NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
StorageGRID
Score 5.1 out of 10
N/A
NetApp's StorageGRID is open S3 object store to manage your unstructured data at scale.N/A
Red Hat Ceph Storage
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
Red Hat Ceph Storage is a software defined storage option.N/A
Pricing
NetApp StorageGRIDRed Hat Ceph Storage
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
StorageGRIDRed Hat Ceph Storage
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
NetApp StorageGRIDRed Hat Ceph Storage
Top Pros
Top Cons
User Ratings
NetApp StorageGRIDRed Hat Ceph Storage
Likelihood to Recommend
10.0
(1 ratings)
9.0
(6 ratings)
Support Rating
9.0
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
NetApp StorageGRIDRed Hat Ceph Storage
Likelihood to Recommend
NetApp
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.
Read full review
Red Hat
Large scale data storage: Red Hat Ceph Storage is designed to be highly scalable and can handle large amounts of data. It's well suited for organizations that need to store and manage large amounts of data, such as backups, images, videos, and other types of multimedia content.Cloud-based deployments: Red Hat Ceph Storage can provide object storage services for cloud-based applications such as SaaS and PaaS offerings. It is well suited for organizations that are looking to build their own cloud storage infrastructure or to use it as a storage backend for their cloud-based applications.High-performance computing: Red Hat Ceph Storage can be used to provide storage for high-performance computing (HPC) applications, such as scientific simulations and other types of compute-intensive workloads. It's well suited for organizations that need to store
Read full review
Pros
NetApp
  • Allows for very granular data tiering policies
  • Integrates seamlessly with our Cloud solution
  • Easy deployment
  • Easy to manage and adapt to a changing environment
Read full review
Red Hat
  • Highly resilient, almost every time we attempted to destroy the cluster it was able to recover from a failure. It struggled to when the nodes where down to about 30%(3 replicas on 10 nodes)
  • The cache tiering feature of Ceph is especially nice. We attached solid state disks and assigned them as the cache tier. Our sio benchmarks beat the our Netapp when we benchmarked it years ago (no traffic, clean disks) by a very wide margin.
  • Ceph effectively allows the admin to control the entire stack from top to bottom instead of being tied to any one storage vendor. The cluster can be decentralized and replicated across data centers if necessary although we didn't try that feature ourselves, it gave us some ideas for a disaster recovery solution. We really liked the idea that since we control the hardware and the software, we have infinite upgradability with off the shelf parts which is exactly what it was built for.
Read full review
Cons
NetApp
  • Initial network design can be tedious
  • Provide more out-of-the-box ILM policies
  • Include professional services time with each purchase
Read full review
Red Hat
  • GUI based mainetenence should be developed
  • Unable to detect storage latencies
  • VM to disk mapping should be visible so as to save some critical applications data in case of HDD failures
Read full review
Support Rating
NetApp
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.
Read full review
Red Hat
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
NetApp
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.
Read full review
Red Hat
MongoDB offers better search ability compared to Red Hat Ceph Storage but it’s more optimized for large number of object while Red Hat Ceph Storage is preferred if you need to store binary data or large individual objects. To get acceptable search functionality you really need to compile Red Hat Ceph Storage with another database where the search metadata related to Red Hat Ceph Storage objects are stored.
Read full review
Return on Investment
NetApp
  • Added Flash capacity
  • Decreased application latency
  • Decreased data storage costs
Read full review
Red Hat
  • Ceph allows my customer to scale out very fast.
  • Ceph allows distributing storage objects through multiple server rooms.
  • Ceph is fault-taulerant, meaning the customer can lose a server room and would still be able to access the storage.
Read full review