NetApp FAS Series Reviews

The most valuable feature for us is the ability to perform LIF migrations with clustered Data ONTAP.

It made the workload we needed possible because of its flash cache.

It would be nice to be able to mix flash cache with other technologies.

We've been using it for one month.

It's very stable.

It scales for the kind of customers that we have.

We'd like to get more access to level-two engineers. Sometimes its been a difficult time explaining the problem to level-one people. This process is a little bit time consuming.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We did implemented it ourselves.

When we deployed flash cache, there was no alternative for it. It was the only available cacheing solution.

Flash cache is a great product. If it matches with the workloads, you should consider it.

• Uptime
• Performance
• High Availability
• Disaster Recovery
• NetApp as a company is doing well

• We can failover when needed.
• In my organization, a law firm, brand recognition is important, and NetApp provides that.
• It gives us continuous uptime.

Sometimes there are bugs with firmware upgrades.

Not with deployment, but, again, there are sometimes bugs when we perform upgrades.

It just works, and when some drives go into failure status, it’s just a prediction of drive failure, letting us know when to get the drives replaced.

It scales pretty well, and the limit is how much you want to spend on blades, shelves, controllers, etc.

It's pretty good, they're very knowledgable. With other vendors who outsource support, there's difficulty getting knowledgable first-tier support, but with NetApp, that’s different.

We had help in the installation, which made it straightforward. It was also complex because lots of planning was involved.

It loses points in upgrades from one version to another is not as smooth as it should be. Also, understand your requirements and see how it fits in.

We use this solution as general unified SAN storage for different workloads.

This solution provides us with easy management and great vendor support.

The most valuable feature is that this acts as unified storage, both SAN and NAS, for all types of workloads.

Dedicated storage efficiency accelerators could improve the overall performance of the system.

• High Availability
• Reliability

• Reliability
• Performance level
• Great history with it, and over the last two and a half years, it's been etter than others

Depending on the use case, it needs a service catalogue you can walk through without having to use SE.

It's been great, and there's been no issues.

With cDOT, it's very easy to scale out, and that's the reason we went with it in the first place.

It's been great, and any issues have been taken care of right away.

It was very straightforward and easy.

Pick your partner wisely, as they have a lot in your success. Go with someone with a history in FAS. Also, go with vendor that buys reference architecture and follows the methodology.

I use NetApp FAS Series to store files and for VSI and VDI.

The solution is easy to use.

NetApp FAS Series could improve by being more secure.

I have been using NetApp FAS Series for many years.

I have found NetApp FAS Series to be stable.

The solution is scalable.

We have approximately 30 people in my organization using this solution.

The technical support was satisfactory.

The installation can be difficult but it depends on who is installing it.

We use a technical team to do the implementation.

NetApp FAS Series could be less expensive.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate NetApp FAS Series a nine out of ten.

The primary use case is for standard CIFS/SMB file storage for Windows Clients in an ADS environment.

Samba on Solaris was a nightmare. Our situation improved with no Windows file servers, but at about 30 million files/folders, snapshot and backup functionality started to make trouble.

• Snapshots for user self-service restore
• Ability to use mirroring and SnapVault have made backup no longer necessary.

• The WAFL is slow.
• The adoption of flash by NetApp has also been lagging behind the trendsetters, like TMS, Nimble, and others.

We use it for storage and it has performed fine, but now we need to upgrade.

We like its resilience. It's reliable storage.

I would like to see less latency and higher IOPS.

Stability is very good.

I'm satisfied with the scalability.

We did our research and, at the time, NetApp was what we chose. Our most important criterion when selecting a vendor is reliability. The price is, obviously, always an issue but reliability and the quality of the product are most important.

The initial setup was very, very straightforward.

If you need reliability, definitely go for NetApp.

I rate it at seven out of 10 because it has been very reliable but not very good when it comes to IOPS and latency.

• Fast Snapshots
• Thin provisioning
• Simple management

With scalability, we feel the system is limited. 

From 2013 until now; four years.

No issues. The system is rather stable.

Yes, we have encountered issues. The system is limited by the number of enclosures.

The tech support is very good. We use a third party support.

Previously, we used VNX5300 NAS. We found this one better suited to our needs.

Initial setup was straightforward, not very complicated.

We used a third-party for setup.

No, we did not. We were given direction from the University.

I would recommend it to anyone. It is good for some of the NAS and VMware implementations.