We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ceph Storage and Scality RING based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Replicated and erasure coded pools have allowed for multiple copies to be kept, easy scale-out of additional nodes, and easy replacement of failed hard drives. The solution continues working even when there are errors."
"The solution is pretty stable."
"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."
"High reliability with commodity hardware."
"The ability to provide block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster is very valuable for us."
"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."
"We have not encountered any stability issues for the product."
"The community support is very good."
"Another feature I like is the life cycle management that helps me with data storage efficiency."
"I think it's the economic factor. This solution has the lowest cost for storage systems."
"The most valuable feature of Scality RING8 is its performance and good interface."
"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 needs a better UI for easier installation and management."
"It would be nice to have a notification feature whenever an important action is completed."
"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."
"In the deployment step, we need to create some config files to add Ceph functions in OpenStack modules (Nova, Cinder, Glance). It would be useful to have a tool that validates the format of the data in those files, before generating a deploy with failures."
"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."
"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."
"An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions."
"Scality RING is not easy to learn for someone new. It is a little bit difficult. There are a lot of components to it, and you also need to understand them to work with it effectively."
"When we used this solution in 2015, it was not scalable at all. I don't know if they have improved on that, but at the time, scalability was just horrible."
"Scality RING8 could improve by having more features. We have to use two automation tools to meet our needs. We would prefer to use only one."
Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 22 reviews while Scality RING is ranked 16th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 4 reviews. Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2, while Scality RING is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Scality RING writes "Offers UTIPI (Unified Tiered Infrastructure Per IOPS) feature in billing but lacks extensive testing ". Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct, whereas Scality RING is most compared with Dell ECS, MinIO, Qumulo, Cloudian HyperStore and NetApp StorageGRID. See our Red Hat Ceph Storage vs. Scality RING 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.
