Google Cloud Storage Nearline Reviews

The solution offers quite good monitoring.

We didn't face any downtime last year using the solution. This was very helpful.

Google is always introducing new features and tends to have a new release every month.

The solution needs to offer better System Information and Event Management (SEIM). I'd like to discover how we could implement something like that within Google's cloud.

We are currently running the solution, but if I want to have a better security strategy, I know I have to do something else. It doesn't really offer that as part of the solution.

I've been using the solution for about a year and a half.

We use this solution for our client, and I'm not sure how many users they have. However, with the solution, you could potentially have anywhere from a couple hundred to a couple of thousand users on it. The client has apps on the app store and via the app, there's two types of users: patients and clinicians. There may be only a few hundred clinicians, but potentially thousands of patients. In that sense, I would say it's quite scalable.

I have nothing to complain about in terms of the technical support that is offered. So far, we are satisfied with the level of service.

We didn't previously use a different solution before choosing Google.

The initial setup was straightforward. We didn't face any complexities when we were originally setting it up and found it to be quite easy.

We're Google partners.

In terms of pricing, with Google, it depends on how much data a company uses. If they put more data inside the system, it will cost them more. If they have more traffic on the internet, that costs them more too. 

Everything is pay-per-use. There's the basic fee and then there's a pay-per-use fee. If more people are using the application, that means more data. If there's more data, it requires more storage, more CPU, more RAM use, etc., so the pricing is more expensive. 

Right now, for the number of servers and the storage that I have, I would say I'm charged between $125 and $150 per month.

In terms of using Google, we cannot go too far into the firewall and therefore are only using the basic Google cloud right now. 

We've done some contracts with AWS as well, and, compared to AWS, it's a different way of implementing the infrastructure to the services. Is it better? I'm not sure. It's just a matter of how much knowledge and comfort a user has with the solution. Right now, we'd rather go with Google. It's cheaper for the same quality of services.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution as storage for the databases.

The API integration with the storage packet is the solution's most valuable feature.

The data structure and the types of data that are supported are very good.

The pricing could be improved. It's completely non-competitive at this time.

We have some issues around date/time conversions. It requires a little bit of tweaking to get things done. You can't seem to import a date/time field into SQL.

The solution needs more GUI support.

I've been using the solution for one year.

The stability of the solution is good.

There's no problem when it comes to scaling on the solution. We don't work with much data, so we haven't scaled too much ourselves.

Technical support is okay. We find that the cloud helps the users. 

The initial setup was straightforward. Google makes everything quite easy. Deployment took about one month.

The pricing is quite high.

It's my first time using a cloud solution.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. I'd rate it higher but I find the pricing ridiculous.