TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Pivot3 Acuity vs. Red Hat Gluster Storage

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Pivot3 Acuity

    Score9 out of 10
    N/APivot3 in Austin, Texas offers Pivot3 Acuity (formerly the vSTAC line of products), a hyperconverged infrastructure solution.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
    Pivot3 AcuityRed Hat Gluster Storage
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Pivot3 AcuityRed 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
    Pivot3 AcuityRed Hat Gluster Storage
    Small Businesses
    StarWind HCA
    Score8.6 out of 10
    StarWind Virtual SAN
    Score9.5 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    StarWind HCA
    Score8.6 out of 10
    StarWind Virtual SAN
    Score9.5 out of 10
    Enterprises
    Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure
    Score9 out of 10
    IBM Storage Scale
    Score9.9 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Pivot3 AcuityRed Hat Gluster Storage
    Likelihood to Recommend
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Pivot3 AcuityRed Hat Gluster Storage
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Pivot3
    It is only suitable for a vSphere deployment. This particular cluster is best suited for very demanding workloads.
    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
    Pivot3
    • Deployment was very easy. Pivot3 staff were involved in the POC, and the transition was fairly smooth.
    • This is an all-flash hyperconverged cluster. It is easily scalable and has excellent performance.
    • We frequently burst internal virtual workloads, and this 5 node cluster can support around 15,000 IOPs and 1 GB/sec of throughput.
    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
    Pivot3
    • The cluster is actually very easy to use. It might be nice if the dashboard had more detailed metrics, but those are available in a different interface.
    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
    Pivot3
    We reviewed the technology and pricing prior to commencing a POC. Pivot3 looked the best initially and delivered. We did not test the others ourselves.
    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
    Pivot3
    • Definitely a positive ROI. We are not seeing some of the latency issues that were beginning to crop up on our older hardware.
    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