HPE Nimble Storage Reviews

We will be using this solution for virtualizing specific workloads that we have.

The most difficult part about Nimble was the fact that it didn't have a standard length. It had a prolonged length to standard servers, which made it slightly challenging to get it installed and we had to switch racks around.

I have been using HPE Nimble Storage for 20 days.

We are still in the installation phase, but will probably be using the latest version.

In the 20 days that we have been using this solution, it has been stable.

From what we have investigated, it's pretty scalable. 

The preliminary test shows that it does what we want it to do. We will continue using this solution in the future.

We have approximately 20 users in our organization.

We have not contacted the technical support yet.

We have a team of five to maintain this product.

We had an HPE engineer install this solution. We purchased the installation package with it.

I would classify it as an expensive product. It's a high-end product.

It's quite expensive, but it's what you would expect from a storage box.

We evaluated Pure Storage FlashArray and IBM Storwize, which is now called IBM Flash Array.

This is a solution that I would recommend to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate HPE Nimble Storage a seven out of ten.

We are resellers. We provide products to our customers.

Unfortunately, we were not able to sell this product because it is too expensive. We use it in our own cloud. We created a VMware VCPP cloud to provide VMware services to our enterprise customers.

The performance and the processor are good.

HPE has very good technology in terms of storage, and they have very good support assistance.

The problem is the price. It needs to be improved.

I would like to see an added feature to auto-fix, or a dynamic alerting system on storage. This is very important because we would like to prevent a disk failure before it happens.

If we had some sort of AI in place to alert us then we could replace the disk before it occurs.

Also, we would like to receive alerts if space is over the limits. This is necessary for us.

I have been selling HPE Nimble Storage for a few months.

It's very stable.

It's a scalable product. We have one POC user in our organization.

Technical support is good. HPE has a good channel system in Taiwan.

Previously, we used Dell.

Nimble Storage is too expensive for our enterprise customers.

We are still trying other products. HPE GreenLake has very nice packaging. It's a financial program, and we used Nimble through this financing program. We didn't purchase it, we were testing. 

We are still testing other products, such as Dell Storage.

We have some local storage vendors, so we are not formally using it in production.

We are not able to recommend this product as we are still in the testing phase. We are still doing the POC tests.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The device works very well.

We like how we can report and access everything directly over the cloud.

The solution runs pretty fast.

The solution requires a higher availability.

The pricing of the solution isn't ideal. They should work to make it more affordable. It's very expensive.

I'd like to be able to configure the solution from vCenter, which isn't possible right now.

It would be great if the solution offered even more integrations and plugins.

We've been using the solution for three years.

The solution is very stable. It's been working for three years, and we haven't had any errors. There aren't crashes. There isn't any bug or glitch that affects the way it functions.

The scalability is good. It's easy to expand the solution as needed.

We have around 1,000 people working with the solution currently. We use it quite extensively.

The technical support is really good. They give us adapted support and it's very helpful. We're satisfied with the level of support we get.

I have experience with a few different solutions. Nimble is quite a large solution that runs well without errors. One of its competitors, NetApp, is good but hard to configure. You need to really be an expert to configure it. With Nimble, you don't have to be overly technical. 

I've also worked with Huawei devices in the past as well.

The solution has an easy initial setup. It was straightforward. We didn't find it to be complex. You don't need advanced knowledge, or to be an expert.

Deployment is pretty quick and takes just 25 minutes. It's really quite fast.

We had three team members deploy the solution. They also maintain it. They were all part of the administration team.

We were able to install the solution ourselves without any outside help. We didn't need any help from an integrator or consultant.

The solution is quite expensive. We can't really afford to buy a second device.

We've recently been looking at Pure Storage.

We're currently using model CS5000 and we're on version 5.05.200.

We are not yet on the cloud. We're on-premise. We installed it in our data center. In tests and features, they call it InfoSight. InfoSight collects logs and tries to send to the cloud. It's customizable, and it offers reports for you and any upgrade. It tries to give you information about your device.

I'd recommend the solution. I'd rate it nine out of ten.

We are a solution provider and Nimble is one of the storage products that we implement for our clients.

The most valuable feature is data mirroring.

The documentation is good.

Scalability, in terms of being able to scale out, is not easy and should be improved.

In the future, I would like to see the vendor upgrade the hardware.

I have been working with Nimble Storage for seven years.

This product is definitely stable and we use it on a daily basis.

Scaling up is easy, but scaling out is not easy.

We have a team of five people who are responsible for maintenance. There are a very large number of end-users.

I have never been in contact with technical support because we have sanctions that prohibit it. When I need assistance then I seek help in the community.

I have worked with other similar solutions and I find that there are no big differences between them.

The initial setup is very easy.

Once the solution has been delivered, I can set it up myself.

The pricing is better than some of the competitors, such as Dell EMC.

My advice for anybody who is implementing Nimble Storage is to perform a step-by-step deployment, and write down the steps as you go. This will ultimately save a lot of time if you experience any problems.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case if for our central data storage. This contains our files, financial services, and customer data.

We are a 24/7 operation, even though our corporate office is a typical Monday through Friday operation. It is vital that we have all of our data up and running, all of the time because a lot of our customers have what they call "volume runs" during the month. For example, one of our customers is subscription-based, so we have to run about three million packages during a two-week timeframe. All of the data has to be fully accessible and we can't afford to have any downtime.

This solution has increased our performance by ten to fifteen percent. From both an operational standpoint and management perspective, it is an improvement. It has also reduced costs and allowed us to allocate more towards other projects.

My engineers have said that this solution has improved our throughput. This has helped because when a customer comes up asked for a solution then we can guarantee it will actually meet the demand for their product or service.

The All-Flash storage positions us for growth because of the speed aspect. We have pool data that doesn’t have to be accessed quickly, but when it comes to other things then we are required to be on the spot. This is especially true for SQL databases.

The most valuable features of this solution are it's reliability and the redundancy that it provides. This is also a good product from a financial perspective.

The performance of this solution allows us to have real-time access for SQL databases.

I would like to see more advanced analytics in the next release of this solution. Perhaps it will help us to see things that we're not seeing already.

We have almost one hundred percent uptime. It seems very reliable and cost-effective, and it seems like it can be molded to any solution that you need.

From what I have heard, it is extremely scalable. It is interesting because you can start with a very small margin and expand to as high as you want, with very little effort on the side of the end-user.

Technical support for this solution is very good. It's always on-demand, and we never feel like we're too far off from getting support. It's always available when we need it, and you're getting a live person a lot faster than you would from other providers.

We did not use another solution prior to this one.

The initial setup of this solution was a lot more straightforward than we thought it was going to be.

We handled the deployment in-house.

The ROI from this solution comes from the savings in time, just from managing and keeping everything up and running. It also reduces the stress and burden on our database team.

We looked at providers other than HP, such as Pure Storage, but we don't like to be on the bleeding edge. We prefer to be with providers that have been stable and around for a long period of time.

This solution is efficient in more than one way. Not only is it high performing, but it is also more compact and fits better in our storage arrays than equipment from other storage providers. This helps out with space in the data center.

We have experienced an increase in performance of ten to fifteen percent.

This product has proven itself to be very reliable and we're looking forward to where it's going to take us in the future. Everything that they've told us it's going to do, it has done and exceeded.

The biggest lesson that I have learned is not to run at any solution that is already out there. Really dive into what it is that you need. Find out what your baseline is, and have a number in mind from a cost perspective. Then take a look at what your priorities are. Is it cost, or uptime, or perhaps having a reliable solution? Always define what your parameters are.

My advice to anybody considering a solution such as this is to always do your research. Look at everything, including peer evaluations, and always take your time. I have met a lot of people that try to rush into a solution and then end up finding stuff that they didn't think they needed. So, as much as possible, take your time and do your studies.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We have a primary data center, and then a secondary data center for our applications and our colo (colocation data center). Our financial and document management systems are on this platform.

This solution has given us reliability that is evident by the fact that it has been running for five years with virtually no hiccups.

InfoSight automatically predicted or resolved problems in your environment. It has given us insights with respect to our VM using more resources than we thought.

Our performance has increased by approximately ten to fifteen percent.

The most valuable features of this solution are the replication functionality and the snapshotting of the storage array.

InfoSight has been very useful because it gives me the ability to see what ones are actually working and how they’re functioning.

We use this for business-critical applications. Our financial and documentation management systems are on this platform.

An area that needs improvement is extending the life of the device after five years.

The solution is very good with respect to stability. The uptime is very good.

The scalability of this solution is moderate. 

Storage capacity efficiency is very fitting for our company and our usage.

Technical support for this solution is good.

We implemented this solution because our legacy applications needed a better solution than we already had. We used to use the HP LeftHand Storage Array. Our performance has increased by approximately ten to fifteen percent.

The initial setup was very straightforward.

We deployed this solution ourselves.

We have seen ROI, but I do not have specific data points.

Our options were IBM and HP, and we found that HP was the better choice for us.

Using this solution has shown us some of the things that are possible, and what we can better improve on in the future.

Nimble Storage is a solution that I would recommend to anybody who is in the same kind of space as I am.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our primary use for this solution is SAN storage for virtual server workloads. We do not use cloud volumes.

This is a storage solution and while it is faster than our old storage platform, that in and of itself hasn't really improved any of the operational aspects of the company.

Performance has been restored to the same level of what we replaced, although it has taken six months of working with Hewlett Packard to allow them to understand our unique environment.

I don't think that it's fair to say that All-Flash is for growth. It's the next logical progression that we had to make.

I really like the form factor, which is nice and compact and small. 

We do use Infosight, but it does not greatly affect us because we are one hundred percent Hyper-V, and the analytics are not yet released for that environment. I know that they are coming later this year.

The storage capacity efficiency is very good. 

It would have been nice if the vendor had informed us of a known bug that occurred during the firmware upgrade because we could have prevented our only major failure.

I would like to see greater integration with Microsoft's Hyper-V platform. We are one hundred percent Hyper-V and no longer have use for the expensive VMware platform.

This solution is very stable. The uptime is excellent. We had only one major failure, and it was during the firmware upgrade. There was a known bug, and it would have been nice if they had told us because we could have prevented the failure.

Performance has been restored to the same level of what we replaced, although it has taken six months of working with Hewlett Packard to allow them to understand our unique environment.

This is a very scalable solution.

The support for this solution has been phenomenal.

We needed additional capacity and our old SAN solution was seven years old, at about end-of-life. We had been using a Dell Compellent, and it wasn't really suited for our type of workload.

The initial setup of this solution is very straightforward.

We handled the deployment in-house.

I would say that we have seen ROI, but the specifics are elusive because it was replacing an older, end-of-life platform.

There are no licensing costs for this solution.

The only vendor on our shortlist was Nimble. We had investigated them years ago because other sister companies within the community had already begun using them. We want to have a synergy with them.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from using this solution is to only make changes in maintenance windows, even when the engineers say that nothing will happen.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to go through a detailed sizing operation with HPE so that it can be appropriately scoped.

We do use this solution for business-critical applications but it is too broad and there are too many to name a specific example.

I like this product, but there is always room for improvement and nothing can be a ten.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Secondary storage and supplemental primary storage are our use cases. We use Nimble for business-critical applications such as accounting, our in-house EPS platforms.

The InfoSight platform and the reporting help us to identify network issues and compatibility problems.

All-flash also positions our company for growth. We've deployed 3PAR all-flash for our core applications and will not transition outside of flash from this point forward.

Nimble has increased performance with better IOPS evaluation, mixed-load capacity. Also, it improves throughput which means we've been able to transition off of remaining rack mounts onto Nimble plus virtualization structure, in a cost-effective manner.

• Reliability
• Performance
• Cost

The solution's uptime is fantastic. It's 100 percent. In addition, Nimble's storage capacity efficiency is very effective.

I'm very impressed with the stability of the solution.

We haven't had to scale beyond our initial purchase.

We have used tech support. Nimble's technical support is excellent.

We previously used Dell EMC. We went to Nimble because of space-growth requirements.

The initial setup was straightforward. The platform is fairly intuitive with standardized SCSI configuration and it was up and running. The product was very self-explanatory so we were able to move it into production very fast.

We had install assistance from HPE, but they would probably not be required for further installs. Our experience with HPE's assistance was good.

We've seen ROI in the retirement of obsolete platforms, the reduction of the licensing cost of outside products, and by collapsing of other storage platforms into a single platform.

We looked at 3PAR, Tintri, Pure, and more. We chose Nimble because it was an HPE acquisition and due to familiarity with Nimble products.

My advice is that you bring it onsite and evaluate InfoSight's reporting.

The biggest lesson we've learned from using Nimble is that it provides better insight with a single pane of glass.

It's feature-complete for what we are looking for. I rate it a ten out of ten. We've been very happy with Nimble.

The primary use case is storage virtualization. We use it for public facing customer workloads.

We spend less time managing it.

The all-flash positions our organization for growth. It is much easier to use, and we do not have to worry about the I/O profile of the workloads that we putting on the array.

The solution has increased our throughput.

• Availability
• Ease of use
• Performance

The way the market is going, supporting NVMe storage would be useful as a step up.

The stability of the solution is fantastic.

The uptime is great.

The scalability is good. It is easy to scale out.

The solution’s storage capacity efficiency is as good as anyone else's that I have seen.

We find the support is pretty good. It is pretty easy to get a hold of the support team. They generally know what they are talking about.

The storage that we had was going out of support. We previously used mostly HPE 3PAR. We switched to Nimble mostly because it was simpler to administer. Also, the scale that we needed in Nimble was probably better suited for us than the 3PAR systems.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward.

We deployed in-house.

I have not seen ROI.

The all-flash array has increased our performance. It has been good.

We buy the arrays outright, so we don't pay anything on an ongoing monthly basis for licensing.

We probably only looked at HPE and Nimble, and they are the same company now anyway.

If you are not going for the all-flash arrays, then try to understand your I/O profile and working set. That will help you with your sizing. 

Performance is great. It is still reasonably expensive, but the product is good. It does what it needs to.

From an availability viewpoint, it provides us with confidence that applications will be available when they need to be.

It does what it says on its own.

We use it in small business setups with 10, 15, or 20 VMs per customer. Our entire system runs on Nimble Storage, e.g., Windows Active Directory, Windows Servers, and WEP.

Everything is just faster. Though, it is not necessarily required for the deployment that we do. It just gives us a bit of that extra speed.

InfoSight has helped us resolved an issue where the snapshots were growing too big.

Speed versus storage space is the most valuable feature.

I don't think it is officially released yet, but the main reason that we chose Nimble is because of the sync rep feature. So, I would like to see that further evolve. This feature will be essential for our setups.

The stability is good. I have no issues.

The uptime is good. I can update without any downtime, so that is good.

The scalability is average. We had a unit that wasn't that old, which we couldn't extend anymore.

The solution’s storage capacity efficiency is good.

The technical support is awesome.

When it came to renewal, the requirements are based on customer demands and projects.

The initial setup is always easy. It was easy before it was part of HPE, so I am happy that they took this with them.

We deployed in-house.

The solution has increased performance.

Our hybrid solution could do with some more competitive pricing and more scaled-down deployments. Already, the smallest one is too much for us. We would flourish by having a smaller unit.

If you don't go cheap, it is eventually worth it. However, the initial investment is high.

We looked at Nimble and NetApp.

I have had some bad experiences previously with the performance of the NetApp units, which is the reason that we went with Nimble.

Go with Nimble if you want the best.

It is reliable, the support is good, and it provides us with good performance.