NetApp StorageGRID Reviews

It started back when we first got NetApp StorageGRID at Cox Automotive, approximately seven years ago. We first got it replacing EMC's ECS. Although it didn't really replace the usage for ECS because NetApp StorageGRID was more tied with NetApp, and we only used NetApp StorageGRID to save us space on snapshots. I tested NetApp StorageGRID on S3, and it was very good. We went from having two sites, an Atlanta site and a Las Vegas site, with approximately seven nodes to double the nodes in the seven-year span. We now have 15 nodes at each site.

We definitely saw the benefits of NetApp StorageGRID immediately. Our growth of snapshots and our internal customers, including Kelly Blue Book, AutoTrader, and HomeNet - we have close to 15 brands that we service for and they require long-term snapshots. We saw the results of having NetApp StorageGRID saving us on SSD space, which at times the snapshot would definitely be assigned to SSD space. The product is great. We did have some challenges throughout the years, especially with centricity under the covers, which is not well exposed in the background. I think that should be more exposed by NetApp, letting everyone know that it is centricity.

All support calls were after-hours calls. One thing about NetApp StorageGRID is that if it's working, it's nothing else. The same applies to EMC ECS. Once it's working and, in our case for NetApp StorageGRID, was the snapshots, utilizing for snapshots or archival. We also used it for an application called Acorda, which provides all dealers with a certain amount of space for DMS functionalities. That had grown over 100 terabytes, and NetApp StorageGRID worked very well to accommodate the snapshots of that large data.

The advanced features of NetApp StorageGRID which our upper management wouldn't agree to use, include the S3 feature. We are heavy into AWS, and my thoughts were to develop a small dev environment or even a POC environment on-prem. That's still up in the air as we continue on. Currently, AI has taken over everything with a focus on AI.

The upgrades of NetApp StorageGRID present a challenge. It's a rolling upgrade, node by node. At one point, one node would not upgrade. The positive aspect is that it didn't take down the entire environment. The environment remained functional on two different versions.

The scalability of NetApp StorageGRID has been proven as we've expanded twice. We started with six or seven nodes and have grown to 15 nodes. It does take time for synchronization to complete. From what I've seen, it took a couple of months for it all to sync up once adding nodes. However, it was transparent. It captured the addition and performed effectively, all happening in the background, steadily and surely.

The upgrades of NetApp StorageGRID present challenges. It's a rolling upgrade, node by node. At one point, one node would not upgrade. The positive aspect is that it didn't take down the entire environment. The environment remained functional on two different versions. They need to focus on a better upgrade path with easier and more resilient upgrades.

We have been using NetApp StorageGRID for seven years.

We experienced very little stability issues. We may have had a number of nodes with network issues throughout the years because of changing networks and upgrade issues, but it continued to work with support's help. From what I recall, it continued to work. It was degraded during the time, but it continued to work, which is a plus. We fixed it, and once fixed, it was out of sight, out of mind for what we were using it for and waiting for an alert, checking it from time to time.

The nodes continue to grow, which can be an issue. One of the things that it alerts on is growth, which required us to add nodes twice within seven years to accommodate the space growth. Adding the nodes was very seamless. The product is definitely more useful than what we were using it for.

The scalability of NetApp StorageGRID has been proven as we've expanded twice. We started with six or seven nodes and have grown to 15 nodes. It does take time for synchronization to complete. From what I've seen, it took a couple of months for it all to sync up once adding nodes. However, it was transparent. It captured the addition and performed effectively, all happening in the background, steadily and surely.

I have contacted the technical support of NetApp StorageGRID. I would rate the support for NetApp StorageGRID as eight out of 10.

Positive

We previously used ECS. I was personally involved with ECS up to decommissioning the entire system. NetApp StorageGRID was more versatile than EMC's solution. We had challenges with EMC going back to when we first implemented it. EMC had their own protocol before they bought out another company. We used it for a couple of years when we first implemented it, and increasingly the programmers and developers were writing code for AWS and required S3. It took a long time for EMC to implement and accommodate us when we were DealerTrack. Everything went fine eventually, but that was a challenge we had with EMC. NetApp StorageGRID worked with S3 out of the box, which was a significant advantage in terms of software versatility.

The setup was pretty simple. We needed to take some courses for NetApp StorageGRID. That's another area needing improvement. The class from a NetApp partner wasn't very good initially. About a year ago, I took another class that showed significant improvements compared to when we first started taking courses. Through hands-on experience and exploration, the system proved very simple and effective. It has useful features including notifications and alerts, which are better than EMC's ECS. The product line is superior to EMC ECS in terms of administration.

As an administrator, I was not involved in the pricing of NetApp StorageGRID. From what I understood, it was cheaper than EMC ECS, though this was over seven years ago. We were a NetApp shop, so we definitely appreciated NetApp's solutions.

We are not a direct partner of NetApp. We work with partners, and currently, Ahead is our NetApp partner. I rate NetApp StorageGRID a 10 out of 10.

My customers' usual use cases for NetApp StorageGRID usually involve either secondary storage or a solution for some kind of cloud, multi-hybrid cloud purposes.

By implementing NetApp StorageGRID, my customers are usually trying to solve problems related to getting proper storage and S3 storage.

Over the years, NetApp StorageGRID has improved my customers' organizations by providing a scalable, feature-rich, and robust solution for the storage system industry. It can be physical and virtual. Therefore, it's scalable from small to large.

The features or capabilities of NetApp StorageGRID that I have found the most valuable include scalability, interoperability, and integration options.

I find scalability to be something you expect from object storage. The amounts of data are usually large, and integration is the key for different solutions.

The feature of NetApp StorageGRID that has significantly improved data storage management for my customers is the value of the S3 API because it allows developers who are not infrastructure-oriented to use it and write code against it.

The user interface of NetApp StorageGRID might need some tweaks, and configuration is maybe a little bit confusing for those who are not so experienced. It's difficult for some inexperienced users to navigate, as it might look a bit hectic initially.

I would improve scalability. I would also enhance competitiveness. The minimum size of the solution could be better, though it scales very effectively.

I have worked with this solution as a partner of NetApp and have worked with them for more than ten years.

My impression of the stability of NetApp StorageGRID is quite high; from one to ten, I would rate it a nine.

I rate NetApp StorageGRID a nine in stability, as in most cases it's important since it consists of data, and data availability is key to this process. If data could be lost or not accessible in time, services might be down.

It's sufficient for our needs, since we operate in a small market. The scalability of NetApp StorageGRID rates an eight or nine out of ten.

When evaluating the technical support of NetApp StorageGRID, I would give it an eight out of ten.

As a partner, I have received the support I need from NetApp StorageGRID. In this small market, we have authorization to do the support ourselves sometimes, which makes it easier for all of us. However, sometimes we need to support ourselves, which makes the process more complicated since we act on behalf of them in some cases.

Positive

I don't directly handle the initial setup. I'm more responsible for customer relations. Based on feedback, the implementation process is not overly difficult. The amount of time it takes depends on the client expectations and project scope. It's not a complicated depoyment, however, sometimes, for example, integration can be challenging. A full implementation may take two months or so. How many people needed depends on the level of integrations, however one to two people are needed.

Regarding the pricing and licensing of NetApp StorageGRID, it could be more flexible and aggressive against the competition. Licensing itself is quite simple, however it could be even simpler as it depends on different options. I'd rate the pricing eight out of ten.

We tend to work with the latest version of the solution.

I am not aware of whether NetApp StorageGRID is enhancing my customers' AI-driven data analytics functionalities, however, it could, since the amounts of data are large, so they can be used for such purposes.

I haven't used the AI engine in NetApp StorageGRID, so I cannot comment on this.

Overall, I would rate NetApp StorageGRID an eight on a scale from one to ten, where one is worst and ten is best.

When I need to expand the capacity of storage, NetApp StorageGRID allows me to have a higher tier to save my data without growing the NetApp filers. With NetApp StorageGRID, I have two buckets where I can store my data on a longer-term basis, whereas I only keep metadata on the first-level filers. Moreover, I can use commodity hardware to grow my NetApp StorageGRID infrastructure instead of having dedicated appliances. It streamlines my internal operations.

NetApp StorageGRID helps keep data out of the ONTAP storage and grow my infrastructure by simply adding Linux boxes using commodity hardware instead of buying dedicated appliances, which cost very much. It has saved the cost of ownership. Instead of buying specific NetApp filers, I can grow the storage capacity by adding Linux boxes with Intel PCs or Intel servers that I can find everywhere. NetApp filer costs much more than the Intel hardware.

NetApp StorageGRID is a great alternative to AWS S3 buckets. Erasure coding is very valuable.

It is very simple. It has been improved over time. Its UI is very user-friendly.

They can enhance the deduplication and compression features, which are crucial for saving more disk space. It's not at the same level as the NetApp filer or the real NetApp cluster that runs itself on its architecture, as StorageGRID is a software solution that emulates a RAID level.

They can speed up the reindexing in general and also internal tasks and jobs. It would be great if it could fix internal issues itself without manual intervention. Currently, I have to figure out when something is wrong and the system needs manual fixing.

I have been using NetApp StorageGRID for ten years.

They offer a great support experience.

Positive

It is very cost-effective.

My company is a long-time NetApp customer, and NetApp is the most affordable and reliable company. The specific reason we chose NetApp StorageGRID over the competition was that it costs less and is more cost-effective. The cost was the main point.

The specific capabilities of NetApp StorageGRID that differentiated it from other solutions we evaluated included the simplicity of installation. We also have the possibility to recover old servers, decommission the servers, and reuse them as part of the StorageGRID structure by simply installing a pre-configured Linux system with all the necessary components.

We have plans to expand the usage of NetApp StorageGRID in the future. We are currently carrying out upgrades to newer versions, as we are running out of space, but the current license doesn't allow us to add more Linux boxes, so we would set up a new cluster instead of growing the current one.

Overall, I would rate NetApp StorageGRID a nine out of ten.

We use the product to manage large, unstructured files and data requiring scalable storage solutions. It's particularly effective for storing unstructured files efficiently with metadata in one accessible location.

The product's continual innovation and enhancement in integration capabilities with other NetApp solutions could be better.

I've worked with Dell EMC storage solutions for approximately 23 years, initially with Compact StorageGRID, which later became HPE, and then with Dell EMC solutions.

I rate StorageGRID's stability around an eight out of ten, as NetApp promptly addresses any issues that may arise. Its reliability in maintaining data availability and consistency contributes to its high stability rating.

The platform is highly scalable, allowing easy addition of enclosures and drives, making it non-disruptive and straightforward to expand as needed. It was originally hardware-agnostic, and its integration into NetApp has maintained this scalable nature, allowing for growth without compromising existing infrastructure. Its scalability is around an eight out of ten.

It can handle large-scale and unstructured data needs. Its ability to manage significant volumes of data effectively makes it suitable for enterprises requiring robust storage solutions.

The technical support team is reliable and responsive. 

NetApp's support and documentation generally make the initial setup straightforward and manageable.

It can be deployed in both environments, but typically, we deploy it on-premises following technical workshops and customer consultations. It ensures tailored implementation to meet specific business needs and integration requirements.

The platform's scalability and efficient data management capabilities are generally well-regarded for enhancing operational efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

I rate the product pricing around five out of ten—it's negotiable, depending on the circumstances.

NetApp's data integration fabric strategy allows for seamless data replication and availability across global locations, which is particularly effective. Integrating with its existing solutions enhances data management and replication capabilities.

I rate it an eight. 

We are a cloud service provider, so we don't know what our customers use our storage for.

Our internal customers within the Dutch government use our facilities, and I've got no visibility over and no control over what they use the storage for. The scalability is very effective for our customers.

If I could change anything in NetApp StorageGRID, that would be pricing. In terms of functionality, reliability, and scalability, we are satisfied with NetApp. 

It's quite complex, which is a disadvantage; it'senterprise-levell, it's complicated to set up, and you need external support.

I have been working with NetApp StorageGRID for several years now; about three years.

In terms of scalability, we are satisfied with NetApp.

I would rate NetApp technical support at the moment at five out of ten. That's due to the fact that we haven't implemented all the technical support facilities in NetApp.

Neutral

I used to be responsible for storage solutions. I'm no longer interested in those solutions, so it's a recent change. I am familiar with Red Hat solutions. 

It would definitely be more on the expensive side, especially if you compare it with open source solutions like Ceph.

There are some helpful features of NetApp StorageGRID. I wouldn't be able to give a proper answer on the huge value and impact of NetApp StorageGRID. I would rate NetApp StorageGRID eight out of ten.

We have diverse use cases ranging from large work databases to scenarios requiring a higher volume of small objects.

Integrating StorageGRID into our data management workflow poses no challenges. Provisioning and managing it in an agile manner is straightforward and standard, similar to other products.

The feature of StorageGRID that I find most valuable for ensuring data durability and protection is its Information Lifecycle Management functionality. While I acknowledge that managing ILM policies can be cumbersome at times, it offers a comprehensive range of resiliency patterns that align with our specific requirements. Whether we need premium protection for copies or archival protection, StorageGRID's ILM allows us to easily configure and manage these policies. Leveraging ILM enables us to offer a range of service offerings, including premium, standard, and archive solutions.

NetApp StorageGRID, like AWS S3, adheres to standards for decoupling data from metadata. However, the product faces challenges in this area, particularly concerning the storage of metadata. Unlike some other solutions, StorageGRID stores all metadata in the first storage node, and expanding metadata capacity necessitates adding more storage nodes. This design choice, using Cassandra database for metadata storage, can lead to significant costs as organizations may need to add more storage nodes solely to accommodate metadata requirements, even if additional storage capacity isn't needed. The challenge lies in the taxing aspect of managing both small and large objects efficiently. On average, the metadata space for objects ranges from 1.3 to 2 KB, regardless of object size. While this variability is common across platforms, it poses specific challenges within StorageGRID. Managing small object transactional records stored as objects creates pain points within storage groups.

One key improvement I'd like to see in StorageGRID is enhanced visibility for management purposes. For instance, tracking delete markers, which is a standard mechanism, becomes challenging when bucket versioning is enabled. Currently, there's a lack of visibility in this area, unlike what is offered by AWS. However, I'm aware that product enhancements are underway to address this limitation. While StorageGRID's documentation is comprehensive in some aspects, it could be stronger in providing details on certain events and metrics.

I have been using it for three years now.

Scalability in StorageGRID primarily relies on storage node expansion, which is generally not an issue. However, the concern lies in the management of metadata.

In terms of support, there can be instances where it feels like the team is learning on the go, despite the product being mature. This impression is reinforced by occasional gaps in documentation, suggesting areas that might still be unclear or less well-documented from a support and product perspective. I would rate its customer service and support seven out of ten.

Neutral

When comparing NetApp with its competitors, such as Dell, there are notable differences in terms of both advantages and drawbacks. Dell tends to be on the pricier side, while NetApp's pricing is more comparable to industry standards. Additionally, when looking at competitors like ECS, which has been established for a long time, there have been numerous instances of last-minute issues and hotfixes, leading to frequent challenges in dealing with the product.

The initial setup is relatively straightforward, with very minor complexities. I would rate it six out of ten.

The geo-distribution features of StorageGRID are built on a foundation of a three-site deployment model. This setup includes a global namespace and load balancers, facilitating the distribution of data across multiple locations. By default, the ingest flow of objects involves storing two copies of each object of interest, as per the product's standard settings. Configuration of the ILM policies allows for adherence to required resiliency patterns, such as full copies or erasure coding, tailored to specific needs. This setup enables the deployment of multi-site duo configurations. For instance, in our specific scenario, any expansion necessitates a threefold increase in resources. In a three-site deployment, local load balancers are set up at each site, while global load balancers facilitate geographically optimized access by directing clients to the closest site. The IPAN nodes in storage are configured with a primary node responsible for administrative tasks. However, from a client perspective, access is geolocated, ensuring data availability across all sites. This setup fulfills our geo-related requirements effectively.

From our team's engineering perspective, which consists of about three individuals, the deployment process for StorageGRID doesn't require many resources. However, from the vendor's viewpoint, deployment involves several personnel, including a project manager and possibly six to seven others. Regarding hardware maintenance, StorageGRID is relatively straightforward, involving standard tasks like supply replacement and firmware upgrades.

The pricing of StorageGRID falls within the typical range for enterprise-grade solutions and is comparable to other vendors such as Dell, NetApp, and Pure Storage. There's no significant difference in price point among these vendors, as they all offer solutions at similar levels.

Overall, I would rate it seven out of ten.

StorageGRID is designed for cloud-based, highly scalable storage. Think big names like service providers like Google who need massive storage volumes with scalability. It also offers cloud-enabled storage capabilities with cloud management functionality. 

So, if you prioritize scalability and cloud integration, StorageGRID is the way to go. Its object-based storage is built specifically for that purpose. 

If you're a service provider catering to multiple tenants, then StorageGRID is definitely recommended. It's incredibly scalable, easily handling hundreds of petabytes of data. You can start small and seamlessly scale up as your needs grow.

The ease of management and scalability are at the top, followed by data security.

The only thing missing is flexibility in configuration to cater to specific customer requirements.

Another area of improvement is marketing. NetApp's marketing of StorageGRID isn't optimal. They should present it more effectively, especially in regions like Pakistan. Here, I haven't seen any marketing campaigns from NetApp for StorageGRID or the Solid State Platform (SSP).

While StorageGRID is a globally recognized product, I haven't seen any marketing efforts from NetApp in Pakistan. Even competitors are promoting object storage solutions here, but NetApp seems less efficient in selling StorageGRID.

There might be one or two customers, but even as a NetApp partner, I'm not aware of any major sales.

I've been trained on StorageGRID, and it is a good product. I'm unsure why it hasn't gained traction in Pakistan compared to other countries.

So, I just recommend improving the marketing campaigns in Pakistan. I'm pretty confident that if we have one example of successful StorageGRID implementation in Pakistan, other customers will follow suit.

I have been using it since 2009. 

StorageGRID is pretty scalable. 

There are two key points here: scalability and multi-tenancy. Multi-tenancy itself is another use case, typically relevant to cloud storage, SC protocol storage, or even NetApp FAS series storage. We can also leverage the NetApp Volume Service, which is available in most cloud service providers. So, multi-tenancy is built into the FAS series, making it a cloud-enabled storage solution.

However, if you have a specific use case for object storage like Google Drive (which is object storage from Google), and your customer only needs the object storage with the multi-tenant feature as the single requirement, then I wouldn't recommend a heterogeneous storage approach. 

In that case, the object storage, which is a separate product from NetApp called StorageGRID, would be the perfect fit. It's ideal for customers who want cloud-based storage, specifically to create a public or private cloud and offer dedicated storage to their tenants or even for general internal use. So, for that scenario, I would definitely recommend StorageGRID over the E series, F series, or FAS series.

Now, in terms of scalability, each model has its own feature set. For entry-level storage, the FAS series scales up to one terabyte. More specifically, the FAS releases 2750 and 2820 are quite scalable within that range. They offer cost-effective options but with lower maximum capacities (like 54TB or 48TB). 

On the other hand, high-end models like M5300 scale up to six to seven petabytes. The key takeaway is scalability comes at a cost. If you need a highly scalable solution, expect to pay more.

Now, for StorageGRID specifically, the scalable option is the 1700 series. If you don't require scalability and prefer a cheaper archiving solution, consider the F150 or F250. F150 initially offers a lower cost, and though DXRIS isn't scalable, it's a good option for customers focused on data migration performance and lower TCO (total cost of ownership) compared to newer StorageGRID models.

NetApp support is very efficient. Obviously, that's a collective response, not just for StorageGRID. Overall, they do a great job. 

The product itself is very good. We rarely need support, almost never. That's how good and efficient their support is.

For example, we sold a NetApp system years ago. There were eventually no problems with the specific StorageGRID unit we used. You can say the product is truly reliable storage. That's another crucial point; the storage system or product is very efficient, offering 24/7 operation.  

Positive

We're also a Hitachi partner and sell Hitachi products. I'm certified for Hitachi as well. Obviously, I haven't explored other products extensively. But compared to the Hitachi Content Platform, NetApp is even better. 

However, Hitachi Content Platform is costlier than NetApp StorageGRID; the initial cost is still higher. Scalability is similar, but marketing really favors Hitachi Content Platform here. Every customer seems to go for it. From Hitachi's perspective, they market the Content Platform heavily, unlike NetApp with StorageGRID in Pakistan.

Initial setup is very easy, as with most NetApp products. Even for the S-series and E-series, the setup is straightforward. 

We have implemented StorageGRID for data archiving or backup. When we deploy any storage, we consider core data, protection data, and customer backup needs. Third-party tools can be used for backup, but NetApp has built-in snapshot technology and user-friendly SnapCenter software for easy backup and restore.

So, StorageGRID supports Big Data Analytics or IoT environments. But we might need to revisit your initial sales configuration. Depending on the use case, we might need to adjust the solution to ensure the clients have the right product.

Now, if you're looking for centralized unified storage in a heterogeneous environment, I'd recommend the FAS series. It's built with backup and recovery software and offers unified storage for various platforms.

However, if your primary focus is big data analytics, then an E-Series system would be better suited. It's specifically designed for big data workloads. Additionally, consider StorageGRID CloudSync for managing data across geographically dispersed locations.

But if your primary focus is data analytics and you already have an externally managed solution, then again, E-Series is the way to go.

StorageGRID is inherently efficient. But cost efficiency depends on specific requirements. 

The pricing is quite flexible and depends on the specific customer requirements. The initial cost is primarily based on the desired capacity, so it's not a fixed price.

It's important to consider the customer's role. Are they a service provider or a telecom company needing large storage to serve their customers? In such cases, they might require 10TB or even more, not just 1TB.

However, if the customer is a central authority or organization looking for an archiving solution for massive data storage (e.g., government institutions), then scaling with StorageGRID might not be ideal.

So, StorageGRID is best suited for customers who need a large-scale, cloud-enabled, and S3 protocol-enabled storage system, possibly for public or private cloud storage. They'll likely require a dedicated namespace, meaning they need a large object storage such as StorageGRID.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. It is really nice product. 

We use StorageGRID to manage our organization's data. We've created separate spaces to manage our archives. We partition the data – one partition is dedicated to archiving, and the other partition hosts and manages our live data.

It's helped us expand our data retention capabilities. For example, we have audit requirements where we need to store data for extended periods. Earlier, we were not able to store that data for a specified period of time. StorageGRID allows us to meet those requirements, which we couldn't do before.

Moreover, integrating StorageGRID into our existing infrastructure has improved operational efficiency significantly. There is more space available and it's easier to manage data now. I'd rate the improvement as an eight out of ten.

The management portals have most significantly improved our data retrieval times. They've made it much easier to restore data compared to our previous methods.

Data replication helped us expand our capabilities and horizons. We were able to fulfill both finance [finance auditors] and customer requirements shared for longer data retention and storage archive features – something we couldn't do before the upgrade.

Data retrieval speed could be better.

I've worked with it for around six to seven years.

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten, 

Scalability was quite easy. We initially planned for a five-year growth period and were able to scale after three years to meet our organization's increasing data needs. We simply added more hardware to the existing setup.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. We have around 150 end users using it in our organization.

Since some users are responsible for storing and archiving the data, it's used on a daily basis.

We used a different product. 

We received positive feedback from others in the industry who use StorageGRID. They indicated it's a stable product, which was important to us.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a six out of ten, with one being difficult and ten being easy. 

It was new for us, so it took some time to configure and understand the setup for our environment.

It's on-premises, but we have plans to move to the cloud in the future.

The deployment was a collaboration between a third-party integrator and the core NetApp team.

So, NetApp team directly assisted with the deployment. There was one integrator, one NetApp team member, and three to four people from my team.

The entire deployment and to implement this solution took us a few days. 

One person is enough for the maintenance of the solution. 

The pricing is on the expensive side. I'd rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is inexpensive, and ten is expenisve.  Our licensing is in INR it was around 25 lakhs, which is roughly two million.

I would recommend using it to others. Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Its performance and stability are the primary reasons I would recommend it.

The solution is used for cost-effective storage data purposes. With OpenShift architecture we can do more depending on the requirements of the customer.

The most valuable feature is tiering. We can easily move the data from on-premises to lower-cost storage automatically which is valuable to our customers. Also, the testing environment ticket where the developer can use a single script for testing through the app.

The integration with more apps has room for improvement. 

The matrix with the hardware during the sizing has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for two years.

I give the stability a nine out of ten.

I give the scalability a nine out of ten. 

The technical support is good but there is room for more expertise.

Positive

The deployment can take up to one year. Once all the resources and information are ready, we have to get the environment ready for the engineer to start working. A small deployment requires up to two people.

We pay for a license annually.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

The number of people required for maintenance depends on the organization's requirements and size.

Our organization is enterprise-level.

I recommend the solution to others.

There are specific use cases for StorageGRID. The target customer market is the oil and gas sector, and media and entertainment, where they have large files including videos and archived news information. I am head of IT support and services and we are customers of NetApp StorageGRID.

The solution is very easy to deploy for any IT personnel. It's also cost-effective. It addresses all the challenges customers have with regard to object storage.

Marketing is a very weak area of NetApp in Pakistan. They are not investing in the Pakistan market. Improvements need to be made in the customer support area.

The solution is stable. 

It's more scalable than Hitachi Content Platform offering near to unlimited space. No company can reach the limits of NetApp StorageGrid, because of the petabytes.

The company still has no footprint in Pakistan. We are lucky that the solution is simple to maintain. In that respect, Hitachi provides better support for their product. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

I rate this solution nine out of 10.