HPE StoreVirtual Reviews

We are running a training lab environment with ever changing setup and, therefore, iSCSI is the most flexible solution to provide storage to any point inside our datacenter. HP StoreVirtual is a scale-out, clustered iSCSI storage solution with High-Availability features packed into the base license.

The HP StoreVirtual VSA (Virtual Storage Appliance) allows us to turn any storage supported by our ESX server (local, FC SAN, shared SAS) into a flexible and highly-available iSCI storage.

There are numerous features in the product, some not even used by us. The ones we like most are thin provisioning and network RAID (node-to-node replication of data to satisfy different availability needs). With the latest Lefthand OS releases, we also started to use the adaptive optimization feature (automated block-level tiering) to leverage capacity of traditional spindle-driven hard disks, and the speed and responsiveness of SSDs.

In the past, we were exclusively Fibre-Channel focused with all the associated disadvantages of running a separate FC SAN with particular array types. Every host we wanted to connect to shared storage had to have an HBA installed.

With iSCI and the clustered StoreVirtual approach, we can now use standard IP networking, standard ethernet NIC, and we can easily provide storage to any server anywhere in our datacenter.

If we need more capacity or performance we simply add additional VSA nodes, which my be backed by internal server disk storage as it's cheaper than the legacy array storage.

From my perspective, these things are missing:

• Homogeneous management of 3PAR, StoreVirtual and MSA
• Remote Copy (sync or at least async) to/from StoreVirtual (similar to online import from EVA, EMC, etc., just expanded to continuously copying)
• Integration of Priority Optimization with VMware vSphere and vVols on the VM level straight from the vSphere web client
• StoreServ iSCI VSA

We've used HP StoreVirtual for about 10 years now, but, honestly, I don't even remember anymore. We do not see any downtime due to the clustered approach, and migration and updates worked smoothly. Especially with the VSA, the hardware (server and storage backend) underneath simply get swapped without affecting availability.

We've had no issues with the deployment.

There have been no issues with the stability.

We've had no issues scaling it for our needs.

We rarely use technical support as the solution is software driven and very stable. We are very experienced with this solution, and if you have a support call, it is like gambling (as with every vendor). It depends if the level-one or level-two engineer is experienced or not, is located in your country or near-shored. Essentially, it's a mixed-skill experience, but we've had no bad experiences in general.

We used HP's Enterprise Virtual Array and EMC's CX3 and CX4 arrays (and still use some of this hardware as pure capacity behind HP StoreVirtual). We went for StoreVirtual at that time as StoreVirtual provided much more functionality (and based on an all-inclusive pricing) than our existing storage arrays.

The initial setup of both hardware-based StoreVirtual as well as the VSA are absolutely straightforward. OK, we were trained and experienced already, so there was no big challenge. However, there are still quite a lot of things you need to understand (especially in VMware environments) which can cause performance or availability issues if you don't follow certain (sometimes not clearly communicated) best practices.

But if you do everything right, you'll have a highly-stable, highly-available, and well-performing platform. We put all basics and learnings together and created our own two-day training (also available as video training) to teach admins and implementers how to do the important things right.

We implemented it ourselves as we are architects and consultants. This the best way to learn and gain experience.

We never calculated the ROI. For us, it was just about having a stable, modern, feature-rich platform for our use cases.

From a licensing perspective, the all-inclusive licensing was very appealing, as EVA and CX had lots of licensing options and add-ons, which was awful.

Specify the workloads (availability, size, and performance). Either use the StorageWorks sizing tool (not available to everyone) or the advice of an experienced consultant/reseller to select the model and size the cluster and follow the best practices on implementation.

• Multi-site SAN (near-real-time replication)
• Ability to assign Servers/LUNs to a physical/logical site for better access avoiding high-latency connections
• Space reclamation
• Thin/full provisioning
• Maintenance and support is easy to do.
• There are two 10GB ports present next to four GB ports, which makes it easy to upgrade the network .

Server provisioning and capacity expansion are much easier than before.

StoreVirtual should offer QoS per v-disk or ISCSi.

We've been using the 4500 for three years, and the 4730 for one year.

We had no deployment issues.

There were no issues with the stability.

We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.

9/10 From disk replacement to software support, the response from technical support is always excellent.

Initially, we used a HP entry level "SAN" HP P2000 G2. It was for our initial virtualization project.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward as HP did a good job providing excellent documentation and best practices.

We implemented it via an in-house service. Testing different workloads on your SAN is a good idea. This helps you to have a comparison point for later users. In case people encounter trouble in production, you can then easily compare performance with the different workloads.

Over a period of five years, we created 40-45 VMs. Previously, we had a physical server, storage, and backup solution, which was about $5,000 per server. We made a serious savings compared to the price of the SAN solution.

We've found that the ability to repurpose existing hardware is the most valuable feature for us.

It has allowed us to create a SAN from existing hardware without having to purchase any other hardware.

Using multiple bonded network interfaces needs work.

We've used it for five years.

We've had no issues with deployment.

There have been no issues with the stability.

They need to improve its ability to scale with bonded network interfaces.

Technical support has been excellent.

Make sure you license according to your total storage requirements for the foreseeable future.

We didn't look at other options.

• Multi-site capability for disaster recovery
• Application aware snapshots
• Enterprise solution for virtualisation
• Centralised and easy to use management
• Easy to support whether it is four or 40 storage nodes

Business continuity and disaster recovery. The storage environment is spread between two geographical locations – bi-annually BCP/DR tests are conducted proving the validity of the architecture. Each site in turn simulates power loss – both the compute and storage that supports the vSphere estate are affected. In all cases, these tests have been 100% successful.

It needs further improvements in terms of reporting from the CMC, specifically more detailed alerting from the CMC.

We've been using it for five years. We're currently running SANi/Q versions 10.5 and LeftHand OS version 12.5.

We have had no issues with the deployment.

We have had no issues with the stability.

There have been issues with adding further nodes to existing management groups and clusters. The volume re-syncing and re-striping caused some performance issues. With version 9.5 of the OS there were high numbers of disk failures – these appear to have been resolved as we progressed through versions 11.5 to 12.5.

Technical support is excellent. I have great experiences in dealing with technical support. Generally, the product is so intuitive (to people appropriately skilled to manage storage) that HP support is only really required when low-level shell-type access is required or when a major bug has been detected.

EMC CLARiiON, IBM DS 4000 series – HP LeftHand presented a more rounded and mature storage solution.

The initial setup was very straightforward. The CMC logically guides you through the setup and configuration process. This does negate the requirement to plan the implementation, but even if you choose not to use the wizard and manually configure management groups, cluster groups, FOM instances, etc., the CMC lets you know what needs to be completed first.

The implementation was all completed in-house with some limited input from the vendor partner group.

My advice – plan your installation, think about your geography, consider what the technology can do for you, think about the networking, consider that like any storage, it works well plugged into the high end backbone and not just available ports on some local access switch.

If you fail to think about the connectivity correctly, performance can be affected. Finally, latency is king, so keep your eye on the performance monitor within the CMC.

The HP product is end-of-life, and the cost for licensing is considerable but necessary. HP support for breaks as fixes are required. Low-level and shell access requires an HP engineer because passwords required are not given out to customers. If you don’t procure the HP care packs for your P4000 estate, you cannot download or gain access to updates, i.e. OS updates, BIOS, firmware, etc.

I am currently considering Tintri VAS and Nimble as well as reviewing certain hyper-converged technologies such as SimpliVity and Nutanix.

Ensure you have the right skills – general administration is straight forward but Virtual Connect configuration requires knowledge.

StoreVirtual's High Availability and redundancy are the most valuable features for us.

It has removed the single point of failure. The resiliency was improved due to features like snapshotting at hardware level. It gives us better uptime and improved HA time, which means less downtime in the event of a failure.

Communication of HP firmware and BIOS updates need work. Also, the directives relating to the products need to be improved.

We've used it for one and a half years.

We had no issues with the deployment.

There was an issue with one CPU overheating and causing fans to rev up. The CPU had to be reseated and firmware updates applied.

We've had no issues scaling it for our needs.

Technical support is good, but it could be better.

There was no solution in place previously.

It was straightforward by using the HP CMC software.

The pricing and licensing are fair.

There were no other solutions looked at.

This is a good SAN solution.

• Heterogeneous hypervisor support
• Broad hypervisor version support (vSphere 4.x, 5.x, and 6.x in future)
• Broad hardware support, no special qualification or HCL beyond that of the hypervisor
• Snapshot for BC and backup
• Multi-Site SAN for DR (synchronous volume replication)
• The Veeam snapshot integration plus the hypervisor integration with vSphere VAAI and VASA as well as the Microsoft VSS integration is second to none.

We can afford shared iSCSI storage and it’s easy to deploy for the lab as well as production usage, not just for critical production apps.

The capacity utilization is the worst in the industry as far as I know. Data compaction in the form or dedupe and compression, while on the roadmap, is long overdue. A serviceable (e.g. practical) “Network RAID 5” would also help the capacity utilization issue.

I've been using it for four years.

We have had no issues with the deployment.

There have been no stability issues.

There have been no issues scaling it for our needs.

It is good if you know how to navigate the HPE support queues (Storage -> LeftHand) to reach a legacy LeftHand support engineer. If you overlook this simple but critical detail you risk falling into a “black hole of support.” If you reach a legacy Left Hand engineer, you will have a successful user experience.

StoreVirtual/LeftHand is very well known in the HPE world. For vSphere, I don’t have the hardware to run VMware VSAN. For Hyper-V, it is rumored to be easier to use than MS Storage Spaces. For KVM it is perceived to be the easiest available solution (due to my ignorance, perhaps?).

The initial setup is very straightforward and not at all difficult. There are good HPE written documents and YouTube videos as well as some good independent content on sites such as https://www.bitcon.be/.

Read the HPE content from 2014 and then watch the StoreVirtual VSA “How To” video series on YouTube. Talk to someone who knows and has implemented LeftHand, if possible.

I don’t maintain hard and fast ROI info, however, I believe it is 50% less expensive than a SAN for deployments under 15 TB of usable capacity. My advice is to make sure that you understand the true usable capacity calculations and that you have no other option for production apps other than “Network RAID 10.”

The design of the solution is critical. If you undersize the hardware the performance will not be adequate. Also, setting the customer’s expectations is very important. StoreVirtual VSA is relatively slow for big block sequential things like migration and large file or directory copies. It is designed for day-to-day random IOPS with at least 50% read IO, typical of most virtual environments.

Talk to someone who knows and has implemented LeftHand and StoreVirtual VSA, if possible. Find an HPE Partner that has deployed this at least 3 or 4 times. If you choose to “roll your own” read the HPE content from 2014 and later then watch the StoreVirtual VSA “How To” video series on YouTube. Also check out Veeam Backup & Recovery’s StoreVirtual snapshot integration as well as HPE’s best kept secret, the StoreOnce VSA for virtualizing your disk-based backup and recovery.

This screenshot depicts a restore operation from an HPE StoreVirtual VSA snapshot of a primary storage, production VMFS volume. This can give you a Recovery Time Objective as low as 30 minutes on StoreVirtual VSA production volumes whereas recovery from a daily backup offers an RTO which can be up to 24 hours. Restores can be executed for SharePoint objects (including sites, libraries, documents, calendar items and lists), Exchange items (.edb files, mailboxes, calendar items, contacts and even individual messages), Active Directory objects (Groups, accounts and GPOs) as well as SQL record and tables. Oracle DB support is now available as well.

Redundancy of the product, especially for remote locations, is the most valuable feature. Easy implementation and easy online upgrade process, which is very secure, are also great. If anything happens, the upgrade can be restarted or stopped without an impact on the production.

We and our customers did not have any downtime for their SAN, not because of an update or due to an expansion of the cluster with extra nodes. The support tool does not depend on one system. It just reads the status of the SAN and can be installed on more than one device.

You cannot easily mix SAS with SATA or SSD within a cluster. So tiering is not easy to implement at a reasonable cost.

I’ve done about 30 implementations in the last six years. Most of our implemented systems are clusters of P4500G2/P4530/P4300 G2/P4330.

The system is functional and always up, even if several nodes need rebooting when an upgrade takes place.

It has on the fly scalability.

Support for StoreVirtual is a separate team within HP. All the support-engineers are specialists which can always find a way to fix your issue.

A complete installation of a four-node cluster can be done within four hours to be ready to move your VMs to the new cluster. It's very easy.

Only the first implementation with a vendor team. After that it is straightforward.

There is not an easy way to build redundancy at this price. Only one license with all the features is needed as it has no additional costs. Every vendor should do that.

We use this product for easy redundancy over two locations. No other solution could make this happen as easily. We also resell EMC SAN and the business case of the customer is the most important to fit the best SAN.

Always follow best practice to be sure to connect in the best way to your VMware or Hyper-V-environment.

It works great in a stretched datacenter. All data stored across two data centers is available.

If one datacenter fails, we can continue without failure.

It needs to have an SSD solution.

We used LeftHand for more than seven years before it became an HP solution.

We had no issues with the deployment.

We've had no stability issues.

It's better not to have big clusters or volumes, so we've avoided scaling it.

6.5/10 - We have a lot of experience and often they already know where the problem is.

We used LeftHand for block-based storage and other storage solutions for file storage.

The initial setup is very simple. Just think about your design with the management groups and clusters.

The ROI is fine.

The price per GB/TB is good.