The system relies heavily on ethernet networking, and when issues occur, we must consult with the network team to investigate. While logs may indicate network errors, the situation differs from previous SAN setups where Fiber Channel was under our control. The storage team could directly identify and resolve Fiber Channel network issues. GPFS should consider enhanced integration with network monitoring to enable quick detection and resolution of network layer issues rather than depending extensively on the networking team.

From a functionality perspective, I cannot think of additional improvements or enhancements needed for the future.

View full review »

There can be improvements in fault tolerance and making erasure coding faster. 

Additionally, it would be beneficial to have example configurations or applications that assist in setup and configuration.

View full review »

There is room for improvement in the web interface. There could be more information available, such as charts and graphs to monitor performance. View full review »

I wish there were some graphical user interface to access the GPFS file system creation and monitoring.

View full review »

The biggest problem is that it is not able to provide block storage. It can consume block storage, you can put it on from the storage and present the span over the fiber channel or iSCSI. The problem is that they have not been able to provide block storage consumable to the customer host. This is only a side-based solution. We can install the GPFS into the customer environment but I don't think that is the best solution.

The initial setup has room for improvement, it is not straightforward.

Spectrum scale is very good from the performance perspective, but from the application perspective, you have to take care if you want to use a database as a service that you can consume. For example, a database, or being able to read and write it, doesn't have a deployment solution. It is missing.

View full review »

I rate this solution a nine out of ten. I believe there is no graphic user interface, so they should include it.

View full review »

Integration with other vendors is not available. This feature would be very helpful.

View full review »

The solution would benefit from being simplified.

The scalability could be a bit better. It needs to be more flexible when it comes to expanding.

It would be helpful if there was a graphical user interface that could walk you through the deployment process. The instructions surrounding setup aren't the best. They need to be more step-by-step.

View full review »

The pricing and licensing model for this solution are complex and it is sometimes difficult to explain it to customers.

It is not always easy to sell this product because certain aspects seem complicated for the customer.

View full review »

Maybe it needs integration with HA.

View full review »

It does everything we need it to do. 

Though, making it a little easier to add bad file sets would help. There is a transition to how you add storage and how you add a file set, so making that a little smoother would probably be my recommendation.

View full review »

The main issue that we have now is with the encryption. They want to use more metrics in encryption, which is not working very well. Thus, we need to decide whether we need to actually use an IBM solution. However, that decision is way above my level.

View full review »

The solution's pricing could be better.

View full review »