Pure Storage FlashBlade 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 Pure Storage FlashBlade 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 Pure Storage FlashBlade vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report (Updated: September 2023).
746,670 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 tool's most valuable features are data warehousing, speedy recovery, and analytics. Its latest release is cost-effective.""The product is scalable and easy to expand.""Pure Storage FlashBlade is user-friendly. It's replication feature is great because it has active replication and active DR. That's the beauty of the product. It's a perfect solution for block storage.""The solution is able to handle workloads and is easy to use. It allows us to actually manage the boxes in less time.""The most valuable features of this solution are the rewrite speed and the nonstop services.""The solution provides many controllers.""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.""It is very easy to use, and it is very fast."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Pros →

"We have not encountered any stability issues for the product.""The most valuable feature is the stability of the product.""The solution is pretty stable.""It's a very performance-intensive, brilliant storage system, and I always recommend it to customers based on its benefits, performance, and scalability.""I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product.""Most of the features are beneficial and one does not stand out above the rest.""We use the solution for cloud storage.""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."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Pros →

Cons
"The features provided for SMB customers are limited.""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.""It usually comes down to just what you hit and the value you're getting when you spend the money and license the products. I would always go, "If you want to make things better, lower your price and make your licensing simpler." There's always an opportunity around that.""I would also like to see better support for CIFS workloads.""I want efficiency. FlashBlade doesn't have efficiency now.""It would be beneficial if the layer could support the S3 protocol and be container ready in the next release.""Pure Storage FlashBlade should improve on more cloud integration.""There is some room for new features related to authentication and integration with Kubernetes, and other solution using S3 Bucket."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Cons →

"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI.""If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable.""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.""It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure.""An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions.""The storage capacity of the solution can be improved.""We have encountered slight integration issues.""The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "I feel that the price could always be lowered."
  • "Pure Storage FlashBlade is a hardware appliance, and it's very expensive if you compare its price with other solutions. You can get the same features and benefits from its competitor, VAST Data, but for half the price of Pure Storage FlashBlade."
  • "It's a costly solution, but Pure Storage FlashBlade doesn't require additional licenses. All of the software is combined into one bundle."
  • "The price could be cheaper."
  • "The product is very expensive."
  • "I rate the tool's pricing a seven to eight out of ten."
  • More Pure Storage FlashBlade Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The price of this product isn't high."
  • "The price of Red Hat Ceph Storage is reasonable."
  • "The operational overhead is higher compared to Azure because we own the hardware."
  • "I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten."
  • 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.
    746,670 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The tool's most valuable features are data warehousing, speedy recovery, and analytics. Its latest release is cost-effective.
    Top Answer:Pure Storage FlashBlade should improve on more cloud integration.
    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:We have not encountered any stability issues for the product.
    Top Answer:Red Hat Ceph Storage is difficult to maintain. We use CLI tools for maintenance, and the concept seems challenging. Additionally, it is difficult to expand the product due to balancing errors. It… more »
    Ranking
    6th
    Views
    4,389
    Comparisons
    2,942
    Reviews
    7
    Average Words per Review
    508
    Rating
    8.7
    3rd
    Views
    13,344
    Comparisons
    11,079
    Reviews
    8
    Average Words per Review
    286
    Rating
    7.8
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Ceph
    Learn More
    Overview

    FlashBlade is the industry’s most advanced scale-out storage for unstructured data, powered by a modern, massively parallel architecture to consolidate complex data silos (like backup appliances and data lakes) and accelerate tomorrow’s discoveries and insights.

    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 Pure Storage FlashBlade
    Learn more about Red Hat Ceph Storage
    Sample Customers
    ServiceNow, Mercedes-AMG Petronas Motorsport, Dominos, Man AHL
    Dell, DreamHost
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Manufacturing Company18%
    University12%
    Energy/Utilities Company12%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization36%
    Computer Software Company9%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    Financial Services Firm7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Financial Services Firm10%
    Comms Service Provider7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business26%
    Midsize Enterprise24%
    Large Enterprise50%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise42%
    Large Enterprise45%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business36%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise48%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business24%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise62%
    Buyer's Guide
    Pure Storage FlashBlade vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage
    September 2023
    Find out what your peers are saying about Pure Storage FlashBlade vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: September 2023.
    746,670 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 6th in File and Object Storage with 9 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in File and Object Storage with 9 reviews. Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.6, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "Immutable snapshots, great performance, and simple and easy replication". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Flexible and good for storage but can be complex to set up". Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), Pure Storage FlashArray, MinIO, VAST Data and Dell ECS, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Dell ECS and NetApp StorageGRID. See our Pure Storage FlashBlade 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.