Dell PowerScale Formerly EMC Isilon vs Hitachi Content Platform (HCP)

EMC Isilon Scale-Out NAS is well suited for larger files (greater the 128 Kb) and where you need to have everything in one common name space. Where it is less appropriate is for many small files (millions of files less than 128 Kb in size) - this causes the protection level to becoming mirroring, which will cost more space.

• [Hitachi Content Platform (HCP) is] well suited for needs requiring a highly secure, multi-tenant on-premise object store.
• Exceeds expectations with respect to object level attributes and permissions
• Has excellent S3/HS3 REST API feature set
• Situations which require versioning and proven Immutability (certified by Governments)

- Expensive to use for general file storage publishing where meta data, compliance, retention, versioning are unnecessary.

• NAS Storage
• Capacity and Performance details of the array
• Alert and Operations details

• HCP/HDI interface works like charm. it's easy to deploy and scale.
• Hitachi customer support is at par with expectations
• More cost effective than EMC/NetApp solutions.

• Some upgrades require the entire cluster to be rebooted simultaneously. In this day and age, that should not be necessary. This is my biggest disappointment with Isilon to date.
• When using multiple storage pools you have to be very careful with your capacity management. Filling up one pool can cause an overflow of data to a pool that is less performance driven. Do not underestimate your capacities or you will find yourself in a tight spot.
• Block size is almost always an issue with Isilon. It does not handle all types of data well. In many cases PACS and VNA data is best to be stored on a different storage platform that will utilize the capacity more efficiently that Isilon is capable of.
• Deduplication seems to be less efficient on Isilon than on other platforms for similar types of data.

• Cost structure is by capacity and is expensive
• Some access settings are mutually exclusive for performance (REST vs. CIFS)
• QoS by Tenant requires use of external ADC (Hitachi suggested and sold us Pulse Secure) and their support on this product offering is not up to their normally high standard

Raw disk space vs. logical disk space ratio was significantly better on the Isilon. Fast cache using SSD drives for faster searching is available on the Isilon but not available on the Overland solution. Isilon solution included faster backend switching between nodes.

My company has close ties with Hitachi. NetApp chargeback was more per Gig and for cost saving purposes, we had to choose HCP.

• Isilon provides very high value for money
• Matches the performance and storage requirements of the arrays
• EMC provides very skillful and high response team in case of any issues in isilon

• Best on premise solution of its' kind that encapsulates all our needs
• ROI has been positive but it does raise questions at renewal time in terms of cost/GB vs other 2nd tier storage types