Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between NetApp StorageGRID and Red Hat Ceph Storage based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two File and Object Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report (Updated: September 2022).
632,539 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The technical support is good.""Cost-effective and easy to deploy.""The backup features are valuable. I've heard from our backup and data protection people that our clients are very satisfied with the performance in junction with the backup, which they archive on this type of object storage."

More NetApp StorageGRID Pros →

"I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product.""What I found most valuable from Red Hat Ceph Storage is integration because if you are talking about a solution that consists purely of Red Hat products, this is where integration benefits come in. In particular, Red Hat Ceph Storage becomes a single solution for managing the entire environment in terms of the container or the infrastructure, or the worker nodes because it all comes from a single plug.""Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well.""It's a very performance-intensive, brilliant storage system, and I always recommend it to customers based on its benefits, performance, and scalability."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Pros →

Cons
"Beyond the initial setup, this product is a little bit difficult to configure.""Improvements need to be made in the support area.""The price is something that NetApp could improve, as with most companies. NetApp is known for not being the cheapest storage option, which is also valid for StorageGRID. There are other storage options on the market which we are aware of and have done proofs of concept for, but you cannot really compare the list prices because, as a big user of NetApp storages, we have totally different prices than some list prices. Still, the price information we got for other options are almost always less expensive than StorageGRID."

More NetApp StorageGRID Cons →

"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI.""An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions.""The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication.""It took me a long time to get the storage drivers for the communication with Kubernetes up and running. The documentation could improve it is lacking information. I'm not sure if this is a Ceph problem or if Ceph should address this, but it was something I ran into. Additionally, there is a performance issue I am having that I am looking into, but overall I am satisfied with the performance."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "NetApp is not known for being the cheapest storage option on the market. Almost all of the other storage options we looked at were less expensive than StorageGRID. The price is one thing to criticize, which is what we hear internally and from customers as well. They find the cost of the terabytes in this class of storage a little bit higher than expected."
  • "With respect to pricing, it is okay. This product is mid-range."
  • More NetApp StorageGRID Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The price of this product isn't high."
  • "The price of Red Hat Ceph Storage is reasonable."
  • More Red Hat Ceph Storage Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File and Object Storage solutions are best for your needs.
    632,539 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Marketing is a very weak area of NetApp in Pakistan. They are not investing in the Pakistan market. Improvements need to be made in the customer support area.
    Top Answer:There are specific use cases for StorageGRID. The target customer market is the oil and gas sector, and media and entertainment, where they have large files including videos and archived news… more »
    Top Answer:Red Hat Ceph does well in simplifying storage integration by replacing the need for numerous storage solutions. This solution allows for multiple copies of replicated and coded pools to be kept, easy… more »
    Top Answer:I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product.
    Top Answer:Ceph Storage lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication. That is a huge loss in terms of performance. It's also very intensive on the backend network and takes a lot of resources from the network… more »
    Ranking
    8th
    Views
    3,945
    Comparisons
    2,812
    Reviews
    2
    Average Words per Review
    438
    Rating
    9.0
    4th
    Views
    21,637
    Comparisons
    18,232
    Reviews
    4
    Average Words per Review
    352
    Rating
    7.5
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Storage GRID
    Ceph
    Learn More
    Overview

    Store and manage unstructured data at scale using NetApp StorageGRID for secure, durable object storage. Place content in the right location, at the right time, and on the right storage tier, optimizing workflows and reducing overall costs for globally distributed rich media. 

    Red Hat Ceph Storage is an enterprise open source platform that provides unified software-defined storage on standard, economical servers and disks. With block, object, and file storage combined into one platform, Red Hat Ceph Storage efficiently and automatically manages all your data.
    Offer
    Learn more about NetApp StorageGRID
    Learn more about Red Hat Ceph Storage
    Sample Customers
    ASE, DARZ GmbH
    Dell, DreamHost
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company21%
    Comms Service Provider14%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Financial Services Firm12%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Comms Service Provider23%
    Computer Software Company22%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Financial Services Firm6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise64%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise71%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business33%
    Midsize Enterprise19%
    Large Enterprise48%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business20%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise64%
    Buyer's Guide
    NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage
    September 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: September 2022.
    632,539 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    NetApp StorageGRID is ranked 8th in File and Object Storage with 3 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 4th in File and Object Storage with 4 reviews. NetApp StorageGRID is rated 9.0, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of NetApp StorageGRID writes "Very satisfied with the backup performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Designed for container platforms and has good integration, but its user interface needs improvement". NetApp StorageGRID is most compared with Dell ECS, MinIO, Cloudian HyperStore, Scality RING8 and IBM Cloud Object Storage, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Dell ECS and Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct. See our NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.

    See our list of best File and Object Storage vendors.

    We monitor all File and Object 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.