Azure Data Lake Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID

Azure Data Lake is an absolutely essential piece of a modern data and analytics platform. Over the past 2 years, our usage of Azure Data Lake as a reporting source has continued to grow and far exceeds more traditional sources like MS SQL, Oracle, etc.

Incentivized

The NetApp StorageGRID solution fits in perfectly with what our company was trying to accomplish. Our goal was to free up our expensive storage flash (SSD) capacity for our critical applications to allow for growth and added performance capabilities. I do not believe this solution would be greatly suited for those without a Cloud solution or secondary site/system to tier data.

Incentivized

• Setting up Azure Data Lake Storage account, container is quite easy
• Access from anywhere and easy maintenance
• Integration with Azure Data Factory service for end to end pipeline is pretty easy
• Can store Any form of data (Structured, Unstructured, Semi) in faster manner

Incentivized

• Allows for very granular data tiering policies
• Integrates seamlessly with our Cloud solution
• Easy deployment
• Easy to manage and adapt to a changing environment

Incentivized

• study for the certifications also to have them as a reference for work when you have any questions about applying a configuration to the equipment.
• The Internet interface is simple and easy to use. Capacity is good and it's good that HP continues to innovate with this technology

Incentivized

• Initial network design can be tedious
• Provide more out-of-the-box ILM policies
• Include professional services time with each purchase

Incentivized

NetApp Support was able to quickly resolve a networking issue during the deployment of the NetApp StorageGRID system, which we, unfortunately, could not figure out on our own. Not only did Support engage quickly, but they also provided guidance on how to properly troubleshoot various issues such as the one we encountered and also provided excellent documentation.

Incentivized

Azure Data Lake Storage from a functionality perspective is a much easier solution to work with. It's implementation from Amazon EMR went smooth, and continued usage is definitely better. However, Amazon EMR was significantly cheaper overall between the high transaction fees and cost of storage due to growth. The two both have their advantages and disadvantages, but the functionality of Azure Data Lake Storage outweighed it's cost

Incentivized

We chose NetApp StorageGRID because we were not looking for a true backup solution but wanted the features to included a DR centric ideology. The IBM Cloud Backup solution was purely backup focused and did not fit the requirements for our needs. NetApp StorageGRID checked all of our boxes in regards to cost, use case, and ease of manageability.

Incentivized

• Instead of having separate pools of storage for data we are now operating on a single layer platform which has cut down on time spent on maintaining those separate pools.
• We have had more of an ROI with the scalability as we are able to control costs of storage when need be.
• We are able to operate in a more streamlined approach as we are able to stay within the Azure suite of products and integrate seamlessly with the rest of the applications in our cloud-based infrastructure

Incentivized

• Added Flash capacity
• Decreased application latency
• Decreased data storage costs

Incentivized