Dell PowerMax Reviews

The primary use case is for SQL database, as it's our primary data tier. We are deploying the main SQL databases for our cloud application on the solution.

It has dramatically cut down the footprint in our data center and reduced the amount of raw disk capacity that we needed to purchase.

The managing and monitoring of PowerMax arrays from a performance, capacity and health checks perspective is really easy. It integrates well with our existing automation  environment and is inline with all Dell EMC's other values and products. As we are moving an application over to it, it has been very fast, efficient, and easy for our teams.

• Compression 
• Deduplication

The REST API needs improvement. We are a very big automation company, and this would be big for us.

It has been very stable, so far. We have been a VMAX customer for a little awhile, and it is continuing on with the same reputation.

The product is still very new for us, but given what we have heard about it and everything we've seen, it should scale very well and not disrupt us.

The technical support is excellent. We have always had great support.

We're actually not going from VMAX arrays to PowerMax. We're going from Hitachi arrays to PowerMax.

Our performance requirements for this solution were response time and very low latency. We were able to cut our response times in half by implementing this solution.

We were using the Hitachi arrays and wanted something easier to manage. After last year's Tech World and hearing all about the brand new PowerMax array, we knew that it was something we had to really look into. We really liked the compression and deduplication.

The initial setup was very straightforward. We were up and running in no time and immediately serving production applications with it.

We partnered with Data Strategy, who is now Trace3, for our PowerMax implementations. We had a very good experience.

We also considered Hitachi since they were our current vendor.

It's a very strong platform for compression, deduplication, and performance, which makes it tough to compete with.

We use PowerMax as a dedicated Tier 0 for our product.

Mainframe and open system storage that replicates consistently.

We are a financial services organization, so we are data and investments. It is what our company uses to run. However, I don't know that PowerMax, or VMAX, is anything special compared to other products that we have our data on.

A lot of our critical applications are mainframe and open system-based, and they spread between those two. So, we need a platform like PowerMax to be able to recover in a DR scenario.

We can consistently replicate mainframe and open system and have a single recovery point.

I started using CloudIQ two days ago, and all it's been doing is filling up my phone with alerts that aren't worthwhile. There is something going on there that the array is flagging things as inappropriate that aren't really impactful.

I would like to have Snapchat scheduling and the ability to modify that instead of erase a schedule, then recreate it. There are way better ways to do that. 

Support for SRDF consistency groups within the GUI, instead of making that the command line. 

Remove the need for physical or hardwired virtual servers to run consistency groups, instead make the expensive array controllers handle that.

The management interface needs improvement. It shouldn't be as hard to do some of the functions as it is. Also, it shouldn't need Windows Servers to run a million dollar array.

From a host IO standpoint, the stability has been very good. 

From a replication standpoint, we're actually a company who turned up a bug in the brand new PowerMax. That makes me a little jaded.

It scales enormously, but it's expensive to do so.

The technical support has been good. When we did run into an issue, once I told them what the problem was, they were able to come up with a solution to fix the problem moderately quickly.

We came off VMAX. Our performance requirements were to just match the VMAX levels. I find the array is doing that for host IO.

Since we were already on VMAX, our decision was related to a data center move and protecting our data. Prior to that, just getting on the VMAX product line and came from IBM. That was a look at all the mainframe products, which was a cost and functionality play. We picked the product that seemed to have the best cost and functionality with longest term company relationship.

The initial setup was complex. I found out you can't make the new arrays talk to other arrays on a customer level. You have to reach out to Dell EMC support to do that. It's the only array in my environment where I can't, as a customer, make those changes. That's one of the things that slowed down our install.

The migration from VMAX to PowerMax wasn't much of a migration because it was a DR target. We just changed our SRDF.

We used a reseller to purchase it, but I believe it was Dell EMC badged people who did the install.

The experience wasn't great. The install, in my mind, meant a usable box. The install that I got was a plugged in box. Then, it's like, "Oh, but we still have to do these five steps." I was under a time crunch, so that was a surprise.

When it's mainframe there are only three: IBM, Hitachi, and Dell EMC. The arrays at this level are all fairly competitive.

IBM doesn't support VMware the way that we needed it to. 

Hitachi and EMC were neck and neck. What won it out was Dell EMC's relationship with our sales team.

It's effective at doing what you need it to do. It's fairly high-powered, but the management interface has a long way to go to be made simple and easy to use.

If you have mainframe, you have few choices, and this is a good choice. If you don't have mainframe, there are a lot of products on the market which are much easier to use. It depends on your requirements. 

SRDF/A is quite good, but even other cheaper arrays have synchronous and asynchronous replication. I don't know that I would look at a product line for this unless your needs are either enormous that you need a box this big or mainframe centric.

The Unisphere has gotten a lot better. It is fairly easy to dig into and find things. It has been a long time coming, but it's there.

From a storage point of view, our primary uses are as our primary storage which provides all of the capacity for our databases, applications, and most of our mission-critical work at the moment.

We're planning on moving our most critical databases onto the PowerMax to take advantage of all the new features and functions, as well as the ability for it to grow into the future to continue to provide that top level of performance.

Data plays a very important role in our business. It allows us to make good decisions and react to our customers' needs. The PowerMax is going to be where we put the most critical data so we can get the fastest results from that investment.

One of the valuable features is that less work needs to be done on the arrays now, compared with what used to be. I used to spend most of my day managing the array. Now I'm more managing the interconnections and the flows of data, and not worrying about the feeds and speeds anymore.

We've been doing testing before implementing for our Oracle Databases and we're seeing much better performance than we were with the previous generation.

We're using a combination of Unisphere and CloudIQ. CloudIQ has become an optimal tool for us to get the full picture of all the different arrays, from mid-tier all the way up. It gives us that single view and the ability to launch the Unisphere. That is really is powerful in being able to manage the array.

With it being part of the Symmetrix family over the years, we don't have a worry at all about it being stable and serviceable. It's been many years since we've had a hardware issue with any VMAX array, and I don't see the PowerMax being any different.

For us, it has enormous scale in the way it can grow with our needs. Starting out as small as we are, with just a small PowerMax 2000, it is amazing how much capacity we can get in such a tiny footprint.

Support from Dell EMC has been phenomenal. Getting the box up and running was very simple, and any time we have a problem we get the right engineers working on it.

We had been using the VMAX line prior, and this was just a case of capacity and performance growth. We refreshed our environment to get the most performance we can out of our applications.

The architecture - using the NVMe on the back end, with the designed use Storage Class Memory, and NVMe end-to-end in the future - really influenced us in not wanting to go backward with our purchase. Rather, we wanted to buy a future-looking device that we can keep growing into, to get our value out of that investment.

The installation of the PowerMax was very straightforward; probably the easiest implementation of an array that we've done so far.

We did it ourselves.

PowerMax was the shortlist.

This should be on your shortlist. You should really take look at PowerMax. They're reliable. They do everything you could possibly want and much more. They have a lot of features that other arrays just don't.

We'd rate it as a ten. It has done everything that we've asked it to do and much more.

We use PowerMax to provide storage for our clients. The service level is important for the different service classes we propose to our clients.

It's a new generation and class of storage so it's faster and more resilient. 

We have reached our required performance level with the response time. We have benched the solution with different types of IO. Now we can be sure, with this solution, that the response time is what we need.

The solution has helped to consolidate storage. With lower space, we now have half a rack.

There is room for improvement in the replication. It's an important requirement for us.

The stability has been good.

The scalability has also been good. We have just bought PowerMax so it's difficult to say much more for now.

Technical support has been good.

The last solution we used was VPLEX. We switched to this new solution because it is more resilient.

We knew we needed to invest in a new solution to help our clients respond to all their requirements. We needed to make available other services and other classes of storage. The solution's architecture influenced our buying decision. It was important for us to have NVMe because it is faster.

The initial setup was a little complex because it was our first time with a high-level storage class from Dell EMC.

In terms of migrating from older VMAX arrays, they are still running. We are working with Dell EMC to do that. We are migrating from the OS side, so it's not from the storage side. It's a little longer process.

We worked with Dell to integrate the solution. Our experience with them was good.

The other vendor on our shortlist was HPE and we went with Dell EMC because, with all the tests, it seemed to be the best array.

My advice is to buy this array.

We use CloudIQ and we use Unisphere, but for day-to-day management, we prefer to automate all tasks with REST API.

For now, I would rate this product at nine out of ten. We have tested it and it seems to be resilient and as fast as we need. But we have to do more tests, such as on the replication. That's important for us.

We used it for Oracle Databases. The customer for which we did the PoC of PowerMax is planning on deploying mission-critical applications on this solution: Oracle workloads such as their quoting system and their data warehouse.

As a partner, we don't have PowerMax in-house but for my customers the SRDF replication is an advantage. The ability to have a scalable, all-flash array is pretty impressive. That's important for our customers.

In terms of helping to consolidate islands of storage in a data center, the use case for the particular customer for whom we did the PoC was to move off of an Exadata environment and to move off of an AIX environment and consolidate those down to one storage platform. PowerMax did that.

It is meeting our customer's requirements. They had several large Oracle databases that needed to move over, including from Exadata. Exadata is one of Oracle's fastest systems in terms of Oracle Database workloads. Our customer had to be able to hit certain timelines for jobs that would run. For example, they are running a quote database and they had to be able to hit the same timelines for jobs that were running within that, or better. As a part of the consolidation, the end goal was to limit their licensing on the front end. Being able to consolidate down into that one footprint on the back end helped them save money on the front end.

When it comes to managing and monitoring PowerMax arrays, the interface has really improved compared to the old VMAX. Getting into the interface and finding out if there are any issues with the array is a lot simpler and more streamlined.

The SRDF replication piece is probably the best feature. It's useful for maintaining recoverability in the event of a disaster.

I would like to see more cache because we are limited to two terabytes of cache now. More cache would potentially help drive better improvements in performance.

Also, when it comes to Oracle and database workloads, data reduction could be a little bit better. Some of the competition, like Pure, have post-processes which do additional deduplication and compression on the backside; everything is in-line and then they do a secondary process. It would be a good option if you could start getting 5:1 or 6:1 data reduction on database workloads. That would be beneficial.

Since our use of PowerMax was just a PoC, we didn't really have any issues with the with stability. We didn't run it for a long time, it was a 30-day PoC. There wasn't a lot of time to really explore that area. During the PoC it was fine, it was perfect, we didn't have any issues.

The ability to add additional engines, additional SSDs, is really a benefit to the customer. You can grow it as you need to.

The PowerMax architecture influenced the buying decision. The ability to grow, to scale from single-engine to multi-engine, was probably the biggest factor in that.

Tech support for PowerMax was pretty good. They came out and set it up and did the install. That took a day. We did have a problem with one of the compression modules and they had it out there and fixed the next day. It was during the install that they uncovered that. We weren't using the array yet anyway, so it was just a byproduct of the installation process.

The improvements to the interface have really been great. It's very simple to set up and configure the storage volumes, whether it's a Fibre Channel volume or an iSCSI volume.

The initial setup was straightforward. I did the setup of the iSCSI volumes to the host and it was it took me less than an hour to do that.

We were initially doing a PoC and comparing PowerMax against other arrays: NetApp, XtremIO X2, and Pure. We were doing a performance benchmark and it came in second compared to XtremIO X2, so it did a good job.

I would give PowerMax a nine out of ten, only because we had that single issue with the compression module failing. Otherwise, it did exactly what we wanted it to. It wasn't as fast as the XtremIO, but we didn't think it was going to be as fast as that in the first place. The XtremIO was somewhat oversized. So from a performance standpoint, we were very happy with it.

The primary use case is for Tier 0 applications.

We have no performance related issues due to hardware.

This solution has helped to consolidate islands-of-storage in our data center due to a reduced footprint. This is because of single pane of glass management.

Applications require zero downtime. The high availability and the configuration of the current Symmetrix provide all of that.

We get amazing IOPS and workload with VMware, SAP, and Oracle.

The stability is the most valuable feature.

It has a simple GUI, but still has a CLI-like interface for managing and monitoring.

I find Unisphere and REST API valuable.

We would like easier DR setup. We require DR operations, and we wish it was a lot easier to do that configuration.

It could use additional features and easier integration.

The stability is amazing. Zero downtime reported over the last years.

I would like the scalability to improve, as it requires additional footprints.

It's been always stable, so we haven't really required much support.

We had an opportunity to transform our environment. From experience with previous hardware, we selected this solution.

Our performance requirements were high IOPS, as well as stability. It is meeting those requirements and exceeding our previous infrastructure.

The initial setup was complex. The initial implementation team was not familiar with the Symmetrix architecture.

This was all new implementations for us.

We used a reseller for the deployment, who we are no longer working with.

Our costs are on a yearly basis.

IBM was the competitor. Ultimately, it came down to price.

The product is good. Test it yourself. Assess it against other solutions, and you'll be impressed.

Data plays a role in digital transformation, automation, and database decision-making.

I am looking into CloudIQ.

We're not at the NVMe architecture mode yet.

We use it for our testing and development environments.

It is a hyper-converged solution, which has easy deployment. It is easy to manage and upgrade.

It doesn't need shared storage.

There are some stability issues that we just recently experienced. We hope the next release will solve these problems.

We probably needed more time to test the solution.

Stability is okay for now. However, but if you are using over 80 percent of the storage, that will become a problem.

Scalability is very good. We just added another node with computing too, so it is pretty good.

The technical support is good.

We previously used Cisco HyperFlex and Dell EMC VNXe. Both of these solutions are out-of-date.

The initial setup was not straightforward, though it was pretty easy. We did have Dell EMC come onsite and help us, which was good.

We worked with Dell EMC directly for the deployment. Our experience with them was pretty good.

We did some research and talked to Dell EMC. We asked what solution they recommended, since we are a Dell EMC shop.

I would recommend this product to other customers. It is a very good solution for a remote office, a test environment, and maybe, production. It is not that big.

We have a lot of other Dell EMC solutions: Unity, Isilon, and VxRail.

We are a partner installer.

It significantly simplifies storage.

• The ease of install
• The ease of maintenance
• Expandability

There is some room to grow, especially with some of the installation quirks.

As an installer, I've seen a lot of different things. It's mostly stable. It's had its fair share of quirks, but support has always been there to help us get around those quirks.

The scalability is incredible. It's great.

I use technical support frequently. Support has been relatively great across the board. There have been some language barrier issues in the early morning hours. They transfer calls to China, and there are some translation issues, but they know their stuff. You just have to let them go and type because you don't understand what they are saying.

The build process is relatively straightforward.

Talk to other people who have the people. It has been a great experience for most of my customers.

It's pretty much where it needs to be. For the most part, it is solid.