We performed a comparison between IBM Spectrum Scale and IBM Spectrum Virtualize based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is incredibly scalable and stable."
"It has been pretty reliable throughout the years. As far as capacity is concerned, it can handle most heavy loads."
"Its great servicing high availability. That is what it is used for."
"The high performance of the solution is its most valuable aspect. If you compare it to other storage solutions, it's much better."
"GPFS monitoring is the best feature."
"We can have multiple systems within the same file system."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Allows us to share files across multiple environments."
"It lowers cost. It does so by getting more efficient use out of the technology behind it."
"Using SBC, a valuable feature is the mirroring, which is the virtualization of the disk between disparate places."
"The ability to add the virtual machine on the Spectrum environment to sort out the data movers(DMs) and their schedules is a valuable feature. You are able to have, for example, four data movers to balance them so you do not have too much work on one data mover."
"Although the GUI from the XIV was used (in my view), IBM has polished and refined the GUI providing a pleasant and easy to navigate GUI experience."
"It provides transparency, because of its advanced copy features."
"One of the main features of Spectrum Virtualize is it virtualizes the servers from the storage. We have a very large infrastructure. A major advantage is when you get the aged storage arrays and you have to replace all of those."
"The most valuable features are the simplicity of use, the flexibility, and the options included. I mean, it's just a big time saver."
"The most valuable feature is its reliability."
"The main issue that we have now is with the encryption. They want to use more metrics in encryption, which is not working very well."
"Maybe it needs integration with HA."
"They should probably simply the Red Hat implementation portion. This portion was not as straightforward as I would like it to be."
"Integration with other vendors is not available."
"Making it a little easier to add bad file sets would help. There is a transition to how you add storage and how you add a file set, so making that a little smoother would probably be my recommendation."
"The biggest problem is that it is not able to provide block storage."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"This is probably the biggest challenge, getting everything upgraded, because it just takes time. We wish it was a faster solution to be able to do everything at once, but you have do each node individually. The more nodes, the longer it takes."
"t is limited in terms of a single system to eight nodes or four, what they call IO groups."
"For improvement considerations, I would probably say multiple sites."
"The only errors I find sometimes is the solution tells me I cannot operate it because a service has turned off, you can just go back to the VM, go to services, and turn back the services. However, this should improve."
"There are things that occur when you get to this size and capacity. We're very large, i.e., petabytes. When you get to that sheer volume of the numbers of things, it is too big for people to keep track of."
"I hate I/O groups. If you start swapping I/O groups, they can be potentially risky. If they could get rid of the whole I/O group principle, the risk is not there anymore. I understand the fundamental thing about I/O groups, but they are risky."
"Anything which improves performance and the ability of our systems would be a nice."
"There are big arrays now, and if a customer wants add more disks to it, you have to have another array. Adding disks to existing arrays is one of the most demanded things from our customers."
"In general, the migration is complicated. Though, it is case-by-case."
IBM Spectrum Scale is ranked 7th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 10 reviews while IBM Spectrum Virtualize is ranked 14th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 35 reviews. IBM Spectrum Scale is rated 8.4, while IBM Spectrum Virtualize is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of IBM Spectrum Scale writes "A stable solution with valuable profile-sharing features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Spectrum Virtualize writes "Robust, stable, with good performance, and easy to implement". IBM Spectrum Scale is most compared with Red Hat Ceph Storage, Portworx Enterprise, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, DDN IME and IBM Spectrum Accelerate, whereas IBM Spectrum Virtualize is most compared with Dell VPLEX, VMware vSAN, VxRail, DataCore SANsymphony and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP. See our IBM Spectrum Scale vs. IBM Spectrum Virtualize report.
See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors, best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors, and best Cloud Software Defined Storage vendors.
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.