Pure Storage FlashBlade Reviews

Our primary use case for this solution is backup.

We are running VMware on Pure because our old storage was very poor. Running on Pure helps because it improves our performance in general.

Using this solution has made our backups more reliable.

The most valuable feature of this solution is its reliability.

I would like to see more monitoring capability included in the next release of this solution.

This solution is very stable.

This is a very scalable solution.

Technical support for this solution has been great. They have been right on board with us.

We outgrew our old solution, which is why we implemented this one. We are traditionally a Dell EMC shop.

The initial setup of this solution was straightforward. We didn't run into any major issues.

We worked directly with the vendor for the implementation and our experience with them was great.

Before choosing this option we also evaluated solutions by IBM. We chose Pure because we like their support model and we like their performance. The vendor came out and did a bake-off for us.

For anybody considering this solution, my advice is to ask the vendor for a bake-off, or a demo product, so that you can evaluate it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use it for backups and replications of our IBM Systems.

It does a good job in-house, as an onsite solution.

The solution’s inline deduplication and compression do a good job.

The speed could be improved.

We are on the low side for our storage. I wish we had purchased more.

We are looking to grow, so we will probably be adding more storage.

The tech support is pretty good.

It was setup before I joined the company.

The initial setup is pretty easy and simple.

We have done upgrades of our physical controllers.

Our licensing is renewed annually.

They are doing very well with the product.

We have integrated the solution with VMware. The integration process was user-friendly.

We use SolarWinds to evaluate our performance metrics.

It is our storage solution.

It improves our organization by making the management much easier to access and not as time consuming. It has made the management easy and simple.

We use it to monitor latency. The solution corrects the latency and makes it easier.

For space requirements, it helps expand what we are trying to use it for on the network, which is all positive.

It does a great job of capacity planning for us.

The management is its most valuable feature.

The predictive performance analytics are pretty good.

The simplicity of the solution is great.

The stability is pretty good.

The scalability is pretty good.

The technical support is pretty fast. Everything is good with the technical support.

We use Nimble. We found out that Nimble had a lot of latency issues, so we decided to switch to Pure Storage. Ever since then, everything has been running a lot more smoothly.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We will be upgrading our controllers soon.

We used a consultant with our deployment. The experience was pretty good.

It reducing our total cost of ownership by 10 percent.

I have not seen ROI.

Through past experience, we all decided that Pure Storage was a better fit for our environment.

The interface is a lot better than most other storage solutions. We have Nimble, as well, and I prefer the whole layout of Pure Storage over any other storage solution.

While Nimble is definite good, I would recommend Pure Storage because it is a pretty good system.

We have integrated it with VMware. The integration process is pretty good. Especially with VMware, it helps with the capacity of it.

I would rate it as a nine (out of ten). Altogether, it is a pretty good system. Everything is well setup: The management, interface, and everything else are all pretty good.

It is for our enterprise. The product is fantastic. 

We have an Evergreen Storage subscription.

Our latency has gone down.

We can capacity plan at a greater level than we used to.

Speed is its most valuable feature.

The compression is amazing.

The support needs improvement.

I would rate the technical support as a five (out of ten). They need to improve. When we open a case, it is auto assigned to a support tech person. Nine out of ten times, we get an email right back saying that person is off until tomorrow. I cannot handle that. They just did this over the weekend to us, too. I had to call our rep and have them do something about it.

My previous solution was EOL.

The initial setup was straightforward because Pure Storage set it up for us.

We have undergone an upgrade of our controllers, and the process was okay.

We did use a company for the deployment, and our experience was fantastic. We ended up buying the company.

I have seen ROI. It has allowed me to increase the density of my VMs without having to purchase anything additional.

NetApp and Isilon were also on the shortlist.

The compression is true and does happen.

We are using it for scratch space.

Most of our jobs require partial storage (or read/write). While it is temporary storage, it is doing a fantastic job. 

Its SSD to storage is its most valuable feature.

It helps simplify our storage, because the user interface is very simple and the installation is easy.

I would like to have Snapshots and Snapmail in the next release. People who came from a NetApp background, especially expect these features.

It is very scalable. I have gone from five blades to seven blades. While it did require some rebooting, it scales well.

We wanted to have a multi-vendor strategy. We already had two storage vendors and we wanted to more competition. This was where Pure Storage came in. We were looking for a SSD data storage or all-flash base, so that is where this solution fits in.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We used an integrator for the deployment.

We are using it for our scratch space, and it works well for our use case.

It helps our customers with their storage solutions. 

The ease of deployment and management has helped us simplify our storage. We also do not have to worry about capacity management as much. A lot of these things are native to Pure Storage.

Our availability is at nine nines.

• Deployment
• Cost per terabyte

They need better integration with public clouds along with a better hybrid solution. 

I have been highly satisfied with the stability.

We are highly satisfied with its capacity management.

We have worked with the engineering team and professional services team. We have had no issues. They are excellent. 

Our customers asked us to change from our previous solution, HPE.

The initial setup is straightforward. Implementing Pure Storage end-to-end from procurement all the way through deployment, we have no issues.

We are the integrator.

Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO. The amount of reduction depends on how poorly they were previously doing at storage management.

Our customers have also seen ROI.

We also evaluate NetApp and Dell EMC. The reason that we chose Pure Storage was because the cost per terabyte was lower and customer demand.

Pure Storage should be the top contender for certain types of workloads.

We have been using it for data center consolidation. It is our primary source for data center applications: production, development, and test. 

It creates a much smaller footprint. Previously, we had a large data center with 30 racks with 12 racks of storage, and we are now down to one. So, a huge electric savings along with freeing our data center ports.

The most valuable feature is its  ease of use. We went from six different storage vendors down to one. The training for the operations staff and others that had to deal with this on a provisioning standpoint was much easier to do. The process was seamless and very easy to learn.

It has absolutely simplified our storage because the dashboards on the consoles show a clear understanding of where you are, and it is also very easy to provision. This been a big help for our teams.

I am very happy with the latency, availability, and reduction rates.

On our dedupe during our initial buy, we were expecting a number a little higher like 4x. However, we are getting about 3.6. While it is close enough, it doesn't quite hit the numbers. So, this has been a challenge.

We are looking at Pure Storage's capabilities to move off-premise into the cloud.

Stability has been rock solid.

Scalability has not been an issue. Performance has been great. It is just the capacity and dedupe part, which is a little light.

We used technical support during the install process, and they were helpful.

We switched to Pure Storage as a decision to get away from Dell EMC.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was very easy to set the IP addresses up and the rest of the initial parameters up, then go.

Our consultants did the installation with the help of Pure Storage's technical support.

We have mainly seen a reduction in TCO because of operational efficiencies. It used to take us a lot longer to get servers and storage provisioned. Now, the speed of the disk, plus the ease of use, has made great improvements.

We used a reseller for the purchase.

We were in a build a new data center mode, and Pure Storage was one of three option that we considered. Then, it became our final option.

The other options were HPE 3PAR Flash Storage and Dell EMC XtremIO Flash. While all three solutions are comparable in price, we chose Pure Storage because of politics. 

It works quite well for us, and I would recommend it.

From a standpoint of pure performance, it's moving. We've been very happy with it. 

Our primary use case of this solution is for the massively scalable flash storage that's close by on our on-premise service.

This solution has improved how our organization functions in the way that it has essentially made us not have to think about storage. That's probably the biggest selling point. Storage is boring and you don't want to think about it. From that point of view, it's provided a lot of benefits. It ticks the big boxes. It's fast, it's scalable, it's essentially zero-touch maintenance. All of those get us eighty, ninety percent of the way.

The biggest feedback is that none of the teams have noticed. I'm not getting negative feedback which is a big improvement from where we were.

Primarily, most of the features that we've used work out of the box. It's fairly simple if you just roll it out. We integrated it with our kubernetes cluster fairly painlessly but, also the flip side of that is that's where the pain point is coming from because we need a bit more control over it. That's been the frustrating aspect of it, but for the most part, it was plug and play.

The Pure Storage Orchestrator is our biggest pain point at the moment. If we can have more say in future developments of feature sets that we will need to support for our use case, that would be pretty beneficial to us.

Regarding stability, I have no questions so far. We did a hardware upgrade of an older system and it just kept on ticking. I was quite impressed by the zero downtime.

We haven't pushed it to its limits. We're only at one FlashBlade so far. Being able to dynamically scale it as we added more storage was simply enough. I have no reason to believe it wouldn't be as painless when we scale up to multiple FlashBlades.

We've only had to use their technical support during run of the mill maintenance events like upgrading the firmware and exchanging the box. It was very helpful during the big upgrade. I had them on video call so we could do it in real time while we were in the data center.

We were just using a very homebrew, on-premise, traditional NAS-style storage solution that was quite a few years out of date already. We took the opportunity then to upgrade our infrastructure completely. 
The other solution we looked at was a startup that uses NBME fabric as their solution, but it's not zero touch. You have to configure a lot, you have to take a lot of care of it, so it just didn't appeal from that perspective. That's still why I think Pure Storage ultimately won our business just because it works out of the box.

The initial setup was straightforward. If you know how to plug in power and network you're pretty much qualified. They were on site to configure the network, the box to fit into our network architecture. Other than that, we self-managed from there.

We implemented it ourselves.

I would rate this solution a solid eight to nine, it does tick all of the major boxes. Our main concern is just with the little customizations that we need.

If someone is considering this solution I would say that for the gap in the market that Pure Storage is going to fill, essentially updating NAS to the 2018s, they excel at that. If you have an existing solution that isn't performing then Pure Storage makes perfect sense to drop into a lot of enterprises.