We performed a comparison between Kaminario K2 [EOL] and Pure Storage FlashBlade based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Pure Storage and others in All-Flash Storage."The management features are well organized and they have a very good dashboard."
"The stability of Pure Storage is very very good."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. You simply plug it in and turn it on."
"They have really good baked in analytics to show you trends for growth history, so it does help with future planning for data growth."
"Support has been helpful."
"Has also helped simplify storage for us. The other person we put in there, took about a week to implement. And we had both arrays set up within around four hours with a thirty minute drive time between the two locations."
"Having an intuitive user interface to get things running is great."
"Most of the problems that we had in the past with the performance in IOPS have disappeared. It has been a great improvement for our customers' services."
"Built-in snapshot support gives us SAN-side functionality most other platforms would have had us license separately."
"The increased performance is many times above our previous array performance in all metrics. Integration with vSphere features is also a definite plus."
"Inline compression"
"The most valuable feature is definitely the always-on data deduplication."
"Ease of use: My installers - my administrators over the system - they love how easy and fast it is to install and spin up a LUN and get going."
"The speed and, for us in particular in what we're doing, the data de-duplication."
"Implementation of the solution is very simple."
"Scale out is a differentiator for them, especially in the enterprise market. It's key for a lot of customers."
"It has absolutely simplified our storage because the dashboards on the consoles show a clear understanding of where you are, and it is also very easy to provision. This been a big help for our teams."
"The tool's most valuable features are data warehousing, speedy recovery, and analytics. Its latest release is cost-effective."
"It's very easy-to-use."
"It helps simplify our storage, because the user interface is very simple and the installation is easy."
"The onboarding and integrated monitoring tools are pretty good."
"The snapshots, replication, and the ability to have immutable blades are the most valuable features. You're putting data snapshots out in those blades, and they cannot be touched. Its performance is great."
"I would rate this solution an eight plus. It has has good flexibility and stability, it's easy to manage and the response time is good."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is performance."
"It is a bit expensive."
"In the next release I would like to see integration into other third-party player providers like Google."
"In terms of the future, I have been excited by some of the copy data management stuff that they're talking about building into the environment. There are feature sets where I've done a lot of automation work. So, I am always looking forward to extensions of their API. They're also talking about a phone home centralized analytics database being used as a centralized management console with a list of new cloud features, but this doesn't seem finalized."
"The problem is that we can only make a few groups, around five or six groups. I like groups and we need a lot of them. We had to put all the information in only a few groups and cannot make a more detailed separation of them."
"I would like to see the NAS add-on component become more fault-tolerant than just a single virtual machine running inside the array. I'm unwilling to use it for that reason."
"It was not proactive communication."
"With scalability, I have run into a little problem with our last upgrade. There were some undocumented limitations to the number of drives that our controller could run on. So, instead of putting in a new data pack as we had anticipated, we had to keep adding and removing to get up to the capacity that we needed to be. What should have been a one day process (or a few hours) turned into a month and a half process."
"There are a lot of things to improve."
"The system currently has a 15TB LUN size limit and that snapshots need to be scheduled through script API instead of the GUI."
"I would love to see capacity on its DRAM. I know it's not cost effective for them to do it, but I think that it could be a big differentiator and was a big differentiator from the beginning."
"I'm hoping to see Active Directory integration. Right now, you still have to use a local admin account to log in and manage everything."
"Access to technical support should be improved for our region. Technical support is good, but they're very hard to access."
"The front panel of the drive shelf doesn't always seat firmly."
"The management graphical interface needs more improvement."
"The interface look and feel could be improved."
"Improved scale and budget planning with flexibility of the solution for budget needs and efficiency for growth with the great optimization ratio due to the nature of our use."
"File storage needs a lot of improvement. Mainframe connectivity also needs improvement because it requires additional components to be integrated with Pure Storage FlashBlade. If you want to keep your backup data, then this becomes an even more expensive solution because Pure Storage FlashBlade will not be able to meet your backup needs."
"The Pure Storage Orchestrator is our biggest pain point at the moment. If we can have more say in future developments of feature sets that we will need to support for our use case, that would be pretty beneficial to us."
"The technical support needs to improve. When we open a case, it is auto assigned to a support tech person. Nine out of ten times, we get an email right back saying that person is off until tomorrow. I cannot handle that. They just did this over the weekend to us, too. I had to call our rep and have them do something about it."
"In the realm of micro-services, I think that Pure Storage can do well if they start getting in there and making their arrays more micro-services ready."
"We haven't been able to use much of the cloud area of Pure Storage. We have a storage server and it would be better if it could integrate with other cloud features of this solution."
"I would like to see better integration."
"There could be improvements in public cloud integration."
"The solution is expensive."
Earn 20 points
Kaminario K2 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in All-Flash Storage while Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 16th in All-Flash Storage with 31 reviews. Kaminario K2 [EOL] is rated 8.8, while Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Kaminario K2 [EOL] writes "Built-in snapshot support gives us SAN-side functionality most other platforms license separately". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "A high-performing and scalable solution that improves data performance for S3 workloads". Kaminario K2 [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), VAST Data, MinIO, Red Hat Ceph Storage and Dell ECS.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all All-Flash Storage reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.