QoreStor vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

Quest Software and Red Hat are both solutions in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category. Quest Software is ranked #23 with an average rating of 7.0, while Red Hat is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.9. Quest Software holds a 0.1% mindshare in SDS, compared to Red Hat’s 19.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Quest Software users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 82% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 19, 2025

Red Hat Ceph Storage and QoreStor are competitors in the enterprise data storage arena. Red Hat Ceph Storage stands out in scalability and open-source integration, whereas QoreStor is notable for performance optimization and cost efficiency.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage offers robust data redundancy, immense scalability, and seamless integration with open-source platforms. QoreStor, on the other hand, provides advanced data deduplication, inline compression, and replication features that enhance data transfer speeds and reduce storage needs.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage could enhance its user interface and management tools for easier configuration. Additionally, optimizing performance under different workloads and better support for non-Red Hat environments could be beneficial. QoreStor may improve by expanding its integration capabilities with more diverse IT ecosystems, enhancing flexibility in deployment options, and strengthening its data security features.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Red Hat Ceph Storage is recognized for its flexible deployment options and reliable customer service, particularly in integrating with other Red Hat products. Meanwhile, QoreStor is praised for its straightforward deployment and proactive customer service, offering quick setup and accessible support.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage involves a higher initial setup cost but offers high scalability and adaptability, reinforcing long-term value. QoreStor provides a more competitive initial pricing with a high return on investment through storage reduction and efficient data processing, appealing as a cost-effective solution.

To learn more, read our detailed QoreStor vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report (Updated: August 2025).

Buyer's Guide

QoreStor vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

August 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Pure Storage FlashBlade

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 4.4%, up from 4.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of QoreStor is 0.1%. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 19.8%, down from 21.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Software Defined Storage (SDS)

Featured Reviews

Eric Black

Solutions Architect at Recovery Point Systems

The ability to leverage multi-tenancy along with immutability is a huge benefit for us

The only thing I feel FlashBlade is missing is the SOS API. If it had SOS API, that would put it well over the top. Veeam Backup specifically has started to streamline their API, and they are doing that with SOS API. They have optimized it. Any of the S3 devices out there that support this SOS API can have far more API calls at once. On our side, that translates to better restoration. With SOS API, it can leverage far more restorations at a single given time or read from the device in simple terms. That results in maximizing the output and throughput from the device itself.

Read full review

Jeff Manuszak

CTO at EDSI

Cost-efficient, highly scalable, and installable on different types of hardware

They could improve on support a little bit. We have not had to engage their support much, but when we do have issues, it can take longer to get things resolved. We are pretty lenient as we do a lot of IT support ourselves. We are not very hard on support organizations, but when a customer has a support issue, it would be easier if the support processes were a little bit more automated. It would be beneficial to have an easier way to upload diagnostic dump files. They can make it easy for the customer to collect the diagnostic data. There can be some kind of monitoring solutions to alert users to issues with the appliance or software, making it easy for customers to monitor their systems in the field. This is especially critical because it stores customers' backups, and a failure can have significant business impacts. If a customer does not have the backups and has a disaster, they can be out of business, so monitoring is key.

Read full review

Rifat Rahman

Infrastructure Architect & CEO at Tirzok Private Limited

Offers reliable performance and availability for large deployments

I would like to see improvements in Red Hat Ceph Storage not because I necessarily think it needs improvement, but because I generally prefer to do things manually rather than following the containerization part. Current deployments are based on containers, but I deploy manually with my scripts and controls. If there are no Kubernetes-like requirements, I often prefer to deploy a whole manual process. I don't ask for improvements in the deployment model because Red Hat has its own philosophy about making things, but it's my personal choice that I prefer things manually. Some features are available only in the containerization part, so if those are also available in manual deployment, that will help.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"Using this solution has made our backups more reliable."

"We have integrated it with VMware. The integration process is pretty good. Especially with VMware, it helps with the capacity of it."

"The most valuable features are the Metro clustering, and disaster recovery."

"The most valuable features of FlashBlade include its replication capabilities, reports, and easy allocation. Everything is user-friendly."

"The most valuable features include the ease of implementation, ease of use and the speed that you can do backup and recovery on."

"The onboarding and integrated monitoring tools are pretty good."

"The solution is able to handle workloads and is easy to use. It allows us to actually manage the boxes in less time."

"We can capacity plan at a greater level than we used to."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"Data deduplication and replication would be the top two features. The encryption and cloud tiering are also attractive for the future."

"Deduplication is the most valuable feature. It saves us a lot of space. When we back up 100 terabytes of data, after dedupe, it only uses maybe five to six terabytes for the disk space in QoreStor."

"I would rate QoreStor a ten out of ten for what it offers for the price."

"It integrates with various backup software solutions, which makes it compatible with existing backup workflows and processes."

"This software solution can be installed on many different types of hardware, which makes it very flexible. We can run it on virtual machines or virtual servers, providing convenience for solutions of varying sizes, from small to large."

"Quest QoreStor is very stable compared to our previous solution."

"The dedupe and compression are pretty extreme. On disk, we're getting dedupe rates of up to 65 percent of data and compression of 34 percent. When you go to the cloud, it's more like 76 percent for dedupe and almost 50 percent for compression."

"The extreme compression of data is a big thing for us. We were looking for an online backup solution, and QoreStor is very good in terms of data compression. It helps us minimize the required storage in the Blob Storage environment."

More QoreStor pros

"The high availability of the solution is important to us."

"High reliability with commodity hardware."

"The solution is pretty stable."

"The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."

"Ceph Storage allows us to add value related to cost and offers a unique experience compared to traditional storage."

"Data redundancy is a key feature, since it can survive failures (disks/servers). We didn’t lose our data or have a service interruption during server/disk failures."

"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."

"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"It would be nice if you could store file-based in the same box with the same technology."

"Compared to, for example, Hitachi NAS, the solution is not mature at all. It's just in its infancy as far as technology goes."

"I would like to see the licensing fees improved as well as the price per terabytes."

"The speed could be improved."

"To improve FlashBlade, some analysts suggest enhancing its handling of relational database management systems and SQL queries."

"It would be beneficial if the layer could support the S3 protocol and be container ready in the next release."

"I would like to see more deduplication."

"I would like to see more monitoring capability included in the next release of this solution."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"The installation could use improvement. The initial installation was a little touchy and it's not really user-installable. You have to have a connection to support to install."

"They could improve on support a little bit. We have not had to engage their support much, but when we do have issues, it can take longer to get things resolved."

"Overall, I am happy with this solution, but a way to export configuration settings would be beneficial."

"The ransomware protection of QoreStor could use improvement."

"The setup of the software is definitely not the easiest thing. I worked a lot with Quest engineers, especially in the early days when we were first testing it and trying it out. I actually had some of the developers working with us at one point because they were going through these point releases, and I was having trouble getting it to work in this S3-compatible situation. We got it all working eventually, but setup is definitely not the easiest thing in the world."

"They need to increase their maximum capacity. Other than that, they're doing a pretty good job."

"There can be some kind of monitoring solutions to alert users to issues with the appliance or software, making it easy for customers to monitor their systems in the field."

"In terms of improvement, we would like to have an Air Gap feature to prevent a virus from attaching to something. So that when we don't do a backup, we want the QoreStor to stay offline. It would be a nice feature to have."

More QoreStor cons

"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."

"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."

"If troubleshooting is needed, the response should be faster."

"Ceph does not deal very well with, or takes a long time to recover from, certain kinds of network failures and individual storage node failures."

"This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing."

"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."

"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."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

"The product is very expensive."

"I rate the tool's pricing a seven to eight out of ten."

"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."

"Support is a separate line item. Support is a different cost, but whatever your support is now, that's what you're going to pay forever. If your support's $100 today, six years from now it's $100. It doesn't fluctuate unless you upgrade it, or change it, etc."

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

"I feel that the price could always be lowered."

"The pricing is relatively expensive due to the FlashBlade technology. However, for companies needing quick and reliable data access, the cost is justified."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"The pricing is good. It is competitive for a managed services provider. I like the ability to pay by the terabyte, allowing for an incremental cost that we and our customers can afford, so the solution grows with the customer."

"Quest QoreStor's pricing is affordable. We evaluated Veeam, a well-known company for backup solutions, but found their pricing to be quite high. Veeam's price was almost double. For us, Quest QoreStor is very affordable."

"The cost is per terabyte, and overall, the cost was reasonable when compared to some competitors."

"Its pricing model is very attractive. You have one price, and you get everything from QoreStor."

"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten."

"If you can afford a product like Red Hat Ceph Storage then go for it. If you cannot, then you need to test Ceph and get your hands dirty."

"The other big advantage is that Ceph is free software. Compared to traditional SAN based storage, it is very economical."

"There is no cost for software."

"The price of this product isn't high."

"The operational overhead is higher compared to Azure because we own the hardware."

"Most of time, you can get Ceph with the OpenStack solution in a subscription as a bundle."

"We never used the paid support."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Performing Arts

11%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Educational Organization

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Pure Storage FlashBlade?

The tool's most valuable feature is its fast performance, especially in handling snapshots. It helps during power out...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashBlade?

The pricing of Pure Storage FlashBlade is expensive compared to other products I used from other companies in the pas...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?

I believe there is not much improvement needed because they have everything we need, but the interface is a little bi...

See all answers

What else besides data replication does QoreStor offer?

Quest QoreStor can be used for multiple things besides data replication. For example, it can be trusted to make a bac...

See all answers

How does Quest QoreStore protect your data?

One of our favorite features of Quest QoreStore for data protection isn't the backup, actually, though we're using it...

See all answers

How does Quest QoreStore solve repetitive data replicas?

When I first found out about data replication and the many benefits it had, I couldn't help but wonder - what about t...

See all answers

How does Red Hat Ceph Storage compare with MiniO?

Red Hat Ceph does well in simplifying storage integration by replacing the need for numerous storage solutions. This ...

See all answers

What do you like most about Red Hat Ceph Storage?

The high availability of the solution is important to us.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Red Hat Ceph Storage?

Areas of Red Hat Ceph Storage that have room for improvement include more promotion. Many people do not know about th...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 19% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 9% of the time

Dell ECS vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 5% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) vs QoreStor

Compared 100% of the time

More QoreStor Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 39% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 6% of the time

VMware vSAN vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 5% of the time

Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 4% of the time

Dell PowerFlex vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

August 2025

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

QoreStor

August 2025

Download QoreStor product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

August 2025

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

QoreStor

Ceph

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.

Pure Storage

QoreStor optimizes storage costs through advanced deduplication and compression, seamlessly integrating with backup infrastructures and supporting diverse hardware. It enhances data security with replication and offers flexible deployment with minimal maintenance.

QoreStor offers significant benefits in deduplication, which leads to space savings and reduced storage expenses. This system integrates effortlessly with backup platforms like NetVault and Veeam, functioning as a reliable backup target for both on-premises and cloud environments. The ease of integration is complemented by its replication capabilities, which add a layer of data security by enabling geographically dispersed backups. Its cloud tiering functionality extends storage capabilities, ensuring cost-effectiveness compared to other solutions. While enhancements are needed in areas like Cloud Tier support, Air Gap features, and GUI intuitiveness, the continued developments aim to further optimize storage and backup solutions.

What are QoreStor's key features?

Deduplication and Compression: Achieves high deduplication rates and space savings.
Seamless Integration: Works well with diverse backup infrastructures.
Replication: Facilitates data security through multi-location backups.
Cloud Tiering: Extends storage capabilities efficiently.
Minimal Maintenance: Requires low maintenance efforts.

What benefits should be considered in user reviews?

Cost-Effectiveness: Offers competitive pricing and optimized storage.
Storage Optimization: Reduces storage needs with advanced data handling.
Flexibility: Supports diverse hardware and deployment options.
Data Security: Enhances protection with robust replication features.

QoreStor is widely implemented in industries for backup and restore operations, providing data deduplication and compression as key functionalities. Its integration as a backup target across platforms like NetVault and Veeam makes it ideal for enterprises that require efficient data management and storage cost control. Many organizations utilize its features to optimize cloud storage seamlessly while focusing on internal data handling or acting as service resellers.

Quest Software

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.

Red Hat

Sample Customers

ServiceNow, Mercedes-AMG Petronas Motorsport, Dominos, Man AHL

American Airlines, at&t, Bank of America. Barclays, ebay, Ford

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

QoreStor vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

August 2025

Free Report: QoreStor vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

Find out what your peers are saying about QoreStor vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: August 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our QoreStor vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.

See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors and best File and Object Storage vendors.

We monitor all Software Defined Storage (SDS) 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.