We didn't have any other vendors on the list, although we had one team that tried to push HP on to us and we said no. HP was really the only other possible alternative that we had. We had tossed around a couple of other vendors, but we never really gave them any serious thought. We already knew NetApp, so it made more sense because they could integrate better and that was the main thing we were looking at. The level of integration. Since we had a NetApp that we've had for many years, it just made sense to stick with what we had, but a newer and faster version.
All-Flash Storage Arrays Integration Reviews
Showing reviews of the top ranking products in All-Flash Storage Arrays, containing the term Integration
NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS): Integration
SteveGrangert says in a NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) review
Storage Engineer at Missile Defense Agency
reviewer1223547 says in a NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) review
Data Protection Engineering at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
The cost of this solution should be reduced.
SnapCenter is the weak point of this solution. It would be amazing from a licensing standpoint if they got rid of SnapCenter completely and offered Veeam as an integration.
One of the best things about the AFF products is its integration with NetApp StorageGRID, which can give you the ability of tiering to the cloud or StorageGRID. Whether it is on-prem or off-prem, tiering is the industry trend right now. One of the ways that these products help us is by using the new ONTAP version as well. They identify the cold data sitting on our main storage arrays, consuming the very expensive media and moving that to the cheaper storage tiers, whether it's on-prem, StorageGRID, off-prem on a public cloud, or a private cloud. With this integration as part of the Data Fabric, we have been able to lower some costs of storing data on-prem.
Christopher Privitere says in a NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) review
Unix Engineer at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees
But I find some issues with other administrators on my team when it comes to management of the data because they have to either learn a CLI, which some of them really don't like to do — to really get into managing how volumes should be moved or to edit permissions and stuff like that. Or they go into a user interface, which is fine, it's web-based, but it's not the most intuitive interface as far as finding the things you need to do, especially when they get complicated. Some things just hide in there and you have to click a few levels deep before you can actually do what you need to do.
I think they're working on improving that with like the latest versions of ONTAP. So we're kind of excited to see where that's going to go. But we haven't really tried that out yet to see.
One of the areas that the product can improve is definitely in the user interface. We don't use it for SAN, but we've looked at using it for SAN and the SAN workflows are really problematic for my admins, and they just don't like doing SAN provisioning on that app. That really needs to change if we're going to adopt it and actually consider it to be a strong competitor versus some of the other options out there.
As far as other areas, they're doing really great in the API realm. They're doing really great in the availability realm. They just announced the all-SAN product, so maybe we'll look at that for SAN.
But a lot of the improvements that I'd like to see around AFF go with the ancillary support side of things, like the support website. They're in the middle of rolling this out right now, so it's hard to criticize because next month they're going to have new stuff for me to look at. But tracking bugs on there and staying in touch with support and those sorts of things need a little bit of cleanup and improvement. Getting to your downloads and your support articles, that's always a challenge with any vendor.
I would like to see ONTAP improve their interfaces; like I said, the web one, but also the CLI. That could be a much more powerful interface for users to do a lot of scripting right in the CLI without needing third-party tools, without necessarily needing Ansible or any of those configuration management options. If they pumped up the CLI by default, users could see that NetApp has got us covered all right here in one interface.
That said, they're doing a lot of work on integrations with other tools like Ansible and I think that might be an okay way to go. We're just not really there yet.
reviewer1440240 says in a NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) review
Consulting Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Their backup software could be improved.
In the next release, I would like to see a complete S3 protocol. Also better compatibility and integration with VM-ware.
The admin tools and the integration with other products and clouds can be improved.
It should also be easier to identify and troubleshoot problems in this solution. It takes a long time, and it should be improved.
The performance with the QoS is its most valuable aspect.
The integration with VMware is excellent. There are different plugins to manage the SolidFire storage from the vCenter level. That I really appreciate.
SolidFire even as a standalone storage platform is excellent.
I would say in terms of architecture and in terms of functionality, the product is quite good.
It's block access storage, however, for block access storage we have the guarantee of performance.
We have the duplication and we have the encryption with this solution. We have almost all the standards needed for storage with SolidFire. In terms of protection, with the level of protection we can set between the SolidFire nodes, it's very good.
Pure Storage FlashArray: Integration
reviewer1262520 says in a Pure Storage FlashArray review
IT Manager at a consultancy with 51-200 employees
The integration capabilities could be improved.
reviewer1514421 says in a Pure Storage FlashArray review
IT System Engineer at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
The solution is not cheap. It's much more expensive than DataCore. It costs much more.
The improvement I would expect from them is maybe more if there is integration with VMware. We are also using Amazon Cloud to provision snapshots or to move or to copy snapshots to Amazon. I would expect more integration within Amazon. Amazon has tree storage or last tier so we have that as an option instead of keeping it in Pure Storage as it costs a lot of money. If they offered a hybrid cloud, for example, it would be very helpful.
The solution needs to ensure they have good integration with VVol. VVol is the future of VMware. I have spoken with Pure Storage engineers and they have an integration with vVol. They have a kind of plug-in for VMware to work with VVol, however, it's not mature enough. It's my understanding they're working on it to get it done on that side. More integration with the Windows Server for snapshots would also be helpful.
One year ago I found that instead of having the new Pure Storage FlashArray on-prem, you can have it in Tokyo or you can have it in Virginia - it depends where you are. You can just pay a certain amount per minute and you can have a Pure Storage that you manage from your prem, but have it on Amazon. That may be in production. It will be a useful attribute.
The integration and migration features have been really good.
We're getting good performance, and the compression ratio is also very good in Pure Storage FlashArray.
It has an Evergreen model and always maintains the controllers, so the controllers never let you down.
HPE Nimble Storage: Integration
Bilal Aksoy says in a HPE Nimble Storage review
Network & System Support Engineer at a recruiting/HR firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
The solution requires a higher availability.
The pricing of the solution isn't ideal. They should work to make it more affordable. It's very expensive.
I'd like to be able to configure the solution from vCenter, which isn't possible right now.
It would be great if the solution offered even more integrations and plugins.
reviewer1387293 says in a HPE Nimble Storage review
Technical Manager at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
A valuable feature for me is the architecture which is pretty good. We have a good throughput and we like that they have a lot of IOPS and low latency is also pretty good. And we also like the verification features because we get some good things with the method Nimble takes to duplicate. If you have a hybrid secondary storage, it allows you to do remote copy, data recovery and business continuity with the solution. And the integration with some other solutions is also good. For now, Nimble has a way of integrating with each solution, it's very good.
Technical support is good. Their responses are interactive and they work with us. We try to keep open communication with our customers and I know that in internal support the issue has arisen of how long it takes to be escalated from L2 to L3 support.
I feel that it takes too long. When it comes to performing integration with InfoSight, it is helpful that we can then segment the issue or possibly check the connection.
HPE 3PAR StoreServ: Integration
reviewer1473348 says in a HPE 3PAR StoreServ review
SAN Consultant at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
HP has several integration elements that work with other vendor storage products. I'd like to see a greater expansion on that so that a customer can do a more seamless migration from other vendor products. The migration of data to their platform could be better.
Primarily they don't have a lot. They have several EMC elements that they can migrate data from, however, there are many more controllers out there and it'd be good to see a more seamless integration so that that could occur.
I'd like to see 3PAR have some integration with Cloud services.
We had help from a consulting integration company for the deployment.
We also have a production team of 34 admins and engineers to deploy and maintain this solution.
reviewer1585665 says in a HPE 3PAR StoreServ review
Solution Architech at a consultancy with 51-200 employees
Cloud integration could be better. They can also add an NVMe to port to that. I would like to see NVMe in the next release. That's the future or the near future for storage. That will give us a real high throughput and some performance.
reviewer372459 says in a HPE 3PAR StoreServ review
Sr. Manager - IT Systems at a transportation company with 501-1,000 employees
It's a very convenient product. I find it easy to use.
It's very flexible in terms of management.
It's an enterprise tool.
The integration is good. We've integrated it with other UNIX platforms and Windows platforms.
The solution is easy to install.
The pricing is okay.
Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series: Integration
Compared to others, Hitachi products are more complex and not user-friendly. The interface should be simplified and made easier to use. For instance, the EMC Unity series is easier to manage.
In the next release of this solution, it should support NVMe.
We have read in the latest newsletters that in 2020 there is going to be more data, more than four hundred zettabytes. It's a huge amount of data and you will need the right platform to process it. More than people, we will need a platform that can process that amount of data in less than a millisecond. So we are looking for a high-speed storage enterprise, such as VSP.
If you compare to other solutions, Hitachi is more complex, but the platform is improving and it's not as difficult as it used to be.
We are facing new technologies such as Container by Google. It's the new way of Application Virtualization. I think that Hitachi and other companies should follow these technologies for integration with new technologies such as container base and their products. I think that cloud integration is important with vVol technologies from VMware.
There will be many challenges, but we need more integration between F Storage and new technology for Cloud, vVol, and Container.
I would like the interface to be simplified more than it is. The interface can be improved with new technologies such as HTML5, which is being used by some storage vendors.
Hitachi interface management is not as easy as the EMC Unity series. It's better to use HTML5 for the management systems.
IBM FlashSystem: Integration
The integration is already included in the license cost of IBM FlashSystem. The integration is very easy. You get the IBM storage core with all software, firmware, and upgrades. EMC provides the features in the box, but they are not free for customers. There is a licensing cost for features.
We have yearly licensing, but IBM has also provided a new option where you pay as you go. They provide a big box, and I pay, for example, for 10 terabytes. If I exceed 10 terabytes, IBM will charge for the new storage after 10 terabytes. It is a good opportunity in the market for using the storage as a cloud and paying as you go.
reviewer1480077 says in an IBM FlashSystem review
Deputy Chief Technology Officer at a comms service provider with 51-200 employees
The stability of the solution isn't great. We have had a lot of issues with discs over the years.
There should be better integration with utilization platforms.
The pricing needs to be more competitive.
NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays: Integration
Paulo-RODRIGUES says in a NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays review
Senior Systems Engineer at Indra
In terms of which features I've found most valuable, this includes rapid deployment, easy integration management and cloning of areas - their cloning tools.
Also, the deployment is very quick and very simple.
reviewer1118220 says in a NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays review
Director at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
All-Flash is made by Solid State Disk, it's not like HDD or spinning disk.
The price is important, and we would like to have it less expensive.
Better integration with other brands is important so we would like to see it easier to integrate.
Its performance is most valuable. This solution is much faster than other as well as older storage solutions. The performance of the system is very good. We are getting 50 times better experience than the older storages. We are using AFF 300. It also has native cloud integration and most of the features.
Dell EMC Unity XT: Integration
Overall, I've had a very good experience with the solution so far.
Integration is easy with this product.
C. says in a Dell EMC Unity XT review
Cloud Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
The UEMCLI is not an object-oriented CLI and the more object-rich PowerCLI has been discontinued. Only people with bash experience possibly can operate it. Still nowadays, feeding object from one command into another is still a burden with such CLI. When adding a few disks to a cluster, the CLI is actually standing in the queue for one disk to be added to all, requiring multiple scans on each membering host, before proceeding with the second...and scanning all hosts once again. One could add all disks at once and stand in the queue once for a rescan all.
There isn't a means to add volumegroups , nor hostgroups. A feature that any solution I worked with so far has. Its a burden to assure each host has the same LUN ID on each host in this manner. As of the june 2021 releae , code OE 5.1 it seems to offer the option to have hostgroups in the end !
The integration with vCenter comes with a sideeffect, in that it will take control of the vSphere scan process, moreover every esx host is scanned multiple times. It takes easiliy a few hours to add a few LUNS to a few hosts. Rather Painfull. Even when adding LUNs using the unisphere GUI , you can keep up with the pace of your script.
Support Responsiveness & time to fix bugs should be improved. Over the past 1,5 yrs we had occassional controller reboots and we went all the way from OE 4.5 over 5.02 to 5.03 and eliminated the most common causes. We still face a stress triggered cache merge issue and though we provided the dumps and engineering acknowledged the bug, it has been told that addressing the bug requires substantial code rewritting and the problem will be fixed in the next major code release (OE 6.x) . We are now a year later, still no fix, but furtunately faced the considition once on one out of 5 arrays during that year.
Huawei OceanStor: Integration
There are some small things in the solution that can be improved. Supporting software is one of them and the integration with mainstream solution technologies could be better. They are small issues and generally the technology functions well. It's not an issue caused by the vendor but rather due to external circumstances and the cessation of cooperation between Chinese and US companies.
Huawei OceanStor Dorado: Integration
Dell EMC SC Series: Integration
reviewer1273260 says in a Dell EMC SC Series review
EMC Storage & Backup Implementation Specialist at a tech vendor with 1-10 employees
The interface could be improved. It should have an application point of view.
In the next release, I would for them to improve their application feature.
I would also like to see some cloud integration.
reviewer1515540 says in a Dell EMC SC Series review
Director at a tech company with 11-50 employees
It had a lot of integration and supported all the platforms, so I was happy with what they were offering. The biggest selling point was when the vendor upgraded it. Dell upgraded the software licenses sold with that. Whenever the hardware is end-of-life, we could upgrade the controller or add a new disk or whatever. There was no lifecycle of three years or five years. We could carry on just by upgrading. It had many features, like a snapshot, replication, on-the-file RAID levels, mix-and-match files, those kinds of things.
Pure Storage FlashBlade: Integration
I think the most valuable part of the solution would be the seamless integration. The fact that they all use the same platform for connectivity, regardless of the physical position of the place. From the customer's perspective, this is the easiest product that I've tested, it's seamless.
At the moment, I can't think of anything that needs to be improved; however, the feature that we're waiting on is better integration with the cell services. I know Pure has a company that's working on the cell system, but it's still not completely there yet.
HPE Primera: Integration
One of the most valuable features is the ease of deployment.
Integration with the compute capacity is good, as this is just the storage component.
Orchestration and management are good.
The performance and capacity-based costs are also good.
Another advantage is that HPE sells everything. This includes all of the capabilities of the hardware, like replication, snapshot, and other specific features. They are all included from the get-go, as opposed to everything being separate and in another budget. When you buy it, you can do whatever you have to be able to do with it out of the box.
The most valuable feature is the ease of deployment.
The integration with the compute capacity because this is just the storage side.
The orchestrations and management, and the performance and cost per capacity.
Another advantage is that HPE sells everything. All of the capabilities of the hardware such as replication, snapshot, and the specific features are all included from the start as opposed to being on another license.
When you buy it, you can do whatever you have to, to be able to do with it out of the box.
There really isn't any aspect of the solution that needs improvement for the customer other than its price.
It is a very good solution, but the Georgia Republic is a very small country and customers in both the government public sector and in the private sector do not have money to purchase enterprise or high performance solutions. They are looking at mid-range or mid-class solutions.
I can say that they need to simplify the solution. In SimpliVity, they need a lot of integration with virtualization technologies. For example, putting some add-ons or plugins in vCenter. vCenter is a management software of VMware virtualization.
Secondly, it would be better if they cold simplify the deployment of Primera. Thirdly, if you have already purchased Primera and you need to scale your infrastructure and you are thinking of buying more hardware disks, you will need to purchase the Rebalance Service from HP Enterprise. They need to improve that methodology.
The customers need solutions that do not require a lot of administrative tasks.
We really like the HPE infosight. it is an AI driven interface for hybrid cloud. it gives some more insights into any virtualized infrastructure such as performance issues, proactive recommendations etc. for example, get alerts and items of that nature It's been quite helpful so far.
The performance of the solution is excellent. It performs far better than you would expect.
The initial setup is very straightforward. It's not overly complex.
It outperforms on latency. It's very fast. We're talking about 0.4 milliseconds. The faster, the fast data works, the faster you'll get the response. This is really low latency; it's a great performance.
The dashboards are very good. It has a very user-friendly kind of dashboard that is easy to understand. There isn't any complex stuff or too much information. That said, it has deep integration in to HPE Infosight. It gives you so much information, even more than you want.
The customization capabilities are excellent.
Pure FlashArray X NVMe: Integration
In the future, I would like to see integration with enterprise backup systems. They should have direct integration available using Pure APIs. Good candidates would be Rubrik and Veeam.
I would absolutely recommend using it. I would also suggest negotiating and testing it. I bought a very small system of 10 terabytes that I put in one of our labs for testing so that my team can learn it, and I could play with it. We tested it, and after we were comfortable with the capabilities of the system and building things in VMware, which is a really critical part of the whole integration, we tested three different solutions from HP, Dell, etc. After the testing, it was clear to us that the Pure FlashArray X NVMe was the easiest to manage and configure and had the best performance that we had seen in all the arrays. We are not testers, but we could tell. We could see the speed at which the databases came up and everything else. After testing, you will be convinced that Pure FlashArray X NVMe is probably the best box or right there in terms of performance. We tested in early 2019. There might be another solution that is doing better today.
I would rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe a nine out of ten. The only reason I won't give it a ten is the price. Its feature set is pretty complete. I'm pushing it right now. It is like you buy a sports car and then you complain that you don't have a big trunk to put a lot of luggage. You are complaining about the wrong thing here. You bought the thing because it is fast. Similarly, we bought it because it is fast. From that perspective, whether they can address NAS or other things like that is just icing on the cake for me. Its price is a little high right now. Otherwise, I would have given it a ten.
IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe: Integration
The initial setup is very easy and very quick. It's not too complex. We found it to be rather straightforward.
The advantage of FlashSystem is the stellar visualization of data integration. We deployed the solution very quickly due to the fact that, when the system was implemented, the migration was transparent. The tools make everything very clear for the user.
Dell EMC PowerStore: Integration
reviewer1526187 says in a Dell EMC PowerStore review
Chief Information Officer at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
We replaced an older, high-performance storage device that was very expensive. With PowerStore, we were able to achieve the IOPS, and we were also able to get a data compression rate significantly above what we had expected. We were able to retire that older, very expensive piece of storage by bringing in the PowerStore. It's been faster and cheaper than we had expected, per terabyte.
Another reason that we were after this machine was PowerStore's VMware integration. We're a very large VMware customer. Some 98 percent of our workload runs on VMware.
reviewer1643715 says in an IntelliFlash review
IT Manager at a agriculture with 1,001-5,000 employees
We did the integration and installation in conjunction with an Intelliflash support engineer. They're good. They're above average. Originally, when Intelliflash was Tegile, the support engineers were knowledgeable of whatever they ran, and they had the patience to assist and were very helpful.
One of the most valuable features is its integration with other cloud solutions. We have a presence within Amazon EC2 and we leverage compute instances in there. Being able to integrate with compute, both locally within Zadara, as well as with other cloud vendors such as Amazon, is very helpful, while also being able to maintain extremely low latency between those connections. We have leveraged 10-Gig direct connections between them to be able to hook up the storage element within Zadara with the cloud platforms such as Amazon EC2. That is one of the primary technical driving factors.
The other large one is the partnership and the managed service offering from Zadara. That means they have a vested interest and are able to understand any issues or problems that we have. They are there to help identify and work through them and come to solutions for us. We have a unique workload, so problems that we may have to identify and work through could be unique to us. Other customers that are just looking to manage a smaller amount of data would not ever identify or have to work through the kinds of things we do. Having a partner that is interested in helping to work through those issues, and make recommendations based on their expertise, is very valuable to us.
Zadara's dedicated cores and memory provide us with a single-tenant experience. We are multi-tenant in that we manage multiple organizations and customers within our environment. We send all of that data to that single-tenant management aspect within Zadara. We have a couple of different virtual, private storage arrays, a couple of them in high-availability. The I/O engine type we're leveraging is the 2400s.
We also have disaster recovery set up on the other side of the U.S. for replication and remote mirroring. Being able to manage that within the platform allows us to add additional storage ourselves, to change the configuration of the VPSA to scale up or scale down, and to make any changes to meet budgetary needs. It truly allows us to manage things from a performance standpoint as well. We can also rely upon Zadara, as a managed-services provider, to manage those requests on our behalf. In the event that we needed to submit a ticket and say, "Hey, can you add additional storage or volumes?" it's very helpful to have them leverage their time and expertise to perform that on our behalf.
It is also very important that Zadara provides drive options such as SSD, NL-SAS, and SSD cache, for our workload in particular. We require our data to not only be accessible, but to be fast. Typically, most stored data that is hotter or more active is pushed onto faster storage, something like flash cache. The flash cache we began with during our first year with Zadara worked pretty well initially. But our workload being a little unique, after that, the volume of data exceeded the kind of logic that can be used in that type of cache. It just looks at what data is most frequently accessed. Usually the "first in" is on that hot flash cache, and our workload was a little bit more random than that, so we weren't getting as much of the benefit from that flash cache.
The fact that Zadara provides us with the ability to actually add a hybrid of both SSDs and SATA allows us to specifically designate what volumes and what data should be on those faster drives, while still taking into account budget constraints. That way, we can manage that hybrid and reduce the performance on some of the drives that are housing data that is really being stored long-term and not accessed. Having that hybrid capability has tremendously helped with the flexibility to manage our needs from a performance standpoint as well as a cost perspective.
As far as I know, they also have solid support for the major cloud vendors out there, in addition to some others that I hadn't heard of. But they certainly support Amazon EC2 and Google and Rackspace, among others. Those integrations are very important. Most organizations have some sort of a cloud presence today, whether they're hosting certain servers or compute instances or some other workload out in the cloud. Being able to integrate with the cloud and obtain data and store data, especially with all these next-generation threats and things like ransomware out there, is important. Having backups and storage locations that you can push data to, offsite, or integrate with, is definitely key.
Our initial application was probably the simplest one. We were sunsetting a product, but we needed to do some movement and we needed some additional storage, but we knew that what we needed was going to change within six months as we got rid of one product and brought in another. To handle this, we started deploying Block storage with Zadara, which we then changed to Object storage and effectively sent back the drives related to the Block storage as we did that migration. This meant that we did not have to invest in new technology or different platforms but rather, we could do it all on one platform and we can manage that migration very easily.
We use Zadara for most of our storage and it provides us with a single-tenant experience. We have a lot more customer environments running on it and although we don't use the compute services at the moment, we do use it for multi-tenant deployment for all of our storage.
I appreciate that they also offer compute services. Although we don't use it at the moment, it is something that we're looking at.
The fact that Zadara provides drive options such as SSD, NL-SAS, and SSD Cache is really useful for us. Much like in the way we can offer different deployments to our customers, having different drive sizes and different drive types means that we can mix and match, depending on customer requirements at the time they come in.
With available protocols including NFS, CIFS, and iSCSI, Zadara supports all of the main things that you'd want to support.
In terms of integration, Zadara supports all of the public and private clouds that we need it to. I'm not sure if it supports all of them on the market, but it works for everything that we require. This is something that is important to us because of the flexibility we have in that regardless of whether our customers are on-premises, in AWS, or otherwise, we can use Zadara storage to support that.
I would characterize Zadara's solution as elastic in all directions. There clearly are some limits to what technology can do, but from Zadara's perspective, it's very good.
With respect to performance, it was not a major factor for us so I don't know whether Zadara improved it or not. Flexibility around capacity is really the key aspect for us.
Zadara has not actually helped us to reduce our data center footprint but that's because we're adding a lot more customers. Instead, we are growing. It has helped us to redeploy people to more strategic projects. This is not so true with the budget, since it was factored in, but we do focus on more strategic projects.