Portworx Enterprise vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

Pure Storage and Red Hat are both solutions in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category. Additionally, 100% of Pure Storage users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 80% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

Portworx Enterprise

Read 6 Portworx Enterprise reviews

609 Views
410 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Red Hat Ceph Storage

Read 22 Red Hat Ceph Storage reviews

3,584 Views
3,043 Comparison Views

80% willing to recommend

Portworx Enterprise

Red Hat Ceph Storage

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Portworx Enterprise 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.

To learn more, read our detailed Portworx Enterprise vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report (Updated: November 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Portworx Enterprise vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

November 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,053 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Portworx Enterprise

Average Rating

9.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Cloud Software Defined Storage (2nd), Data Storage for Kubernetes (1st)

Red Hat Ceph Storage

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Software Defined Storage (SDS) (2nd), File and Object Storage (2nd)

Featured Reviews

Paulo Jose Bosco Otto

Consultant at PBOservicos-Informatica

A solution backed by strong customer support, that is stable and scalable

As a company managed in a Kubernetes environment, being trusted by a Kubernetes vendor, Red Hat creates barriers against using other certified solutions that work. Because IBM is a competitor of Pure Storage, things seem to be getting worse. I don't have plans to use Portworx Enterprise in the future because, at the moment, I am working with Ondat, and I have to follow NetApp's direction on that. When evaluating Portworx, one should make sure their company has already chosen Pure Storage. Still, if they are evaluating the solution on Ondat or Dell or other platforms, they should get a roadmap statement from Pure Storage, that they will continue to develop storage hardware diagnostics. I rate Portworx a nine out of ten.

Read full review

Prajwal Kabbinale

Software Engineer at a retailer with 10,001+ employees

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…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The best thing about Portworx is the Stork, they have called the VPS (Volume Replacement Strategy) and they also have topology awareness, and these are the three features I like."

"The solution is user-friendly."

"Portworx virtualizes the aspects of the underlying block storage. That is good because they can also use block storage for their future deployment instead of just NFS."

"I like that you have a small dedicated file system that is fast and resilient for containerized workloads."

"A custom IBM script is designed to tackle the storage management challenges within containerized environments, providing crucial data services and features required for enterprise applications."

"Portworx is a simple solution. It's similar to Pure Storage products. They're all easy to use and install. You need to have a little expertise with containers to use Portworx, but it will be no problem for you if you understand containers."

"Most valuable features include replication and compression."

"We have not encountered any stability issues for the product."

"I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product."

"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."

"Replicated and erasure coded pools have allowed for multiple copies to be kept, easy scale-out of additional nodes, and easy replacement of failed hard drives. The solution continues working even when there are errors."

"The community support is very good."

"Most of the features are beneficial and one does not stand out above the rest."

"It's a very performance-intensive, brilliant storage system, and I always recommend it to customers based on its benefits, performance, and scalability."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"It would be highly advantageous to include an integrated backup solution within the same license, rather than purchasing backup separately."

"The documentation could be better."

"The integration has room for improvement."

"I would like to see a more native mapping to mainframe-type systems."

"They have not integrated Portworx with Ondat since they are too focused now on Pure Storage APIs and not on users like us."

"I think the vendor could provide more training for new users who may not be familiar with containers."

"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."

"This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing."

"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."

"An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions."

"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."

"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."

"We have encountered slight integration issues."

"It needs a better UI for easier installation and management."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is competitive, but it is too expensive when paired with Red Hat IBM."

"It has two offerings. One is free, which is limited to only five nodes. The other is enterprise, which is a bit pricier."

"I'm not sure how the licensing was broken out, but I don't think our offering of the Portworx was more than USD $20,000."

"The price of Portworx Enterprise is high."

"There is no cost for software."

"Most of time, you can get Ceph with the OpenStack solution in a subscription as a bundle."

"If you can afford a product like Red Hat Ceph Storage then go for it. If you cannot, then you need to test Ceph and get your hands dirty."

"We never used the paid support."

"The price of this product isn't high."

"The other big advantage is that Ceph is free software. Compared to traditional SAN based storage, it is very economical."

"The operational overhead is higher compared to Azure because we own the hardware."

"The price of Red Hat Ceph Storage is reasonable."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Computer Software Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Government

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Portworx Enterprise?

A custom IBM script is designed to tackle the storage management challenges within containerized environments, providing crucial data services and features required for enterprise applications.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Portworx Enterprise?

The price is competitive, but it is too expensive when paired with Red Hat IBM.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Portworx Enterprise?

It would be highly advantageous to include an integrated backup solution within the same license, rather than purchasing backup separately. It would ensure a comprehensive and streamlined approach ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Red Hat Ceph Storage?

The high availability of the solution is important to us.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Red Hat Ceph Storage?

Some documentation is very hard to find. The documentation must be quickly available.

See all answers

Comparisons

Red Hat Openshift Data Foundation vs Portworx Enterprise

Compared 38% of the time

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP vs Portworx Enterprise

Compared 10% of the time

IBM Spectrum Scale vs Portworx Enterprise

Compared 6% of the time

Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) vs Portworx Enterprise

Compared 5% of the time

Rancher Labs vs Portworx Enterprise

Compared 4% of the time

More Portworx Enterprise Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 45% of the time

VMware vSAN vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 7% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 4% of the time

Dell PowerFlex vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

Dell ECS vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cloud Software Defined Storage

November 2024

Download Portworx Enterprise product report

Buyer's Guide

Software Defined Storage (SDS)

December 2024

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

Ceph

Learn More

Pure Storage

Red Hat

Overview

Portworx is the solution for running stateful containers in production, designed with DevOps in mind. With Portworx, users can manage any database or stateful service on any infrastructure using any container scheduler, including Kubernetes, Mesosphere DC/OS, and Docker Swarm. Portworx solves the five most common problems DevOps teams encounter when running stateful services in production: persistence, high availability, data automation, security, and support for multiple data stores and infrastructure.

Red Hat Ceph Storage is an enterprise open source platform that provides unified software-defined storage on standard, economical servers and disks. With block, object, and file storage combined into one platform, Red Hat Ceph Storage efficiently and automatically manages all your data.

Sample Customers

NIO, GE Digital, DreamWorks Animation, Lufthansa, beco, NEW CONTEXT

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

Portworx Enterprise vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

November 2024

Free Report: Portworx Enterprise vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

Find out what your peers are saying about Portworx Enterprise vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Portworx Enterprise vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.

See our list of 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.