it_user335178 - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO/CTO at Bay State Health (VertitechIT)
Video Review
Real User
We spend less on equivalent storage using VSAN to replace our traditional SAN architecture. They are working on extending VSAN's access outside of its virtual bubbles, which I'm looking forward to.

What is most valuable?

The value that VSAN brings to our organization, really there are two major areas. One is the ability to replace very expensive proprietary SANs. The other is the need to replicate and keep data available at all times across three separate data centers. Those two elements are really where VSAN plays.

How has it helped my organization?

Probably the biggest benefit we get is the replacement of the SANS and it's purely a cost one. To give you an idea, we spend roughly 50% less on equivalent storage by using VSAN to replace our more traditional SAN architecture. Further, the operating costs are 20, 30 percent less. The ability to scale our storage as we need it is far simpler with VSAN than buying the more traditional route. So I would argue that that's probably the single best feature we get.

What needs improvement?

There are features that I would love to see added to VSAN and I think they're being worked on. One of the major limitations is its inability to provide storage to things outside the hyper-converged world. Any traditional SAN we have left over in our institution will be for that function. Ultimately, if we can remove that by simply extending VSAN's access outside of its little virtual bubble, so to speak, that's the key. And as I said I think that's going to be added.

For how long have I used the solution?

VeriTech is a consulting and engineering firm specializing in health care. We provide, management and technical skills often acting as the CTO of, healthcare institutions. One of our engagements is I'm actually the interim acting CTO of Baystate Health, in western Massachusetts. VSAN is one of the primary ones but, software defined, architecture and complete hyper-convergence is really what we use VMware for. We use NSX and VSAN as part of our, absolute total infrastructure. And that's all part of vCloud, initiative. We also use Horizon for our VDI, implementation. And that pretty much-those products are 99% of what we use.

Buyer's Guide
VMware vSAN
February 2024
Learn what your peers think about VMware vSAN. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: February 2024.
757,198 professionals have used our research since 2012.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of VSAN so far has been excellent. We're just beginning to enter production. We're beginning to migrate our data off a traditional SANS which are a collection of EMC, IBM, NetApp, whole range of them onto the VSAN platform and so far we haven't had any problems.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It's actually the internal feature that I think gets us the great feature of savings out of it. With VSAN I simply add disk drives and hosts to my infrastructure at any of the facilities I have. The net result is an increase of both storage and processing.

In the older model, if I need to add, let's say a terabyte of space for some particular tier one application, I have to add a terabyte, from let's say EMC, into data center one, a terabyte into data center two, a terabyte into data center three, and if, in my adding of those, I cross one of those magic boundaries where I'm out of cabinet space or whatever, then I have all those expenses. None of that is true with VSAN. In VSAN, I simply add drives into a chassis anywhere in my system. If I need more space, I buy a simple chassis, throw it in there, and continue to add the drives. Much more scalable. There really is no limit to it.

How are customer service and support?

Technical support on VSAN has been excellent also. It's been a bit of a paradigm shift for our employees. They're used to that traditional sort of big iron, I'm going to call it stair-step limited approach and it's taken a little bit of skill to get them used to it, but VMware has been there right for us from the beginning. They've helped our people understand the difference and we're pretty much now self-sufficient.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

The choice of VSAN was almost made for us. And let me step back for a minute and say it's not particularly the product, although we love the product, it's where we suggested after quite a lot of testing of other-of other competing products, we knew that traditional SAN architecture and the cost of deploying it, maintaining it, was unsustainable. Our budgets in healthcare IT are flat. No one's giving us extra money. But, with all the images and the doctors and the sharing of data, the need to store data is not being held flat. It's going way up.

We simply don't have the money. So we needed some new, way to address storage. And that meant software defined storage. So that was a given. The next step was we needed something that would provide the levels of service we have, and stability we have with the traditional architecture but at far less price. That's where VSAN shone. That's where when we did all the necessary testing and reviews VSAN acted in a secure performance and cost, areas needed.

The selection of VSAN, it's really part of a larger hyper-convergence model and for technical reasons and for simplicity, we wanted products. If we were going to move our entire, siloed approach of storage here, processing here, networking there, onto one single platform, we wanted all of those abilities buried into the extraction or the hypervisor level itself. We didn't want to buy independent little products and snap them in so to speak. Really, that means the only solution suite was the VMware world of products -- NSX for networking, VSAN for storage, and vCloud for everything else. So it really was a no brainer. That was really the essential relationship between VSAN and the other products.

How was the initial setup?

The implementation of VSAN along with the implementation of all hyper-convergence technology is tricky. Although we benefit greatly for it now, there were a lot of issues that, we simply had to work through. And these are not really an issue related to the product itself but more related to the nature of what the product does. Since VSAN is a software component that allows you to add storage to your hyper-converged system, which in turn is based on products like Cisco’s UCS, the revision of code in the Cisco UCS chassis, the types of drives, the levels of drivers across the entire platform are essential to keep in lock step. So, we had many cases where, as we added capacity, turned on new features, began to migrate, we ran into all sorts of, um, difficulty. But the truth is, with our people, with VMware’s, with Cisco’s, everybody supplied the skills we needed and now we're pretty much, we're there.

What was our ROI?

Well, VSAN is a solution of replacement. VSAN is going to replace all of our traditional SAN. So ultimately at the end of the day a couple years from now, almost all of our storage should be on VSAN. It really should be very little if anything left.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

When we selected VSAN, as I said, remember, it's part of a total package, so the better question is, when we were selecting hyper-convergence, who would be the vendor for that. Well, there aren't that many options out there. There's really three. You have Microsoft. You have, open stack solutions and open source solutions, and then you have VMware. The Microsoft product, although engaging, isn't really ready for prime time according to our needs. The open source open/stack option is potentially interesting but requires a great deal of internal engineering and support that healthcare systems really don't have. Really left VMware as the only viable, affordable, complete solution. And hence we chose it.

What other advice do I have?

On one side is a strategic vendor and that's where VMware, Microsoft, in the medical case, Cerner, which is a large application provider. There are four or five vendors that I would consider strategic and these are vendors that we could simply not operate without the function that they provide. So when a vendor's classified as strategic and then we look at the function they provide, there has to be a level of commitment. They must be a market leader. They must have enormous R&D capabilities. They must be flexible. They must interact with our engineers at a peering level, not simply as a dictatorial here, use this, and that's what's good for you and no more. VMware clearly acts appropriately like that. So, because, VSAN is part of hyper-convergence, hyper-convergence is a strategic imperative you can connect the dots where a company like VMware is necessary.

I would say, that they are definitely there. They're a high nine [out of 10]. Anybody that's looking to do hyper-convergence I think needs to understand a few basic principals. And all of these apply to VSAN as it applies to any of the elements of hyper-convergence. This is a long project. It's not something that's going to happen all at once and the value is after completion, the sum total of the parts.

If you go through a project like this for example, at Baystate, it's a two to three year project with required funding across that period of time. If, for some reason, we withdrew funding halfway through this process we would end up with less than the sum of our parts, we would end up with a lot of disconnected stuff. So be sure to make sure that your management and the people involved understand that this is a major commitment. It's not, oh, I'm just going to buy this once and forget it.

The other thing I would suggest, be paid attention to, is the affect this has on your people, on your engineers, on your workers, your HR considerations. In a traditional environment like ours, we're siloed. We have our storage guys here, our networking guys here and so on and so on - very expensive, a lot of duplication. In a hyper-converged model, all of that becomes one. Really what you have is a series of better trained, more effective engineers, but less of them. That doesn't mean you fire people.

That means you now put those people to other projects that have been sort of languishing because we just could never get around to them. That's, I think, a big thing to understand, that you will affect the way your users work. If they're not willing to learn new skills, if they're not willing to cross boundaries which were once siloed, your project could be in jeopardy.

When researching anything like hyper-convergence, the more information the better. We spent a great deal of time talking to not just health care institutions, and to be fair, this is a relatively new trend in health care so there really aren't all that many to talk to, but there are a number of non-healthcare institutions that are further along in some of these projects than healthcare is. We spoke with them, we spoke with vendors, we spoke with even other consulting firms. I think it's very important to gather as much information as you can before, you know, embarking on this.

Finding the resources for the gathering of this information is both hard and easy. It depends on which one we're talking about. The ability to get information from other institutions if they're outside of healthcare, and remember I'm speaking from a healthcare point of view, may be difficult, because they may not be allowed to share certain information. Getting consulting information is difficult unless you, of course, engage them. And I would argue that it's not necessarily such a bad idea to engage for a small amount of money the relative experts in some of these consulting firms and just have a quick conversation with them. If all of a sudden they seem to be knowledgeable, you do your homework on them, I would argue a further engagement is not necessarily a bad idea. But you do have to put some efforts into finding the info. It's not just going to fall out of space.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
it_user603867 - PeerSpot reviewer
it_user603867Works at a tech company with 51-200 employees
Vendor

Many Excellent Points.

See all 2 comments
Ryan Dave Brigino - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineer at Es'hailSat
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Easy to install, scalable, and stable
Pros and Cons
  • "We have found the solution to be very scalable."
  • "The price for the hard drive, for vSAN, is very expensive."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for data storage for the virtual machines.

What is most valuable?

The solution is quite stable.

We have found the solution to be very scalable. 

For VMware, it's almost perfect.

The installation is straightforward.

What needs improvement?

The cost of the product is very high. The price for the hard drive, for vSAN, is very expensive.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've just recently deployed the solution. It's been about two or three months or so. It hasn't been that long.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability and performance of the solution are good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's been very good so far, although we haven't used it for very long. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution can scale. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. 

At this time, the administration team for the vSAN infrastructure is just three people.

How are customer service and technical support?

We do not get support via VMware. We get it through our local integrator.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We did not previously use any other solution.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is easy. It's not overly complex or difficult. 

You need to do it as one complete infrastructure. It maybe takes one hour.

What about the implementation team?

We had an integrator assist us with the implementation process. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The price of the product is very high. We want to rescale it, however, it's expensive to do so.

What other advice do I have?

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We have been pleased with its capabilities so far. 

I would recommend VMware. The vSAN is just part of VMware.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
VMware vSAN
February 2024
Learn what your peers think about VMware vSAN. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: February 2024.
757,198 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Head of network and web at a maritime company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Good performance and pricing but needs load balancing features
Pros and Cons
  • "Technical support is very helpful and very good at resolving issues."
  • "Hardware load balancing is available on the enterprise version of the solution, however, it's extremely expensive and therefore out of our budget."

What is our primary use case?

We are mainly using the solution for our Windows environment. 

What is most valuable?

We're largely happy with the solution overall. 

The performance has been good in general.

The initial setup is simple.

Technical support is very helpful and very good at resolving issues.

The pricing is decent.

What needs improvement?

We are looking for more load balancing at an application level.

For the hardware level, we're looking at some other solutions. For example, we're checking out Nutanix and Sangfor. 

We've had issues with load balancing. Suppose, for example, if the physical ESXi host is down, the virtual machine you have handle manually. We need to have load balancing and RAM and processor balancing also.

Hardware load balancing is available on the enterprise version of the solution, however, it's extremely expensive and therefore out of our budget.

In general, we're looking for more features. This solution doesn't really offer us that much.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for three to four years at this point.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We had some issues about a year ago with stability. We took the problem to support and they were able to resolve whatever the issue was. It's been stable since then, and we haven't had issues with bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

My colleague and I are the IT people, and we are managing vSAN for the most part. We haven't necessarily attempted to scale the solution at all. Therefore, it would be hard to say how easy or difficult the process is or how scalable in general the product is.

How are customer service and technical support?

We've used technical support in the past to resolve issues, and they have been very helpful and responsive They were able to fix any problems we've had. We're quite satisfied with them. They've been very good, very helpful.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is not complex. It's very simple and very straightforward. 

While we handle the maintenance ourselves in-house, we have the option of calling our integration partner if we run into any issues.

What about the implementation team?

We had an integration partner that came in and assisted us with the initial implementation. We did not handle it completely in-house. They were very helpful.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The pricing is mid-range. It's pretty good compared to other options. Everything is included. There are no additional or hidden costs.

The enterprise version, however, is very, very high. Currently, we are using the standard version. To move to the enterprise level, there is a big price jump.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We're currently evaluating Nutanix and Sangfor as options to replace VMware in our organization. We want more load balancing and therefore are looking for a solution that could potentially offer us that.

What other advice do I have?

We are just a customer and an end-user.

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations.

I would rate it at a seven out of ten. We've been happy with it for the most part, however, we are looking at other options that offer more features. The standard version just isn't giving us enough of what we need. That said, it;'s a good product.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Senior Manager IT Services at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
A stable solution with integrated storage and a single pane of glass for management and operational control
Pros and Cons
  • "It has a single pane of glass for management and operational control, which is the most valuable feature. The integrated storage is also valuable."
  • "Its integration with a hybrid cloud can be improved. Its scalability can also be improved so that it can be integrated with more than 32 nodes. The maximum number of nodes is okay, but our use cases could probably do with more nodes, probably up to 64. In terms of new features, it should probably have the basic support for high-speed networking spaces."

What is most valuable?

It has a single pane of glass for management and operational control, which is the most valuable feature. The integrated storage is also valuable.

What needs improvement?

Its integration with a hybrid cloud can be improved. Its scalability can also be improved so that it can be integrated with more than 32 nodes. The maximum number of nodes is okay, but our use cases could probably do with more nodes, probably up to 64.

In terms of new features, it should probably have the basic support for high-speed networking spaces.

For how long have I used the solution?

My experience with it has been for about 12 months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It has good stability. It is better than the non-hyper-converged one that we had previously.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Its scalability can be improved so that it can be integrated with more than 32 nodes.

How are customer service and technical support?

Their support is good. If you are a big enough user, you get enough support. 

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

This is the first one that we used.

How was the initial setup?

For us, it was fairly straightforward. You need to have knowledge of vCenter. The deployment took about two to three days in total.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It is expensive, but you get what you pay for.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend this solution, but you have to be careful about the license cost. It can get quite expensive.

I would rate VMware vSAN a nine out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
it_user335802 - PeerSpot reviewer
Global Cloud Architect at Tribune Media
Video Review
Vendor
Its part of the vSphere world, so it looks and feels like any other object that people are used to seeing metrics on. I would like to have snapshots for recovery be part of the core product.

What is most valuable?

It's not a storage array which is a very valuable feature of it and it's maintenance structure isn't paid like a traditional storage array. For me, that's the biggest leap with it is there's a compelling cost with reason to step in to it. You don't have to make a snap decision and get away from where I am. I can keep what I have and dip my toe in VSAN without risking an all-or-nothing decision.

How has it helped my organization?

VSAN is really simple to manage. Its GUI is part of the eco-system so it looks and feels like the rest of VMware. So a VMware engineer or a VMware operations guy's is going to be able to manage the provision storage without having to touch an array, which is generally higher profile so there's a cost reduction through headcount.

VSAN manageability is much easier because it's in and part of the vSphere world, so it looks and feels like any other object that people are used to seeing metrics on and there have been great improvement in management. In 655, there's a little bit of lack information. In the newer system, there's a lot more data about what's going on in that system, in the GUI, easily consumable.

What needs improvement?

The features I'd like to see in future releases of VSAN are around back-up and recovery. There is a great way to replicate data now, but I'd like to see them focus on making recovery from snap shots, off-site, part of the core product.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's very stable. Once you get it built and you take the time to build the system correctly, do your research, once it's in place it's been very stable and it performs as it says.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I'm looking at two different ways of scaling that system. One is for speed and one is for mass. It scales into mass based on what size of disc you choose and it scales in to speed based on solid-state drive size. Both of those are two different avenues that work well for us.

How are customer service and technical support?

I haven't had a technical support case open but we do look at the forums and try to avoid issues and problems based on what's in a publicly available space which has always been something that VMware has done really well, which is making issues public so we can avoid them.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We chose it from a cost perspective. In media we are always looking to save money. It's a publicly traded company so the money I give back is smiled on. We saw a way not to pay maintenance for expensive systems and to run it in a system that performs on parallel with what we already own.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

So with a traditional storage array you pay maintenance based on the purchase price for the array plus any software you bought with it so that residual number is high, so if you paid a million dollars for the machine, you may have to pay $200,000 for maintenance at some point in time. With VSAN I'm paying server-based maintenance and that's a much lower number.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

The top criteria we looked at when considering VSAN was performance and cost. We were going to make sure that we could deliver the performance that people are used to and used the system that costs less than a traditional array model. We did not look at other vendors because there really isn't another vendor that's doing this. There are people that are close but with a traditional hyper-converged box, there's a bunch of things I don't need. With VSAN I have the technical backing from VMware to back-stop the product and is doing what I need and no more so there is a cost-savings for not buying features-compute that I don't need.

What other advice do I have?

I would certainly give it an 8 and I would split in to two parts. The initial configuration of VSAN, once the systems in place, it manages and runs without much attention and that's where it's really shining at the moment, is once it's in production, it doesn't require a lot of care and feeding.

My recommendation is make sure you've got a hardware vendor who's promising you that this equipment that you get is on the HCL, so the compatibility list of what VMware supports and VSAN is important to having a successful deployment. Taking the time to do that and install and build the system correctly first will give you years of good results. Not doing that is a headache.

When looking at any new technology, having peer review and having information available about what it's doing, how many people have adopted it and whether or not it's a good technology is critically important. It's good to be on the edge but you don't want to be the first guy to take the blind leap so having that out and having the forms available has been very important.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
Security Specialist at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
As a hyperconverged solution, it simplifies what equipment we have to buy
Pros and Cons
  • "Being hyperconverged, it simplifies what equipment we have to buy."
  • "I like that we could choose whatever hardware we wanted, rather than having to use one particular vendor."
  • "It's very scalable. I like that. Adding a node is easy. Adding a disk group is easy."
  • "I'd like to see better integration with the Update Manager, with respect to firmware updates for hardware."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is production data and the performance has been great.

What is most valuable?

  • Cost
  • Being hyperconverged, it simplifies what equipment we have to buy

What needs improvement?

I'd like to see better integration with the Update Manager, in terms of firmware updates for hardware.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It has been pretty stable for us.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It's very scalable. I like that. Adding a node is easy. Adding a disk group is easy.

How are customer service and technical support?

Tech support has been very knowledgeable for the issues that we've had. They have been able to troubleshoot or determine exactly what is going on and then resolve it in a timely manner.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were end-of-life on our previous storage and looking at replacements. It made sense to look at something that was going to integrate both the servers and the storage.

The most important criteria, for me, when selecting a vendor are

  • reputation
  • ease of use
  • value.

We went with vSAN because of cost and ultimate value. Ease of use and the cost, compared to some of the alternatives, were pretty compelling. I also liked that we could choose whatever hardware we wanted, rather than having to use one particular vendor.

How was the initial setup?

The setup had some complexity, and some of that was figuring out newer releases. Networking, originally, was kind of a pain, with having to have everything talk Multicast. They've gone to Unicast which simplifies things.

What was our ROI?

It has simplified things for us. It was one purchase for servers and storage so that made it easier on us. It's been a good product, it's something that we'll continue to use.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

For our shortlist, we looked at SimpliVity, some Dell EMC solutions, and Nutanix. 

What other advice do I have?

Make sure you do a proof of concept. And look at your options for hardware if you're looking at vSAN, compared to some competitors where you have just one option.

I would rate the solution at eight out of ten. To get to a ten they would have to drop the cost. That would get a point right there. Then, going forward, I'd like to see better integration with Update Manager. Some of the manual processes that you still have to do, being able to automate those, have it do them on its own, would be great.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Infrastructure Analyst at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees
Video Review
Real User
The stability, which is important for our internal ops, has been flawless for us

What is our primary use case?

We are using it for management of all the data that we collect from our customer bases and from our 500-plus locations. There is also the data that we use to manage employee systems, so it's both ends of the business. It's the actual retail side of the business, as well as the internal operations.

How has it helped my organization?

vSAN has improved the organization just based on the overall speed. It's a lot faster than what we what we've used in the past. The old-school storage systems were kind of slow and cumbersome. This is much faster. It's much more reliable.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature that VSAN offers is reliability. In my mind, as long as their storage is up and running, we can always access what we need when we need it, that's what's important. It's super important to have reliability, particularly for internal operations: for employee data, payroll management; and then as well for the customer side of the equation with customer information and customer databases.

What needs improvement?

Areas of improvement could be the UIs. I've seen them. I've worked with them a little bit. The UIs are kind of cumbersome.

There could be an easier way than having the UUIDs associated to the LUNs. That could be simplified to make life a little easier to search and naming conventions and being able to search them down and for overall utilization; ease of utilization.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of vSAN has been pretty much flawless for us.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability: pretty simple. You just add more and away you go.

The data sets are constantly growing, so we have internal needs, new VMs are getting spun up all the time. They're gobbling up all kinds of storage space. We try not to over-commit too much, but everybody does, right? But it's constantly growing and we're constantly adding to it.

How are customer service and technical support?

I have personally not contacted tech support at VMware for vSAN.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

The company has been around for quite a while, so we go back to some of the earliest days of spinning disks and a local, small data center at the corporate office, to the point now where we've grown to have our own data center and racks upon racks upon racks of storage.

How was the initial setup?

I was not involved in the setup on that side, either. That's a different team that does that.

What was our ROI?

The primary ROI for this is its stability. That's the key. I can't really speak to the cost side of the equation, but I can speak to the stability side, and I know that it's critically important to us to have our data available to us when we need it. Since we've gone over to the vSAN solution, it's been very stable.

What other advice do I have?

When we're choosing a vendor, there are two factors involved, and the lowest price isn't always the most important. We need a vendor who provides really good support and products that really meet our needs well. 

I'm going to rate it as a ten out of ten, because it just works. It's always solid.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Senior System Engineer at a comms service provider with 201-500 employees
Real User
Scalable, good performance, and easy to deploy
Pros and Cons
  • "The scalability of the solution is most valuable."
  • "They can improve the manageability of the solution to make it more simple. It is not that complicated, but it will be good if they can make it more simple."

What is our primary use case?

We usually use it for any workload virtualization, data center virtualization, and storage. We use it for our software-defined storage and when a customer needs scalable storage. Data center modernization is also a use case for it.

I am using its latest version.

What is most valuable?

The scalability of the solution is most valuable.

What needs improvement?

They can improve the manageability of the solution to make it more simple. It is not that complicated, but it will be good if they can make it more simple.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for almost three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is stable, and its performance is very good.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is really scalable. We have five to six administrators and implementers who work with this solution.

How are customer service and support?

They are supportive. They are good in their support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

In my previous company, I worked with Nutanix. In my current company, I'm working with vSAN. Nutanix is much simpler from an interface point of view. vSAN, as a part of VMware, has more maturity in terms of features and software-defined data center journey. VMware is more mature than Nutanix in this area.

How was the initial setup?

It is straightforward. It took two to three days.

In terms of maintenance, it requires the usual day-to-day maintenance. It sometimes requires some kind of support.

What about the implementation team?

We installed it ourselves.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It is not that expensive, and it is not even cheap. If it is designed in a proper way, it has good pricing, but if you do oversizing, the price will be high. There are different licensing models.

What other advice do I have?

I would advise others to do proper sizing and look at the features that they want to include or not include. They need to first understand their business needs and then do the sizing. This way they will get a good solution.

I would rate VMware vSAN a nine out of 10.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Reseller
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Download our free VMware vSAN Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
Updated: February 2024
Product Categories
HCI
Buyer's Guide
Download our free VMware vSAN Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.