Cisco UCS Series vs. Oracle ZFS

Cisco UCS blades are very well suited if you want to have dense and easily managed environment that is flexible (server profiles). its perfect if you have a need for business critical applications that requires whole blade to run. in case of any hardware failure you can simply swap its profile with standby node and power your application server back up very quickly, not something you could do with a standard rackmount

Incentivized

For scenarios where the implementation is an Oracle ecosystem and the need for high-performance storage is present, undoubtedly the ideal solution is Oracle ZFS due to the native integration that exists, for example, with SPARC equipment, Exadata, and traditional architecture running Oracle Linux or Solariums (depending on the case), as well as in highly demanding industries in terms of storage.

Incentivized

• When used with VMWare, firmware changes cause minimal disruption.
• Simple system software updates using all-inclusive firmware bundles covering the individual parts.
• UCS, in contrast to other Cisco products, is stable and reliable, with relatively few hardware failures during its lengthy lifespan.

Incentivized

• Software RAIDZ. Create storage arrays using best available RAID technologies for excellent disk stability
• Array images and backups. Allows administrators to instantly create disk snapshots, to minimize time disk is unavailable (on the order of seconds, not minutes or hours).
• Automatic de-deduplication/compression. ZFS will automatically de-dedup data on disk, allowing for more efficient use of the entire disk for unique data. It will also automatically compress data stored on the disk, allowing for even more usage of the available disk space. Great for infrequently accessed backups (There is some performance cost to compression).

Incentivized

• Some issues with the operating system were present in Memory's memory for some time. A few DIMMS had to be replaced before the current firmware stabilized the problem
• Although some of the templating is a little difficult to understand, this is typical of most Cisco products

Incentivized

• Because it was due to a software originally designed for Solaris. configuration in other environments can be cumbersome for inexperienced implementers.
• The proprietary particularity of this File System makes it in some cases very difficult to implement in highly heterogeneous environments.
• I think that additional forms of integration with more environments should be created.

Incentivized

We are All satisfied with the value and Performance of the UCS servers

Incentivized

While Cisco's hardware is solid and long running, their software is usually the weak point. I will say that they are getting better with each release but if I had to find a problem with usability that would be it. Overall usability is good when you can work around software issues.

Incentivized

Cisco TAC is simply unbeatable and that goes for Cisco UCS server support just as well as it does for Cisco CUCM software. TAC has a well-deserved, excellent reputation and I do not hesitate to call them or open a ticket online, because I always know that I will get the help that I need and get it quickly

Incentivized

Easier to integrate and to use after that. It gives a better feeling as a server and it is better in performance also it is more durable. Offers a variety of use cases and also it is a very scalable server. Offers a great redundancy (has already [been] integrated) and also [gives] you easy access from terminal or GUI.

ZFS is so far beyond the other filesystems available right now, offering full suites of tools for data management, backup, recovery, maintenance, monitoring, etc. It's not even fair to compare them.

Incentivized

• Life cycle of new hardware. We were able to refresh 40 existing servers with new ones in under a day
• When having to move chassis around, having to only move 4 cables instead of the 16 that would have been required for rack-mount servers

Incentivized

• In highly transactional and data-intensive environments such as 200 million records per month or more.
• Banking also represents an ideal niche for this type of implementation due to its high volume of data and the need for security in this industry with over 100 million records per day and online history maintenance for more than 10 years (in most cases).
• The Return on Investment or ROI is clearly seen in the medium term since your storage solution would be in your safekeeping without having to pay anything additional to regular maintenance.

Incentivized