We performed a comparison between Red Hat Gluster Storage and VMware vSAN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about StarWind, Nutanix, Red Hat and others in Software Defined Storage (SDS)."The technical support team is excellent."
"It's very easy to upgrade storage."
"The price tag is good compared to the amount of data and high availability provided."
"The technical support is good. We are always thankful for the technical support from VMware. They are very supportive when we have a technical problem."
"The most important feature to me, in my role, is cost. In the renewal cycle for storage, it was about a 40 percent saving compared to going to an all-flash array, which is what we first looked at doing. Secondly, performance: we need clinical data access in five seconds and need to do everything we can to retain that metric. Thirdly, I was really pleasantly surprised during the data migration across to vSAN, that it happened almost instantly whereas, in the past, migrating from array to array was an arduous and fraught process."
"VMware comes with different stacks like VMware Cloud Foundation, which is integrated with different VMware modules. There's interoperability between VMware products."
"By eliminating dependency on that back-end storage, we now depend on everything that's in the VMkernel with vSAN. We eliminate the middleman."
"The solution is stable."
"The valuable features are its scalability and the standardization - one size fits all. It's also intuitive and easy to use because one size fits all. Obviously, it scales out, but it's the same solution at every physical location I manage."
"I have found the solution to be scalable."
"The features of vSAN allow us to reduce our operational complexity to a large degree."
"The performance of the solution must be improved."
"The user interface could be simplified."
"The system should be more intuitive and easier to manage."
"The solution functions as the marketing says, as long as you follow certain rules."
"The big thing is pricing, and the rest of it is mostly good. From a scalability point of view, scaling the storage from network or compute should be easier. It is again all around the cost, and it would be good if it was easier to scale your storage separately from your compute."
"What I would like to see, for the really small customers, is the ability to have two nodes."
"I think it needs to be more cost-effective. I would also say that even though the capacity is good, there is also room for improvement there. Also, they could improve the security of the system."
"The server files are larger than before."
"The main problem we had was hardware compatibility, finding the right hardware that was certified."
"Lacks sufficient storage terabytes."
"The price for the hard drive, for vSAN, is very expensive."
Red Hat Gluster Storage is ranked 12th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 3 reviews while VMware vSAN is ranked 2nd in HCI with 227 reviews. Red Hat Gluster Storage is rated 7.6, while VMware vSAN is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Red Hat Gluster Storage writes "A scalable and easy-to-implement solution that has an excellent technical support team". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware vSAN writes "Very stable, easy to set up, and easy to use". Red Hat Gluster Storage is most compared with Red Hat Ceph Storage, IBM Spectrum Scale, LizardFS, LINBIT SDS and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, whereas VMware vSAN is most compared with VxRail, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct, HPE SimpliVity, Red Hat Ceph Storage and Dell PowerFlex.
We monitor all Software Defined Storage (SDS) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
