HPE 3PAR StoreServ Reviews

We are using HPE 3PAR StoreServ for our main enterprise application database. 

We have a split of hard drive usage in the solution, such as SATA drives.

The most valuable feature of HPE 3PAR StoreServ is its storage capabilities.

HPE 3PAR StoreServ is at its end of life and they are forcing us to purchase new hardware. They will no longer support this solution. They should provide support for a longer time. For example, 10 years instead of five years.

I have been using PE 3PAR StoreServ for approximately four years.

HPE 3PAR StoreServ is a stable solution. We have not had an issue since we have been using it.

We have approximately three terabytes of usage.

The solution is scalable, we are able to add more hardware if needed, such as hard drives.

The support from HPE 3PAR StoreServ is professional.

The setup of HPE 3PAR StoreServ is not simple. The configuration is not an easy task to complete. The full deployment took approximately one month. We set up parts to implement, such as databases, applications, and hardware.

We had support from our local vendors to do the implementation.

The support for the solution is free for three years, then it is an additional cost. It is approximately $30,000 annually. The price includes a lot of equipment we have not only HPE 3PAR StoreServ.

We have approximately 100 users that are using this solution.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate HPE 3PAR StoreServ a nine out of ten.

We are a telecom company. We are using the tool mainly for processing applications.

The virtualization environment is good. The compression features are good. The tool provides data-tiering features. It is a middle-level storage solution. It is good enough. We do not face any problems with it. The performance and reliability are okay.

If we have two different types of disks, only one data-tiering is possible. The product must accept any type of disk. The solution must be vertically and horizontally expandable. It is not possible currently.

I have been using the solution for the last ten years.

The solution is stable.

Scalability is possible with only the existing drives. The product does not accept the latest drives like the NVMe drives. We have 15 users.

The support is good.

Positive

The solution is easy to deploy. The deployment takes a reasonable amount of time. We need one architect to deploy the tool. It is easy for one person to maintain the tool.

The tool’s price is higher compared to other products. The solution is 20% more expensive than other storage.

We use Dell and HPE. I prefer Hitachi for scalability reasons. Hitachi accepts drives like HDD, NVMe, and SSD. Hitachi is the best tool.

We are partners. After we give the inputs to evaluate and ask the commercial to the presales team, they take a lot of time to respond. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We have used HPE 3PAR Flash Storage in the past for all our IT data. For example, we have used it for claims, office management, business intelligence, business information. It can be used for a lot of purposes.

The performance of the solution is not good anymore and the software is different from all the other types and is not compatible. There are more negative things at this moment than positive. This is why we are removing them all from our organization this year.

I have been using HPE 3PAR Flash Storage for approximately 10 years.

The solution is stable.

HPE 3PAR Flash Storage was scalable in the past but in the current market, it is a four out of ten. You are not able to add more power to the solution, it is not stackable.

We have approximately 6,000 users using this solution.

The technical support is good.

I have used Nimble and Primera.

The installation is not that difficult nowadays. It takes approximately two days.

When we need to do the implementation HPE comes with us and does it together with our maintenance department and an external company.

We have three engineers that do the maintenance of the solution.

The price of the license depends. Some people expect more from the hardware. Some expect more from the licensing, and that is because you can receive several licenses nowadays, such as the terabyte license. You buy the storage, and you pay extra for the terabyte license for the software. There is a one-time purchase for the license and you pay annually for the maintenance.

I have evaluated NetApp.

HPE 3PAR Flash Storage is old and is obsolete and we are moving to newer versions of the system.

HPE has several storage options, such as Nimble. HPE has a lot of operating systems for their storage, and they all have a different approach. They were all from different companies which HPE bought, for example, Nimble and Primera.

I would not recommend this solution anymore. I would advise others to look for new types of storage solutions.

I rate HPE 3PAR Flash Storage a four out of ten.

We use HPE 3PAR StoreServ for all the storage needs for the hospital I work at.

HPE 3PAR StoreServ has improved our organization from its ease of use and high availability.

HPE 3PAR StoreServ is easy to use, fully featured, and has a great graphical user interface.

The configuration and flexibility should improve.

I have been using HPE 3PAR StoreServ for approximately seven years.

I have found the stability to be very high.

HPE 3PAR StoreServ is scalable but it has limits.

We have approximately 5,000 users using this solution across all departments. The solution is being extensively used in our organization.

The vendor support is very helpful.

The configuration is difficult but we had help from HPE 3PAR StoreServ. The whole process of the implementation took approximately one week.

We used vendor support to help us with the implementation of HPE 3PAR StoreServ. The representative was excellent.

We have one administrator that does the maintenance and upgrades of the solution.

The licensing cost for HPE 3PAR StoreServ is expensive.

We have evaluated the IBM FlashSystem solution and we are switching everything over from HPE 3PAR StoreServ.

My advice to those wanting to implement this solution would be to find a good reseller who has expertise in HPE 3PAR StoreServ.

I rate HPE 3PAR StoreServ an eight out of ten.

I use 3PAR as the standard storage. The main production is VMware, and it is connected to 3PAR across fabric switch. The fabric switch between them is MDS Switch and Notebook 8. We also have a Hyper-V environment, which is connected to the same storage. The main service is the exchange service. I have a public cloud and a private cloud. I use 3PAR as a private cloud.

In our organization, the storage is not detected from the first day, so I don't have the workload. The workload is run in my environment, and 3PAR is the best solution. If I have a workload from Thursday, I don't make the adaptive optimization on this because 3PAR is collecting all the storage and doing all tiering of the storage. If I have another disk from a new line, 3PAR makes it as tiering and adaptive. When a VM has more rights about the storage, it will make such VM of a higher tier. It can make it a C-tier. If the VM has a need for more IOPs, they need to use the scale command every time. This VM will move to another tier, and after the weekend, I will schedule adaptive optimization to check if this VM needs this tier or not. This way I can make all the storage tiered. If the workload is big and needs more IOPs, it moves the VMs from one tier to another tier. This is the main advantage. 

3PAR is different from other storage solutions because it uses a chunklet when we initiate the storage. Every disk is submitted as a 1 GB chunklet. This chunklet can be RAID 1, 4, 5, or 6. This fabulous feature is very useful for me because I can distribute the RAID for any volume. 

The adaptive optimization is the biggest feature in 3PAR. 3PAR is very usable with thin volume because it detects zeros while writing. Every time I tell the hypervisor to make the full provisioning, it makes the volume as simple provisioning in 3PAR, not full provisioning. Other vendors take this volume as thick provisioning because of which the capacity is reached quickly. It doesn't happen in 3PAR because it detects zeros. It only writes the data, and it doesn't write zeros. There are two processors in 3PAR: the ASIC processor and the main processor. The ASIC processor detects zero writing and doesn't write it, which is a big feature in 3PAR.

File Persona can be better. I don't use File Persona because it has many problems with my environment. The antivirus that it has is not compatible with File Persona, and that's a big issue with File Persona.

3PAR is not as good as Dell when making a file in the storage. 3PAR for a block is very good, but when comparing row capacity, I get 14% capacity with 3PAR, but with Dell, I get 60% capacity.

I have been using this solution for three years.

It is very stable because the controller is active-active. It is more secure if you make the best design and make two fabric switches around that.

3PAR is easy to scale up and scale out. It can serve a production workload without any problem. To scale up, you can have another inclusion in 3PAR. To scale out, you can add another controller. You can also have more IOPs in your production. 

We have 5,000 users of this solution. The main workload is in 3PAR now. I will also implement 3PAR on another site.

Their live technical support is available 24 hours a day. When I open a ticket with them, the support calls me within 30 minutes and schedules a meeting to show the issue.

I have PowerMax from Dell. I also have Dorado from Huawei in my environment, which is all-flash.

It is straightforward. I power on 3PAR and take care of the cabling. 3PAR is managed by two components: a services processor and a server component. The server can be a virtual appliance or a physical appliance. 

For upgrading, I take different configurations from the services processor. I update a package on the servers, which makes it easy to upgrade in production. For initial configuration, I do an upgrade offline, and it is easy.

It is lower in price as compared to other vendors, such as Dell. As compared to Huawei, all storage solutions are expensive, including this one.

If you are a new company and you need more capacity, availability, and scalability, you can choose 3PAR. Otherwise, you can choose another storage. When you put 3PAR, you must tell the customers about the usable capacity from the first day, not the row capacity.

I would recommend taking the official course from HP for 3PAR before performing any tasks. This is because 3PAR is not easy to manage in your IT environment. You must know everything about storage and how everything is written in the storage.

I would rate HPE 3PAR StoreServ an eight out of ten.

HPE 3PAR StoreServ is an enterprise storage that is mainly deployed in enterprise scenarios like banking and insurance.

The solution’s stability could be improved.

I rate HPE 3PAR StoreServ an eight out of ten for stability.

Around 20 customers use the solution extensively in their companies.

I rate HPE 3PAR StoreServ a seven out of ten for scalability.

The initial setup is straightforward if it is a single server. If there are multiple servers, the initial setup becomes complex.

A single server takes an hour to be deployed.

The solution has two parts: software and hardware, and you need to buy licenses for some features.

One admin is enough to maintain the solution if it is single storage. A complex environment with a heavy workload will need more people to maintain the solution.

I would recommend HPE 3PAR StoreServ to users based on their use cases.

Overall, I rate HPE 3PAR StoreServ a seven out of ten.

We are using the solution for capacity storage.

The initial setup was very straightforward.

We are planning to change the storage soon. The tool is old. We are looking for enterprise-grade storage with NVMe capabilities, low latency, and higher responses.

We have been using the solution since 2018.

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

The tool’s scalability is good. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten. The product is not for users. It is used by an application. We are using 70% of the total capacity of the tool. We are looking to change the solution.

The support team has good capabilities. The team has people with good experience.

Positive

I rate the ease of setup an eight out of ten. The deployment took three to four months.

We have an on-site team. One or two people are required for implementation and deployment.

We choose the solution because HPE is a long-term partner. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

The solution provides streamlined deployment compared to other products. It has a smooth interface and configuration. Also, it is easier to do pre-requested checks as well.

They should add AI-enabled dashboards to the solution.

I have been using the solution for around three years.

It's a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. We have around 500 customers using it.

The solution's initial setup process is easy. If there are no hardware issues during initial configuration checks, the process takes two and a half hours to complete. It requires two executives for maintenance.

The solution's price is reasonable.

I advise others to test the feasibility of the solution's compatibility checks feature when moving from source to target. Apart from that, it is easy to use. I rate it as a nine.

This solution helps to store data for high-loaded and high-performing systems like business communications systems and telecommunications.

It fetches quick responses in milliseconds which can be within 40-50 milliseconds.

The tool has low storage and low performance. This can be solved by adding more disco to the solution. The product’s pricing is also suited for enterprise businesses rather than smaller ones.I would like to see better performance, UI, and compatibility with other products in future releases.

I have been working with the solution for ten years.

The solution’s tech support is good. You will get a dedicated account manager.

The solution is easy to deploy.

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. You need to properly assess your needs before buying the solution since there are chances of overpaying. The type of configuration that you choose can make the price go higher or lower.

The solution is mostly used for storage.

The user interface is very good. It's impressive. I find it very easy to understand. 

It offers good scalability.

The stability is very reliable. 

There is the possibility of using it in a hybrid way.

It's a very popular product for enterprise storage. It's good for medium to enterprise-level companies. 

It's easy to set up the product.

Technical support has been helpful.

This solution is now at end-of-life.

We have found the solution to be expensive. 

I've been using with the solution for the last six years. 

The solution is very stable and extremely reliable. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

It is scalable and easily expands. 

We have various customers on the solution. They might have thousands of users overall, however, we have four to five clients using the product in general. 

We have been satisfied with the level of technical support we get. They are helpful and responsive. 

We also use Primera and PowerStore.

The initial setup is very straightforward and simple. We also use Primera and PowerStore and the setup is pretty much the same for all of those. 

How long it takes will be determined by the capacity and the formats. It can take anywhere from six or seven hours up to 24.

We might need two to three staff members to handle deployment and maintenance It depends on the SLA and the organizational structure. 

There is a one-time cost once you purchase the solution. There is no perpetual licensing. 

It is an expensive product. 

I'm an end-user and handle storage only. 

Unfortunately, I cannot recommend the product as it is at end-of-life. However, I would rate it ten out of ten.