Hitachi Content Platform Reviews

Hitachi Content Platform's metadata search feature is not used in any case. It was only used in one tenant designed for testing, and it considerably impacts the performance of the cluster. Since there is no need to use it, it remains disabled.

Automated data tiering capability of Hitachi Content Platform is not used either, because there is only one pool. Objects were not moved from one pool to another, so tiering is not utilized.

For regulatory compliance, compliance mode is not preferred because the team often needs to modify retention or delete objects that are no longer needed. If compliance mode is used, nothing can be deleted or purged if a long retention period is configured. Governance mode is used instead because it is more practical.

Hitachi Content Platform is a huge solution designed for large S3 workloads. It is especially designed for archiving and backups, and it is not designed for active workloads or for machine learning or applications that require high performance using the S3 protocol. For everything concerning archive needs for ten or five years, it is good for that purpose. Backups are also good with this platform. It offers a lot of configuration modes compatible with many workloads.

The deployment of Hitachi Content Platform is acceptable. Hitachi support helps with the deployment of the whole platform, so responsibility for this deployment is not carried alone. Every time support helps with deployment, especially when it concerns physical installation and pool creation and the whole action that needs an expert from the support team, the experience is great.

An application that can do the monitoring and reporting interface for Hitachi Content Platform would be beneficial. Hitachi Content Platform monitor or intelligent monitoring is known, and deployment of this was attempted, but it appears that Hitachi abandoned this project, so it is not in use. The potential of that application was great, but it does not cover everything. When Hitachi was asked about it, they indicated there is no application in the project they will start to develop for this purpose, and they redirected to Prometheus. They shared some Prometheus metrics that can be integrated with Grafana to get some metrics on Hitachi Content Platform, but having a dedicated interface from Hitachi itself would be great, similar to what other vendors provide.

The upgrade process for Hitachi Content Platform is too long. When upgrading for just two mandatory versions, it took weeks because all nodes had to be restarted. A hardware support tool is necessary every time upgrading to another version, and it is not practical for the production environment. A large downtime must be predicted and the application team must be asked to stop and suspend their technical batches, which takes a lot of time to do.

Hitachi Content Platform has been used for three years.

Regarding technical support for Hitachi Content Platform, there is a SAM who can push and escalate problems quickly for resolution. There are no complaints about that; the Europe team does their best, and if they cannot resolve the problem, they escalate it to the US support. This has happened many times, and when there is a problem with Hitachi Content Platform, they escalate to US support and continue working every night until the issue is resolved. There are no complaints about that; it is great.

In rating technical support, it would be rated as a solid ten.

The deployment time for Hitachi Content Platform depends on the physical configuration. For example, if there are four controllers, that will take about one or two days. If there are twelve or twenty-four controllers, that might take one or two weeks. It depends on the physical installation. It is a little bit difficult to deploy; there is a lot of preparation involved, such as communicating with data center personnel to prepare every matrix for plugins, LAN interface, VLAN creation and reservation, and DNS stub that should be created. There is a lot of work to prepare before, after, and during installation to deploy. Once it is done, it is acceptable.

Multitenancy is not understood or the term is not known in English. The overall review rating for this product is an eight out of ten.

We proposed its consultation to our clients and have explored it further. This is important because we partnered with HST, who provided a demonstration box and shipped it from UAE to Pakistan for the customers' proof of concept. 

We didn't connect with NetApp for this demo box, nor did they initiate such a campaign. We're showcasing it as a content platform because we have a free demonstration box, offering a more cost-effective solution compared to a full version.

Our key focus was integrating HCP with our client's existing robotics platform, tailoring it to their specific environment. They initially requested S3 object storage, which they hadn't used before, hence the proof of concept. 

It's more about exploration right now, with a potential decision later. They primarily wanted a centralized authority connecting all bank ATMs, providing access to diverse applications. They already have access through their existing unified storage. 

So, exploring HCP might be for introducing new products or services for their tenant customers, specifically the 200GB object storage, but that's still under exploration.

Integrating Hitachi Content Platform with existing systems is not challenging. 

For example, it's similar to how you share Google Drive with a tenant. You provide a specific web address, which might be a bit long, to individual users, user groups, or specific volumes. 

It's just like an internet storage app where you log in with your username and password, granting access as defined by the administrator.

The user interface isn't as user-friendly, and the management platform UI isn't as intuitive as others. So it can be more user-friendly. 

Another area of improvement is support. Technical support needs improvement. Hitachi's case logging system is complicated compared to the simple NetApp support portal. They lack a simple, agile call logging system and even a proper help desk or login system.

I've been reading about it for a few years, but I only got certified two months ago. Overall, I have three years of total familiarity.

Overall, support and services are better. While call logging isn't easy yet, if you escalate through a call, they will support you. For example, opening a case in Hitachi requires calling a partner, while with NetApp, you can simply open a case through the web browser interface or their support site without needing to call.

Neutral

While deployment is simple, it's not as simple as StorageGRID. 

The architecture is entirely different, even though the end product uses the same protocols. 

The user interface isn't as user-friendly, and the management platform UI isn't as intuitive as others. 

Deployment isn't as centralized either. Although I've deployed Hitachi Content myself in our production head office for the VM team, even though it's simple, it wasn't completely straightforward. 

They still required my help with the initial configuration environment setup. So, it's not just simple; there are some tricky aspects.

The environment is tricky, but if you understand it, configuration can be done quickly.

It's a content platform hardware, and our team deployed it effectively.

The initial setup involved multiple machines, followed by delivering the proof-of-concept solution to the client. Currently, they're learning and are quite happy with it, potentially leading to further purchases with additional requirements.

The price is expensive. It is more expensive than StorageGRID.

Overall, I would rate the solution a six out of ten. From a management perspective, it's not better than NetApp StorageGRID. The price is not better. Also, the initial configuration isn't as straightforward. The system requires improvement there.

Mainly, from my project, Hitachi Content Platform is used for archiving. The customer is in banking, so they need to keep their long-term data on the platform. 

The platform is replacing their existing tech, which was using IBM Jaguar tech. The aim is to write on Jaggle Storage, which can be kept for about ten years and more.

The main selling point is its compatibility with different environments. It functions like an on-prem Google Drive or Dropbox built on top of the object storage. While it requires another license, it allows the creation of local cloud storage such as Dropbox and Google Drive. Additionally, Hitachi Content Platform is compatible with many platforms, even mainframes, which are challenging to integrate into other solutions.

In comparison to competitors like Huawei, which can use all storage protocols in the same platform, Hitachi Content Platform lacks the integration of block, file, and object on a single system. 

Although they claim to provide NFS, the actual implementation requires an additional gateway, which makes it a costly solution. 

Additionally, Hitachi could improve by replicating functions similar to those offered by Western vendors or addressing the three protocols on the same machine. The existing NFS and S3 compatibility aren't optimal and require additional devices.

I have been trying to sell it since 2020, but my first project using Hitachi Content Platform was in 2022.

I haven't heard of any stability issues.

The scalability is very good. I have mentioned scaling to many more petabytes, possibly even twenty petabytes.

Technical support seems satisfactory with no significant issues. I would rate it eight or nine points.

Positive

The platform is replacing our existing tech, IBM.

The initial setup is quite easy, taking about one or two days if the requirements such as firewall ports, IP addresses, and others are provided.

Two technicians are typically required since the machine is heavy and requires muscle power for installation. However, for software configuration, one person is usually enough.

Compared to other Western vendors, Hitachi Content Platform has a competitive price, which is lower than Dell or HPE. In Indonesia, Chinese brands like Huawei offer aggressive pricing, but among Western brands, Hitachi Content Platform is cost-effective.

I would rate it an eight out of ten.

The platform helps in efficient data management with the ease of server provisioning. 

They could improve compatibility and offer a more user-friendly GUI.

I have been using the Hitachi Content Platform for approximately six months.

I rate the product's stability a nine. 

Adding disks and storage groups can extend the platform's storage capacity. I rate the scalability an eight. 

The technical support team takes time to respond. 

Neutral

I recommend Hitachi Content Platform to others and rate it eight out of ten. 

The product provides the fastest technology and stores different kinds of data in databases.

The software upgrade could be easier. At present, it is complicated to use the CLI command.

The product is stable. I rate its stability a ten out of ten.

I rate the product’s scalability an eight out of ten.

Hitachi Content Platform is easy to set up. It requires a team of 20 executives for installation and maintenance.

The product’s cost is average. I rate its pricing a five out of ten.

It is a good product. It is less expensive compared to other technologies like EMC. I rate it a ten out of ten.

Our clients use this tool as a five-server solution and a backup repository. Those are the two principal use cases.

The most valuable features of the solution are the versioning and ransomware protection.

There is room for improvement in the capacity for integration with other platforms. Right now, we're in the process of implementation for a client and we're having some problems with integration. 

I would also like to see a better user experience for the administration, such as software to manage the principal console. 

My company has been partnered with Hitachi since 2016, but before that, in 2010, I worked at another company that sold Hitachi solutions.

The stability of the solution is very good.

The scalability is very good. We use two engineers for deployment and maintenance on an average project. 

The technical support from Hitachi is good. On a scale of one to five, where one is bad and five is good, I would rate them a five.

Positive

The initial setup isn't too difficult, but it's also not easy. It takes us about a week to configure the first part, so the user experience could be better. On a scale of one to ten, where one is simple and ten is complicated, I would rate it a six or seven.

I think the ROI for this solution is very good because the pricing for it is in between other solutions. Some traditional storages are more cheaper, but I think HCP has a good rate.

My advice to those considering this product is that it's very important to know what platforms you will be integrating with the solution. The integrations are a principal part of the use case. Some people think that HCP can be used like a traditional storage solution, but it doesn't work like that. You have to interrupt the offerability matrix to make sure that you can do the integration. I think that is the most important part.

I think this is a comfortable and secure product. I would rate it as a nine out of ten.

We are a service provider, so we propose this solution to customers.

You can deploy it on cloud or on-premise. You can buy some space from cloud service providers also. It also supports ST protocol.

Not all of the service providers have Hitachi Content Platform space available because it all depends on if they have Hitachi Content Platform deployed on their environment.

The pricing could be improved. Hitachi is a big company, so it's a very strong product. The only thing is that it should be more cost effective. 

I have been working with this solution for the past 12 years.

It's a stable product.

It's scalable.

Technical support is okay in the Pakistan area. If there's something wrong, they make a special arrangement for support and services.

I think StorageGRID is a better option for any customer. NetApp is focused on market trends and makes products according to the market trends. It's a bit cheaper than Hitachi, but Hitachi Content Platform is only for specific use cases while StorageGRID is more than that. They target customers who want a single space for their storage system, a petabyte of storage space that can be managed, monitored, and present via one console. 

If the customer wants a bigger space, I would refer them to a content platform. Someone in the oil and gas sector will have a lot of data, so traditional storage will not work with that. They need storage that gives them more volume.

Any product from Hitachi is not going to be straightforward to deploy. It's really difficult compared to other solutions, like StorageGRID. Deploying it isn't easy, especially when a customer is deploying it on-prem. If a customer is getting space from the selective cloud service provider, then obviously there's no deployment requirement at all because it's already deployed and you just buy a license or buy space from a service provider.

Overall, it's costly.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

My advice is that if someone wants to deploy Hitachi, they need a lot of money.

We are providing the Hitachi Content Platform to customers.

We are positioning the HCP solution for customers that needs to increase the backup throughput. This is the biggest deal that I have with HCP. It's almost two petabytes.

The immutability of the solution is great. That user cannot even change the objects or the file that is stored in the solution.

People like the interface and the integration capabilities.

The stability is great.

Companies can scale the solution.

The pricing of the solution could be better.

Technical support could be more available to certain regions such as ours.

The solution could use more integration with clouds. We have some integrations. This customer would like to run backups into Content Platform solutions and then to another solution like a cloud. We can see integration with Amazon, however, so far, I cannot see the integration potential with the Google GCP and the Microsoft options. The customer should have a contract with Amazon Web Services. If customers have a contract with any other, they should move the contract to this cloud.

I've dealt with the solution for five to six years at this point. 

The stability of the product is pretty good. The performance is good and it's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches.

Scaling the solution is possible and is pretty easy. If a company wants to expand it, it can do so. It's not a problem.

In this part of the world, technical support is not working as it should. Here, there is very few personnel in the field working with the solution. It could improve.

I cannot speak to the initial setup. I was not a part of the process and therefore can't speak about personal experience. 

You typically need two or three people for deployment and maintenance tasks. You might need one engineer and one admin.

The cost of the solution is pretty expensive. Clients would like it if it was more reasonably priced.

I am a reseller for Hitachi solutions and Veeam solutions as well. I'm not an end-user. I'm the person who recommends the solution to customers.

We are offering the latest versions of the product to clients.

The infrastructure should be ready to receive this kind of solution. This is a slightly different solution than storage solutions, and therefore, a company should be prepared in advance for its implementation.

I used to say to customers, "You should learn about this and study the HCP solutions," as this is completely different than block storage solutions. New users need to understand how to manage, how to maintain, and how to improve it.

I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

My job involves managing storage, like adding new hosts in our environment, creating users, zoning, and allocation. I completely decommission storage when a site is decommissioned and carry out all the DR activities, performance monitoring, tuning, and handling Hitachi universal replication. 

These are for the VSP areas and NAS activities like provisioning shares and capacity, as well as access management over the shares and file systems. These tasks are all done in Hitachi HNS. I use Hitachi Content Platform to manage namespaces, tenants, and pools.

This is a backup and storage project with a few tenants used for archival purposes. Data are sent for the archival, and data gets archived according to the retention period in their specific tenant. We have particular tenants that are used for data migration. It is integrated with our HNS platform. These are the two main purposes for Hitachi Content Platform.

We have about 50 people in my company working on HCP for this project, but my company has many projects, so I don't know who is using HCP for others. 

We can easily integrate Content Platform into our environment. We have G10 and S10 nodes. The metadata is stored in the pools that make up the G10 node, while the actual data goes to the pool that forms the S nodes. It has built-in data and capacity management, a background service that handles capacity balancing. It's scheduled to balance the data in each S node. 

We are using Content Platform for data migration, and it integrates with our HNS platform. This is good because we can integrate it with our existing HNS and SAP solutions. The GUI is also user-friendly. It doesn't take much time to do anything. If we know the architecture and the steps, we can do what we need with a few clicks. 

When you want to replace a disk, we need to start the maintenance from the S nodes. We have to automate maintenance so any onsite engineer can replace it after that, but we don't need to do this on VSP platforms. An engineer can come in and replace that specific disk. If also we could do that on Hitachi Content Platform, it would be great for us. 

Also, after we upgraded this S node to the 2.2 version, we found a minor bug where it was giving us false positives showing that the system had failed when it hadn't. I think Hitachi released a patch that resolves this.

In the next update, I would like to see one new feature. We get email alerts when a tenant is at 90 percent capacity or so. It should have the option to automatically expand if the pool has enough space. For example, if the pool has 30 percent free, you can increase the tenant's space when it's 90 percent full. 

I've been working with Hitachi Content Platform for two years.

Content Platform is reliable. We seldom have issues with it, so it's quite good.

It's easy to scale.

If we have any issues we cannot resolve, we escalate with the Hitachi team, and they help us. Their support is good.

I worked on the HP 3PAR on-premises solution, but not the cloud solution. HCP is the only cloud solution I've used. If we're comparing Hitachi and HP 3PAR, I would say they're equally good. 3PAR has some good features, but so does Hitachi.  

I don't know about the deployment, who was involved, how much time it took, or what issues they faced. Hitachi Content Platform was installed in the environment when I joined the company. For maintenance, we need to upgrade it to the n-1 version annually. I can't think of any other maintenance that we perform.

I rate Hitachi Content Platform eight out of 10. I would recommend it. 

I typically use it to back up an archive.

This solution has a ton of valuable features. One of the most hidden valuable features is ensuring that you don't have bit rot, so it will go and check every single object that's stored on the system, then ensure that if there's a problem, it'll be repaired from either a local copy or remote copy, depending upon your configuration.

It also has a variety of features for the metadata for the objects, so you can add additional searching, plus it has a good compliance feature set.

This product's ability to track logs for access could be differentiating and still needs to be improved, but that probably doesn't exist on any product in its class either.

I've been using it for quite a while.

I found the stability of this solution to be stellar.

The scalability of this solution is stellar.

I didn't deal with technical support.

HItachi does a lot with automation. I'm not as familiar with Cloud-Scale which is their new architecture. I assume it's easier than their current one. It tends to show up as an appliance at a certain scale that you buy. It might be hardware, it might be software, and given that, the user will just need to plug it in for installation. It comes as a turnkey appliance, or it comes as a series of virtual machines from a software perspective.

I've evaluated Dell EMC and AWS S3.

I used to work at Hitachi, so I'm deeply familiar with what their offering looks like, and from a competitive standpoint, historically, it's where Dell, EMC's, etc., come from. I have more experience with the Hitachi content platform. I helped in the acquisition of the company that Hitachi had or Hitachi pursued to actually make the product.

My experience is with version nine of this solution. They have a new product called HCP for Cloud Scale: It's their whole new architecture which I'm not as familiar with. 

That's how all these companies tend to go to market. There may be some things around IoT, but at the end of the day, the overriding concern is the cost to store. The least costly per terabyte the better.

All of these companies, when you amortize it between three to five years, the pricing looks very similar, or they have to look very similar to AWS S3.

My advice to others looking into implementing this solution is to not assume it's only hardware. People will make an assumption that it's only hardware-based and it's not. You can buy a software edition of it, and I think their newer product is even more flexible from a software perspective. They may view Hitachi as just a hardware supplier, but they're not only hardware.

Hitachi has done a lot of work in rolling upgrades, expansions recovery from failures, etc., which are fundamental to the product.

On a scale of one to ten, I'd put it at a seven, but I don't think there's any product in the category that would be beyond a seven.