We performed a comparison between Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) and Red Hat Ceph Storage 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."Simplified management: It provides us more time to work on other tasks."
"Single click actions is definitely the most important. They were not even aware that they wanted this."
"Its most valuable feature is simplicity. It is so easy to use. Upgrades are easy. It is easy in terms of disaster recovery, failover, database provisioning, and reporting. Everything about it is just simple."
"We like that the size of the box is 1U or 2U only, and all the servers are fit into that box. The ease of operation is there. All the servers and the SAN storage are inside the box."
"Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure's most valuable features are all the cloud facilities or benefits it provides for my data center."
"The solution is well integrated with other vendors."
"The flexibility of this system is very good. It's also faster than others, and has skilled technical support who showed more initiative than a competitor, e.g. VMware."
"Best features are around data locality, compression, and deduplication."
"The high availability of the solution is important to us."
"We use the solution for cloud storage."
"Data redundancy is a key feature, since it can survive failures (disks/servers). We didn’t lose our data or have a service interruption during server/disk failures."
"What I found most valuable from Red Hat Ceph Storage is integration because if you are talking about a solution that consists purely of Red Hat products, this is where integration benefits come in. In particular, Red Hat Ceph Storage becomes a single solution for managing the entire environment in terms of the container or the infrastructure, or the worker nodes because it all comes from a single plug."
"radosgw and librados provide a simple integration with clone, snapshots, and other functions that aid in data integrity."
"The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."
"High reliability with commodity hardware."
"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."
"The GUI of Nutanix Acropolis AOS could be improved that can be done from the OEM side. It's a very basic stable web browser that they're using. It is not very inclusive."
"I feel like the flow chart and the automated processes have some room for improvement. They're nearly there, and the rest is fine. They've improved a lot over the past few years."
"I'd like it to be more API-based."
"Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure's LTS version needs to be more reliable."
"It's lacking in some features but overcompensating in others."
"The latency needs improvement"
"In the next release of this solution, they could improve by being more competitive with VMware. I would like all third-party solutions to work well with Nutanix Acropolis AOS."
"The reporting feature isn't very good."
"An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions."
"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."
"I have encountered issues with stability when replication factor was not 3, which is the default and recommended value. Go below 3 and problems will arise."
"We have encountered slight integration issues."
"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."
"The management features are pretty good, but they still have room for improvement."
"In the deployment step, we need to create some config files to add Ceph functions in OpenStack modules (Nova, Cinder, Glance). It would be useful to have a tool that validates the format of the data in those files, before generating a deploy with failures."
"Ceph does not deal very well with, or takes a long time to recover from, certain kinds of network failures and individual storage node failures."
More Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) is ranked 2nd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 194 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 22 reviews. Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) is rated 8.6, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) writes "A powerful solution with easy deployment, upgrades, and management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) is most compared with VMware vSAN, VxRail, HPE SimpliVity, VMware vSphere and Nutanix Cloud Manager (NCM), whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and Intel DAOS. See our Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.
See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) 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.