Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

DataCore Swarm vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Customer Service

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
5.5
Opinions on Red Hat Ceph Storage support vary; some value it, others prefer community forums or internal solutions.
They're proactive and assist even if there's no direct issue with DataCore Swarm.
 

Scalability Issues

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
7.3
Red Hat Ceph Storage scales well with user feedback, though latency and planning challenges require consideration and deployment tools.
We use two kinds of architectures, one with single nodes where disk addition is easy and another with a larger infrastructure.
 

Stability Issues

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
7.6
Red Hat Ceph Storage is highly reliable and stable, with minor issues in data rebalancing, latency, and recovery.
 

Room For Improvement

DataCore Swarm's high cost, server needs, and complex setup limit its accessibility, requiring streamlined processes and lower volume licenses.
Red Hat Ceph Storage faces challenges in performance, usability, documentation, integration, and resource optimization, needing various improvements.
The main issue currently is the hard installation process.
 

Setup Cost

Enterprise buyers appreciated Red Hat Ceph Storage's reasonable pricing and flexible licensing, with the option for support depending on expertise.
While the initial step is expensive, ramping up capacity is relatively affordable compared to alternatives.
 

Valuable Features

DataCore Swarm offers flexible, user-friendly management, scalability, and robust security with S3 compatibility, ensuring seamless hardware integration and data availability.
Red Hat Ceph Storage provides scalable, reliable, and flexible storage solutions with self-healing architecture and easy integration for various needs.
 

Categories and Ranking

DataCore Swarm
Ranking in File and Object Storage
14th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat Ceph Storage
Ranking in File and Object Storage
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined Storage (SDS) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of DataCore Swarm is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 22.5%, down from 23.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
File and Object Storage
 

Featured Reviews

CP
Low-cost storage with great automatic failover and easy expansion capabilities
The solution needs simpler architecture; we need many servers to start using the solution. We know that a project is in the roadmap to put the services in a container and we think it will be a very good thing. The second thing would be to improve the updates of the solution. We need a "long" time to pass between the patches on each new version. Again, the containers would be a solution to that. The last improvement for us is already in the pipeline, and we have been able to test it. It's an all-in-one server solution. This system allows us to do the primary copy of the data on a unique server that we can easily move and then transfer the data inside the data center.
Prajwal Kabbinale - PeerSpot reviewer
Overall satisfied , with easy implementation ,having a notification feature would be helpful
Our primary use case is for integration with OpenStack for block and object storage We use both Red Hat Ceph and Azure storage, for all staging and non-production. Most of the features are beneficial and one does not stand out above the rest. The operational overhead is higher compared to Azure…
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File and Object Storage solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
25%
Comms Service Provider
19%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Legal Firm
8%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about DataCore Swarm?
The first feature is compatibility with the S3 protocol. DataCore SWARM allows you to quickly have an on-premise, robust and scalable environment that is natively compatible with the S3 protocol. ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for DataCore Swarm?
DataCore Swarm's pricing is reasonable. While the initial step is expensive, ramping up capacity is relatively affordable compared to alternatives.
What needs improvement with DataCore Swarm?
The main issue currently is the hard installation process. Upgrading from CentOS to Rocky is not straightforward either, which needs improvement.
How does Red Hat Ceph Storage compare with MiniO?
Red Hat Ceph does well in simplifying storage integration by replacing the need for numerous storage solutions. This solution allows for multiple copies of replicated and coded pools to be kept, ea...
What do you like most about Red Hat Ceph Storage?
The high availability of the solution is important to us.
What needs improvement with Red Hat Ceph Storage?
Some documentation is very hard to find. The documentation must be quickly available.
 

Also Known As

Caringo Swarm
Ceph
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

iQ Media, NEP, Texas Tech University, Telefónica, City of Austin, Massive Media, Data Deposit Box, Premier Physician Services, Truliant Federal Credit Union
Dell, DreamHost
Find out what your peers are saying about DataCore Swarm vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.