Pure Storage FlashBlade Reviews

Our primary use case of this solution is for video editing. 

This solution has improved my organization in the way that we used to have a lot of spinning discs. There had to be multiple racks because of the capacity and performance required, now we can put it all in just a couple of Us. 

The ease of use of this solution has absolutely simplified storage for us. 

We've seen some good data reduction rates. We get about 4:1 at our data center. We're getting around 2:1 for the one that we're using for video editing.

Speed and ease of use are the two most valuable features.

I like the information that we're getting out of the predictive performance analytics feature so far. We've only had it for six months so we need to get some more data. 

I would like to see better integration. 

Stability is rock solid. We've had them for years without any issues. 

It scales really well. 

Technical support is excellent. 

We knew we needed to switch to this solution because of the speed. We had these in our data centers and the speed was rock solid and we wanted to get these out to video editors. 

The initial setup was easy. It was done in ten minutes.  

NetApp and Pure Storage were the two solutions that we considered. The NetApp solution was more complicated. 

I would rate this solution a ten. We haven't had any issues with it, it's easy to use, and the speed is incredible. 

I would advise someone considering this solution to buy it. 

Our primary use case of this solution is for storage management.

We needed a separate storage device because we have a large amount of data. The cost benefits of this storage have improved my organization. 

Has simplified storage because it is easy to use. It's plug-and-play. We don't need too much support or technical support to be able to start using it. 

There has been a reduction in the total cost of ownership by around 20%. 

The most valuable feature for us would be that it's a good cost-benefit solution for storing large amounts of data compared to other solutions in the market. 

We haven't been able to use much of the cloud area of Pure Storage. We have a storage server and it would be better if it could integrate with other cloud features of this solution.

It's stable.

Scalability is good. 

I'm not directly involved with the technical support but I haven't heard any complaints or any issues about it. The vendor helped us to install and deploy the solution. 

I would rate this solution a nine. The only reason I wouldn't give it a ten is because the servers are a little big. We have seen smaller products with the same storage capacity. We switched because we were looking for a solution that could meet our data storage and performance needs. We researched the costs for different storage solutions and Pure Storage was the one that fit our needs. Its cost-benefit was the most valuable part for us. 

The initial setup was straightforward. 

The vendor helped us to install and gear it. We had a good experience with them and didn't have any issues. 

Nowadays we have plenty of data storage solutions in the market. Pure Storage is very fast, very straightforward. The price was nice. I believe that in terms of at least storage needs, it filled its role very well.

We are pretty sensitive to response times and have been running storages before PR. We used to not have a great response time but once we moved to this solution it has saved total production storage usage. It has better overall performance. 

There is predictive analysis that PR provides us and the customer. It's useful for as to translate what is being expected. We can calculate and plan the capacity based on the predictive analysis.

Deduplication and response time are its most valuable features. 

I would like to see more deduplication. 

Has been pretty stable. We haven't encountered any issues. 

I like the scalability options. We recently expanded the storage and it's not straightforward but their team helped make it happen.

Their technical support is awesome. I would give it five stars. 

The initial setup was straightforward. 

I would rate this solution an eight plus. It has has good flexibility and stability, it's easy to manage and the response time is good. 

Our primary use case of this solution is for the database masking and testing. 

We have an improved the lifecycle of database testing and has improved QA in the space that we use it for. 

Storage has been simplified for us in the way that it's easy to manage. Their automatic monitoring really helps when things break or are about to break. They see a problem coming and alert us even before our own system does. 

It's good to have a good way to back up high-performance type arrays like this,
especially if we could back it up on the back end versus the front side where things are impacted.

As a Pure Storage platform, the cost-benefit is hugely based on the deduplication and capacity. Otherwise, we would have had to have a bunch of arrays to support that capacity. The physical footprint of the array, the capacity that it's using, and the high performance are all things that we have seen benefit from.

The most valuable features would be the IOPS performance and the ease of management. 

In the realm of micro-services, I think that Pure Storage can do well if they start getting in there and making their arrays more micro-services ready. 

We can add a bunch of compute, we could forever compute, but the array at some point comes to a screeching halt. I think if there's a way to make the flash array go wider that would be the better way to go in the long run.

We have had this solution for two years and we haven't had any issues with it. 

Salability does have its limits but we haven't had any limit or scalability issues in the area we use it.

We considered building our own solution but at some point, we realized that there was a higher risk to that. We ended up choosing Pure Storage because they could prove that other customers had successful implementations with minimal issues that was a huge plus. 

The initial setup was as easy as it can get. 

We used a reseller for the deployment called Trace 3. The consulting and integration of the whole solution was done by them and then turned over to my team. There was an issue that we didn't know how that was happening. It was more of an application team problem that they didn't come to us before starting all of that. 

In terms of performance analytics, due to our own fault, we tend to use a lot of capacity faster than we think. Because of our slow internal processing, we can't add capacity fast enough when we need it. We know it is capable of easily adding capacity.

I would rate this solution a nine and a half and I would definitely recommend this solution to a colleague at another company. It's very stable, efficient and it performs very well. 

The tool's most valuable feature is its fast performance, especially in handling snapshots. It helps during power outages when we need to quickly move data between different data centers. It ensures efficient replication and helps maintain our data centers' uptime. 

Commvault has mainly driven the Analytics, providing data and reports. However, the product has room for improvement, especially regarding storage analytics. Upgrading firmware has caused issues, requiring feature disabling to revert to traditional backups. The firmware upgrades sometimes affect Commvault backups.

I have been using the product since 2022. 

Pure Storage FlashBlade is fairly stable. 

My company has three storage engineers using the product. 

Pure Storage FlashBlade's deployment is straightforward. It took about six months to deploy the solution across five data centers. For deployment and maintenance, we needed three engineers from our team and two from the partner company. 

I rate the overall product a seven out of ten. It would be best if you are ready with the upgrade process.