TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

IBM Storage Fusion vs. Red Hat Gluster Storage

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    IBM Storage Fusion

    Score9 out of 10
    N/AIBM Storage Fusion is the foundation for container-native applications running on Red Hat OpenShift, which provides enterprise grade data-storage and protection services. This solution includes data services that are critical for global enterprise applications and a data driven Red Hat OpenShift environment. IBM Storage Fusion is built on a technology that provides global access to data to container applications. The application sees the data as another local file…N/A

    Red Hat Gluster Storage

    Score6 out of 10
    N/ARed Hat Gluster Storage is a software-defined storage option; Red Hat acquired Gluster in 2011.N/A
    Pricing
    IBM Storage FusionRed Hat Gluster Storage
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    IBM Storage FusionRed Hat Gluster Storage
    Free Trial
    NoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    Best Alternatives
    IBM Storage FusionRed Hat Gluster Storage
    Small Businesses
    StarWind Virtual SAN
    Score9.5 out of 10
    StarWind Virtual SAN
    Score9.5 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    StarWind Virtual SAN
    Score9.5 out of 10
    StarWind Virtual SAN
    Score9.5 out of 10
    Enterprises
    IBM Storage Scale
    Score9.9 out of 10
    IBM Storage Scale
    Score9.9 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    IBM Storage FusionRed Hat Gluster Storage
    Likelihood to Recommend
    8.5
    (3 ratings)
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    IBM Storage FusionRed Hat Gluster Storage
    Likelihood to Recommend
    IBM
    I think its well suited for all modern programming. simple and ease of use are a plus.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    GFS is well suited for DEVOPS type environments where organizations prefer to invest in servers and DAS (direct attached storage) versus purchasing storage solutions/appliances. GFS allows organizations to scale their storage capacity at a fraction of the price using DAS HDDs versus committing to purchase licenses and hardware from a dedicated storage manufacturer (e.g. NetApp, Dell/EMC, HP, etc.).
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    IBM
    • Connecting with multiple application DB of different data types and bringing the normalized data to on a roof/data lake
    • Easy to build the models and analytics that's help better understanding of business operation
    • AI models such as predictions, forecasts, and suggestions based on individual customer patterns or geo-clusters can build easily
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    • Scales; bricks can be easily added to increase storage capacity
    • Performs; I/O is spread across multiple spindles (HDDs), thereby increasing read and write performance
    • Integrates well with RHEL/CentOS 7; if your organization is using RHEL 7, Gluster (GFS) integrates extremely well with that baseline, especially since it's come under the Red Hat portfolio of tools.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    IBM
    • Improvement in areas where Software Defined Storage (SDS) can be better utilized with the broad capabilities of IBM storage features.
    • Focus should be shifted towards enabling capabilities of cyber resiliency as the other offerings in the market are already equipped with the same.
    • Broader non-IBM/Lenovo hardware support can be considered, specifically for IBM Storage fusion software offerings
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    • Documentation; using readthedocs demonstrates that the Gluster project isn't always kept up-to-date as far as documentation is concerned. Many of the guides are for previous versions of the product and can be cumbersome to follow at times.
    • Self-healing; our use of GFS required the administrator to trigger an auto-heal operation manually whenever bricks were added/removed from the pool. This would be a great feature to incorporate using autonomous self-healing whenever a brick is added/removed from the pool.
    • Performance metrics are scarce; our team received feedback that online RDBMS transactions did not perform well on distributed file systems (such as GFS), however this could not be substantiated via any online research or white papers.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    IBM
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    Gluster is a lot lower cost than the storage industry leaders. However, NetApp and Dell/EMC's product documentation is (IMHO) more mature and hardened against usage in operational scenarios and environments. Using Gluster avoids "vendor lock-in" from the perspective on now having to purchase dedicated hardware and licenses to run it. Albeit, should an organization choose to pay for support for Gluster, they would be paying licensing costs to Red Hat instead of NetApp, Dell, EMC, HP, or VMware. It could be assumed, however, that if an organization wanted to use Gluster, that they were already a Linux shop and potentially already paying Red Hat or Canonical (Debian) for product support, thereby the use of GFS would be a nominal cost adder from a maintenance/training perspective.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    IBM
    • IBM Fusion is ideal for Enterprise businesses or Ecosystems where large data types are in play. And added benefit to bringing them under a platform to add visualization and understanding.
    • Managing and monitoring is easy when compare to other industry tool
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    • Positive - Alignment with the open source community and being able to stay abreast of the latest trending products available.
    • Positive - Reduced procurement and maintenance costs.
    • Negative - Impacts user/system maintainer training in order to teach them how to utilize and troubleshoot the product.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots