We performed a comparison between Nasuni and Oracle ZFS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two File System Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Nasuni Management Console (NMC) is super valuable, and both physical and virtual filers are also valuable. NMC is the one-stop place for all our filers, both virtual and physical filers. They are definitely doing a great job in housing all our documents and surveillance videos."
"I would recommend Nasuni because it's a proven product that has delivered results for us even in the worst-case scenario. If you're still using a traditional cloud solution like native Azure products, you are still susceptible to human error. Also, you would need to architect your backup and DR solutions, then integrate, maintain, and administer them."
"We use Nasuni's continuous file versioning feature and it fully protects us. With the ability to version files and have continuous recovery, it helps in terms of resiliency. If we have an incident then we would be able to easily recover from it by using the technology."
"We like Nasuni's snapshot technology. The snapshot and recovery features are the things we use most frequently. Ideally, I would recommend NFS or CFS, which gives you more benefits for clients or anyone who wants to access FTP protocol, FTP utilities, SAN, and MSS."
"The most valuable feature is that we have redundancy in our data. It's nice to know that it is cached both locally on the filters, as well as stored on that cloud."
"I can see who is logging in on files from all over the globe. For example, if a file is locked, maybe a user in Shanghai has locked files or something, I can see that from the Management Console, then unlock the file."
"Continuous File Versioning is one of the best features because it helps you to restore at any point in time. That means you don't have to worry about a ransomware attack. Even if that attack happens, you can restore all the data to five minutes ago and save everything."
"The most important feature is that things are backed up automatically in AWS. We have a lot of remote sites where there is a tiny server onsite and, in a lot of cases, we really don't have to back them up because the data is automatically copied to AWS. The cloud replication is the most useful functionality for us."
"Oracle ZFS is very fast and it is efficient. It has outperformed any hardware array controller that I've ever come across. With Oracle ZFS on my NAS, which is running five, four terabyte drives, when I've had a drive failure and changed one out, it'll rebuild that array in two hours, or maybe less. When you think you're rebuilding almost four terabytes of data redundancy, that's pretty good using an old AMD Turion hardware, that's nothing to complain about."
"The replication capability and data security have been the most valuable features."
"It is not necessarily for the fastest storage or cluster storage, but just for pure storage, it's really hard to beat. It's just been around as long as anything else."
"The privilege settings need to be more granular, and alerts are an excellent example. If a user doesn't have access to them, they can't see them and access information such as what they may have done wrong, what's there, and when the last sync happened. However, the ability to view alerts also comes with permission to delete them, which is not good, so we need more customization options here."
"Some of their cross-platform features are really good, but it could always use more."
"One thing to consider is that Nasuni will have the same limitations that a traditional file storage solution will have, although that is because they are taking the place of a traditional architectural model. For example, Office 365 supports collaboration on documents such as Excel files and Word documents, but because Nasuni is a traditional file server, in that sense, it can't make use of that functionality."
"Nasuni provides enough reporting to see what's happening. You can see the number of shares, total volume, issues, conflicts, etc., but it doesn't provide much visibility from a content perspective. For example, it doesn't tell you the data age. When you're trying to sort and filter information, the data creation date is a critical factor. Nasuni doesn't give you that. You can't get a count of all the file types, like the number of PDFs, Word docs, and PPT files."
"Room for improvement would be the speed of replication of new files. I would also like to see cloud mirroring."
"Nasuni recently implemented a health system for filers. However, it needs better visibility because it lacks data and an explanation, or reasoning as to why a particular filer may be unhealthy."
"When users from one office save their changes, their peers in another office can see the changes within minutes. Of course, this is an area for constant improvement and we hope that they can still reduce the amount of time it takes to replicate changes."
"When we have to rebuild a filer or put a new one at a site, one of the things that I would like to be able to do is just repoint the data from Azure to it. As it is now, you need to copy it using a method like Robocopy."
"ZFS is great for just mass storage, but if you're trying to make fast storage – something like a SAN-type delivery network where you wanted to do any type of RAM disc over the network – it falls flat. ZFS does not do that. It is kind of limiting."
"When retrieving data from the replication of remote sites, it does not give you immediate results. The RPO and RTO rates could be improved."
"Oracle ZFS does what I've asked it to do, and it has done it very efficiently. The only time I'm running into issues is with Proxmox. If I run ZFS drives, I find my RAM usage is very high. However, I don't have that problem with the TrueNAS system, where I'm running an old N36 Turion with four gigabytes of RAM, and that's running 24/7. There have been no issues with such a low-powered environment there, it works fine, but with Proxmox it seems to go slow."
Nasuni is ranked 1st in File System Software with 35 reviews while Oracle ZFS is ranked 3rd in File System Software with 5 reviews. Nasuni is rated 8.8, while Oracle ZFS is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Nasuni writes "We have less downtime and fewer trouble tickets from users who cannot access their shared files". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle ZFS writes "Great for box storage; falls flat if you need fast storage". Nasuni is most compared with WekaFS, Panzura, Azure NetApp Files, PeerGFS and Dell PowerScale (Isilon), whereas Oracle ZFS is most compared with WekaFS, Amazon FSx, Cohesity SpanFS and DDN EXA5. See our Nasuni vs. Oracle ZFS report.
See our list of best File System Software vendors.
We monitor all File System Software 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.
