IBM FlashSystem Reviews

It was quite easy to migrate from EMC storage because everything is virtualized. Easy Tier is quite nice to use.

We're a public sector organization. One of the benefits was that it was the lowest bid for us. It basically came down to cost.

I had wish lists, but I found out that they have already been completed.

At our current code level, when I extend any volume that is using Metro Mirror, I have to remove the Metro Mirror relationship. Once the Metro Mirror relationship is removed, I can extend the volumes and I have to re-create the Metro Mirror relationship and sync the entire volume.

For example, if I have a 1TB volume and I want to extend to 1.5TB instead of 0.5TB being replicated using Metro Mirror, 1.5TB has to be replicated.

The next version will include an update for this problem.

Stability has been good. We haven't had any issues, besides those that were our own fault when we pushed the work loads too high.

Scalability is quite easy. We've been expanding pretty much every year.

We have always used support. We have a main contact person, and he's a really good technical resource.

We don't really have a choice of vendors because we are public sector. To me, it's history. Our trusted partner is Horizon, and they're great people to work with. When I work with someone else, I'm not sure if they can deliver what I want. But Horizon goes the whole nine yards.

I was not initially involved in the setup. I was tasked with other projects at the time.

If cost is not a factor, I would definitely say IBM is good. Their business partners are good. For instance, they will try to get you vouchers to get training. With EMC, we never really got any training. It was all a cost for us in the public sector. We have to evaluate what training we can take, because I have a jack-of-all-trades type of role.

Our primary use case for the solution is virtualization.

The most valuable feature of the solution is compression.

The marketing could be improved. Additionally, awareness in the marketplace could be improved.

We have been using the solution since it was introduced and currently use the latest version.

The solution is stable. I rate it an eight out of ten.

The solution is scalable, and approximately 100 clients are utilizing it. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support, but it sometimes takes a while to resolve an issue. I rate them an eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward and took three days. I rate it an eight out of ten.

We implemented it with a vendor team and in-house staff.

I rate the pricing an eight out of ten.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. The solution is good, but its marketing awareness can be improved.

We use it for data reduction technology. We are using this solution on-premises, and we are also providing services to customers.

I like most of the features. Its speed, performance, and availability are valuable. We are implementing the data reduction technology the most.

Their technical support needs improvement in terms of reachability for the clients and response times. They should be more responsive and have more online platforms for support. 

They should make more technical information available online. There could be some kind of documentation community.

I have been using this solution for three or four years.

It is stable.

We are only using one box or enclosure for now. We don't have experience with scaling the systems. Our companies here don't need big systems for now.

Their technical support needs improvement.

The initial setup is very simple.

Its price is very good.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate IBM FlashSystem an eight out of ten.

On-premises

In a bank.

- Migration efforts - Site recovery using SRM - Highly scalable while backend storage can be of many vendors - Ideal solution if you have a mixed intel/power infrastructure Ease of use

• Migration effort
• Site recovery plan.

- CLI though intuitive, no other API available - Lacks scheduling or a cron - Has no built in short term performance graphs - IBM TPC overexceeds the montoring needs, had to fall back on Stor2RRd - Support response times are bad -

Node conditions in specific workload conditions might trigger a node reset.

- Multivendor support for backend storage - Clustering and adding in another IO--group - supports many shelves, large disks, several clusters

- Bad response times

IBM SVC -> HP 3PAR -> Storwize v7000f

- Easy and straighforward

- selfserviced

Biggest return is the easy migration/upgrade path as well as the scalability options - IBM added in compression and deduplication in its portfolio, as well as Garbage collection and space reclamation.

- setup cost is cheap as you can do it yourself - IBM SVC licensing on non IBM back-end storage used to cost a lot in terms of licenses per shelf or even per TB. The equipment on itself is relatively cheap. Watch out for license costs !

- HPE 3PAR StoreServe - EMC Unity

The benefit to our organization is primarily the capacity savings. It compresses the data so we can see something like a four to one compression.

The most valuable features are, of course, the virtualization of the storage, the performance, and the compression.

With regards to the IBM V7000 storage system, where we have multiple tiers of storage, a heat map would show I/O distribution across the tiers of storage. I'd like to see some type of heat map reporting on the management console. It would be nice to see something like that. It may already be in the new release, but I'm not sure. The current release may have that already.

We had no major issues with stability. It's pretty stable.

We actually upgraded it, adding expansion shelves. It was fairly simple.

I can't remember what I called the technical support for. Generally, I think their support gets the job done. It's sufficient. We have a premium support account with IBM, so we have a dedicated support person to help us get it through.

I was involved in the initial setup, but we had a business partner that did the actual physical connections. I helped with some of the configurations. It was pretty straightforward.

Our shop historically had been an EMC shop. We had the IBM storage put in just a couple of years ago. I believe management brought it in based on price, in order to get price competition between the vendors. We were primarily looking at considerations of cost, reliability, and customer service.

I would just tell them to give it a try. Benchmark it and compare it with the other vendors. Talk to some customers about their experiences.

It is software defined.

It's flexible. You don't need to buy big hardware solutions that are vendor-bound. It's one of the first, fully software-defined solutions on the market available. It's actually built in-house, so it's very robust, tested, and it works right.

I would like it to be more scalable.

It's very stable.

It's not extremely scalable as of today. There are certain limits of the hardware that it runs on. Essentially, it does provide for medium to large enterprises in a single appliance solution.

I have used support and it needs improvement. I don't like the way that levels of support are organized. Level-1 never provides any support anymore. It just relays communication to the actual Level-2 support. Level-1 support barely understands the problem at first.

It's been well established in the market for probably over 10 or 11 years now. This was one of the first solutions available.

The setup was straightforward.

We are open to competitive market solutions, but a single vendor solution is something that definitely makes sense for our enterprise.

When looking for a vendor, support is important, as well as market position.

We use IBM FlashSystem with our VMware environment, however, there are times when we need to connect centers or just servers.

Data deduplication is one of the most valuable features of this solution. 

The Fibre Channel connection is excellent, as well as the extremely fast performance.

There should be more licenses included in the standard price.

Additional licenses might be added for the fundamental licenses, such as those for copying and flash copies.

I have been dealing with IBM FlashSystem since it has become available.

I am a reseller. We sell 5,025,5,100, and 5,200, versions.

IBM FlashSystem is quite stable. I would rate the stability a ten out of ten.

IBM FlashSystem is scalable.

There isn't a lot of software linked to that IBM software.

It is very easy to scale.

It depends on the client's needs because there are small-sized companies with 50 customers to begin with and such. And it is occasionally used. I would say 220 or more are there for the users.

External support is sufficient to keep this solution functional.

The technical assistance is excellent, which is why I recommend this solution to my clients.

 I would rate the technical support a five out of five.

Positive

We have just purchased Lenovo FlashSystem this week for our clients.

I worked with Storage-Tech, IBM Sharks, EMC Clariion, and other similar products.

The initial setup is simple.

Network with your coding laptop or something similar then set up the network. It's not complicated, it's quite easy.

If five is a good price and one is a high price, I would rate the price a two or three out of five.

I was looking into the differences between Lenovo and I went to some other sites to check. I looked at YouTube, but there isn't much but there is something.

After the research, in my opinion, IBM FlashSystem is better than Lenovo.

I would rate IBM FlashSystem an eight out of ten.

On-premises

I am using the private deployment model. 

The ability to create LUNs and modify them is the most valuable feature of this solution. It has a very good storage system. 

Enterprise data storage needs improvement. They should create a feature for data and file storage. 

I have been using IBM Storwize for two years.

It is stable. 

It has good scalability abilities. 

They have good technical support. IBM has offices in Ukraine that have knowledgable engineers. They speak Ukrainian. 

The initial setup was easy, understandable, and straightforward. It's a very good product. 

The price is fair. 

I would rate it a nine out of ten. Engineers think that Dell EMC has better storage than Storwize.