Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) Reviews

I use the solution in my company mainly for file shares and also in conjunction with objects to provide persistent volume claims with Kubernetes.

In terms of benefits, my company has reduced costs by using free trial storage. Cost reduction, along with simplicity, means only fewer hours are required from manpower in configuration and day-to-day administration.

The most valuable feature of the solution is its simplicity because managing installations sometimes involves defining, undoing, and configuring phases, which are not very easy, but Nutanix makes it straightforward. The tool is very stable. It doesn't come to my mind that I have seen the tool in our company's infrastructure for four years.

According to the keynotes announced by Nutanix the previous day or this morning, the data storage for Kubernetes requires improvement as it has a few shortcomings in the area of operations.

I have been using Nutanix Unified Storage for four years. I am a customer of Nutanix.

It is a stable solution.

Scalability-wise, it is quite a simple and straightforward tool. If you need more storage, you just get a new node, and everything gets done in the background, so you don't have to configure anything much.

The technical support for the solution is the best I have seen in my life. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

In the past, my company tried to use an early version of vSAN, and we found that its performance was not good. After my company performed a PoC phase, we deployed Nutanix Unified Storage.

The product's initial setup phase was simple.

When it comes to the product's deployment phase, my company defines the strategy along with the PoC because we are a manufacturing company that has a large and sparse site with more than 100 factories, which we have to take into account. My company started off with the PoC, and then we expanded.

The solution is deployed on a hybrid model, but the majority of the storage is on an on-premises model. My company uses the cloud services offered by Azure.

Nutanix does provide my company with a technical consultant and a pre-sales engineer to help us deal with the implementation part, after which we perform a small test and then go ahead with everything. In Germany and the United States, my company has worked with a third party that Nutanix recommended we approach in order to deploy, install, and configure.

My company pays money for the tool's licensing fees, but we are saving quite a lot of money by getting to have our own resilient storage device.

In my opinion, the product is fairly priced. I would not be surprised if, in the near future, there is a rise in the prices associated with the tool's licensing models.

My company did not evaluate any other solutions against Nutanix Unified Storage. After Nutanix Unified Storage was presented to our company at a meeting, it would be a good idea to do a PoC before choosing the product.

The throughput or latency of Nutanix Unified Storage for data-intensive workloads, such as AI or data analytics, is not an area my company considers a use case in our infrastructure. In our company, we are exploring and migrating some AI and LLM models while also testing them on an on-premises model in order to have a little more control of the data that we are training and so that we can reduce some costs associated with the public cloud, but in general, it is a medium-term project we have in our operations. The product is also capable of working with big projects.

My company has not faced any use cases where we had to use the product to detect and block ransomware threats.

Implementing the tool has certainly resulted in a reduction in the number of storage nodes due to an increase in storage capacity per node. I don't have the specific number because storage is not my main area, but I say from the top of my head that it could be at 3:1 or 4:1 consolidation. You should not take my word for granted because it is not my main area. The aforementioned area has affected my company's operations and business, especially in terms of simplification, by allowing us to save hours for our providers in the storage area for our administrators while also covering a reduction in incidents.

I don't have any idea about Nutanix Data Lens, but in the future, I am interested in working with the cybersecurity team to have a look at the tool's PoC phase, if possible. I think it could be a good use case for us.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We use Nutanix Unified Storage for file storage and analytics. We use Nutanix as an additional server. Before implementing it, we didn't have insight into our files. We have two Nutanix clusters. One is at our primary location, and we also have an off-site disaster recovery cluster.  My company has about a thousand users on the main site. 

Nutanix's analytics provide better insights into all of our files. 

The most valuable feature is Nutanix's file analytics. I like the ability to manage all my file servers from a single platform. I can see which owners have access to files and track changes. 

The interface could be improved.

We have used Nutanix Unified Storage for about seven months. 

Nutanix is stable.

The scalability is excellent. We can scale up and out. Nutanix can expand to meet any demand. We can increase the VMs, CPU, and memory as needed. 

I rate Nutanix support 10 out of 10. It's excellent. We contact them when we have problems, and they always resolve the issue quickly. 

Positive

Before implementing Nutanix, we used a traditional file server storage solution. We adopted Nutanix because we have more than a million files and we didn't have any insights or analytics. We didn't know who deleted or moved files. We couldn't see who had permission to access a file. Nutanix is integrated with our Active Directory.

The setup is straightforward, and it only took about 15 minutes to deploy Nutanix to our file server. We had help from a reseller and rely on the vendor for maintenance.

We haven't seen an ROI so far, but I believe we'll start to see a return after three years.

Nutanix is cost-effective because we don't need to upgrade our infrastructure. It's cheaper than the alternatives. 

I rate Nutanix Unified Storage 10 out of 10. The file server analytics are great. 

We are using the files component of it. We are using it for our network file servers, as well as for some encrypted storage.

By implementing this solution, we wanted to get away from legacy storage solutions like NetApp. We wanted to find a way to make the most use of our Nutanix environment and the storage that we had purchased for the whole HCI implementation.

There is much less oversight of the storage than we had before. We were able to take storage administration away from our backup administrator. We were able to free him up to do other tasks, and the storage fell under sys admins who were able to keep an eye on it from day to day without having to spend too much time or man-hours. It gave us a lot of time back within our department.

It certainly fits our needs in terms of flexibility. It is easily expandable. As long as you have existing storage in your environment, you can license as much of that as you need for the files. The nice thing about it is that you can split up your licenses between multiple clusters. That is what we did with our production in the DR site. We set up a protection domain on our DR site and split the storage fifty-fifty so that we could have a backup of all of our files on our DR site, which was very easy to set up.

Its resiliency is good in terms of the protection domains and the ability to replicate to another cluster that took care of our BCDR needs. Also, because it is built on the Nutanix ECI platform, it is as resilient as Nutanix is, so a single drive failure or something like that is not going to affect the storage array. With the way files are implemented as VMs, if a host goes down and you have a cluster of three VMs, you know that you will always have one that is up and available. As long as you are not riding right on the edge of your storage resiliency limit, you can lose a node without batting an eye.

It is a good solution if you need to unify your organization’s block, file, and object storage. If you have multiple different storage platforms or you require different formatting of your storage arrays, you can get everything on just one platform. You can manage it all in one location. That makes it much simpler to manage.

It rolls everything into one management platform or one pane of glass. You can either have the storage managed by your sys admins or virtualization admins. You can move away from having a dedicated storage admin, or if you still need a storage admin, you can assign them rights to the storage management very easily. It gives them a simple interface to use. It just makes it much easier to tear down silos and consolidate management tasks. If not the roles, you can at least consolidate the location where that management is done, even if you still require multiple people in the department to manage it.

The integration with Prism Central makes it a lot easier to manage, so we just have a single pane of glass location that we can go to. We do not have a separate admin console or anything that we have to use.

It also replicates a lot of the features that NetApp had in terms of tiered storage and snapshots but at a much cheaper price.

While they are good and they do work, some of the snapshotting and tiering features are not as simple to set up as they could be. However, it has improved from when we first rolled it out about three years ago. In the newest release, they have improved the management of it a lot. I have not configured new storage, so they may have made that process easier and I do not know. The management aspect of it has improved a lot just over the few years that we have had it but the initial configuration of the snapshots and the tiering can still be a little bit difficult.

In terms of the integration of Unified Storage with Prism, the funny thing is that they have now split it out for some reason. We used to be able to manage files within Prism directly, but now they give a link to launch a files console, which then launches as a separate web page. It is not the biggest deal in the world, but it seems odd that they would take something that was integrated and now break it out. I have also questioned them on why they would do that. In the meantime, we still access it from the Prism console. We only need to open a new browser tab, so it is not that it changed that much. It just has a dedicated tab now, but it seems like an odd thing for them to do. I am not quite sure why they did it.

I have been using this solution for three years.

It has been rock solid for as long as we have run it. Other than the hardware issues on the platform that needed to be resolved, there has only been one time when we had any software-related issues, and it did not even affect the storage. It was just an alert for which we had to call their support to resolve. We never had downtime on the storage since we started using it.

We have not scaled it as much, but in terms of the existing hardware that you have and buying the licenses, you can license it up to the maximum of your storage. Literally, you get a file from support and you install it. You can add that storage to your pool immediately. We have set up multiple storage pools, and those are very simple to configure and manage. If we bought more storage and added more nodes, we could keep expanding it. That ties more into the Nutanix platform in terms of their ability to add more nodes, but it is easy to scale.

Everyone is using the files that are on there. There are about 200 people in our entire organization.

Their tech support is good. They answer quickly. They have a good response time. They met our SLAs. They were able to resolve our problems quickly. One time, it was a hardware-related issue, so we had the replacement parts sent out the next day per our support agreement. I have no complaints about support. I would rate them a nine out of ten. I never rate anything a ten because there can always be some improvements, but they are pretty close to a ten.

Positive

We have had a few different storage solutions over the years. We used NetApp, and then we also had a product from Apache called HCP. Hitachi Unified Storage was there, but those were all separate storage arrays that were dedicated for a task, whereas Nutanix is integrated with the entire compute environment.

The Hitachi we had did have a NetApp head, so we were using the same management interface for that. There are certain things that it still does at a more enterprise level. You can get more granularity in NetApp in terms of tweaking things to a very finite degree, but if you are a mid-tier organization or a small business, Nutanix would simplify things. It makes it much easier to run or get a lot of those enterprise-level improvements.

We are using it on-prem. I know they have some integrations with AWS, S3 buckets, and things like that, but we do not use them currently.

I was involved in the deployment for Nutanix but not for NetApp, so I cannot compare it with the NetApp implementation. Nutanix was very simple to set up other than some complexity with the tiering and snapshot configuration. We got a license from them, and we installed it on the application or on Prism and deployed the VMs. Pretty much everything configured itself. We did not have to do a whole lot. Once we put in the parameters we required, it took over and did everything else itself.

It was all done in-house. Two people were involved in it.

In terms of maintenance, we have three admins who have the ability to manage it on any given day, but nobody really needs to look at it all that much unless there is an error or something like that or there is some configuration change. So, we only need one admin working on it on a day-to-day basis.

I do not deal with the financials, but I know we have paid a lot less for Nutanix Unified Storage than we did for NetApp. It has saved man-hours in terms of management. That alone would provide enough return on investment. We can use those man-hours for other projects. It helps with better time management.

It is very good. It is much more competitive than a dedicated storage platform.

To someone who is researching Nutanix Unified Storage as an SDS solution for their organization but is concerned about the cost, I would say that if they are looking for just a storage solution, I do not know if I would look at Nutanix solely for that. However, if you already have an HCI platform or you are looking for an HCI platform, and you already have or are looking for virtualization in your environment, then it is a no-brainer to add Unified Storage to Nutanix as a part of that environment. I went to them solely as a storage vendor.

We looked at some of the other vendors such as Nimble and Pure, as well as getting another NetApp, but the cost ratio of what they wanted for what we needed was just too high. Nutanix definitely came in at a good price point for us.

The security offered with Nutanix Unified Storage is good. We use encryption there. It is very easy to set up. The key management is very simple. We are only using software encryption, and I do not know if Nutanix offers hardware-based encryption on their hardware or not. I know that the other vendors, such as NetApp and Pure, do have those options, but hardware encryption is much more expensive. Even if Nutanix offers it, I am sure it would be a lot more expensive than the software. Software encryption is often as difficult to set up as hardware encryption, but Nutanix makes that very simple.

I believe they provide one terabyte of Unified Storage free with any license. I would advise testing out your free terabytes in your environment, and if you like it, you can go for it. That is what we did. We evaluated it first using the terabyte of space that we got for free. Once we added our licenses, we just kept going with what we were testing and expanded out the storage to max out our license. So, try it out for yourself. You already have access to it if you have got Nutanix.

In terms of managing your unstructured data, such as audio and video, Nutanix Unified Storage does have some features to organize by file types. We do have one folder with MP3 and video files, which is separate from everything else, but because of the way we organize it, the Nutanix part of it did not come into play too much.

I would rate Nutanix Unified Storage a nine out of ten. It has been pretty much as perfect as we can ask for.

We mainly got onto Nutanix Files to replace our existing corporate file system. We had plans to migrate almost 100 terabytes of storage, but due to some optimization, we migrated 60 terabytes and ditched the rest because it was useless data. Luckily, we figured out that we do not need that data anymore. That is our main case, and we have set up five separate instances of Nutanix Files so far.

Management-wise, it has made work a lot easier. It is all in one place physically. It is much better now.

There is ease of management. We only have one place to go, and we can find all the information and all the data that we need. It also improved the visibility of the actual usage of our resources. We can see how many people are accessing files at all times. That was one of the main drivers through which we were able to see that our users were not using some of the data at all. We were able to archive that data. If we had Nutanix Analytics and Files Analytics in place, we would have gone a step further and automated the archival of cold data. At this time, we do not have that much to manage, but in the future, we will implement that.

It is hard to assess Nutanix Unified Storage for detecting and blocking ransomware threats because I never had a chance to see it in action. It is enabled everywhere. Maybe we were just lucky. We have not had any ransomware incidents since implementing Nutanix Files, but seeing how the policy is set up, I expect it to react very fast. Hopefully, I will never have to verify the accuracy of this claim.

To protect unstructured data in our organization, we use HYCU backups. They are great partners of Nutanix. HYCU has been awesome and flawless so far. These tools are not critically vital, but they do add to the mix. There is plenty of useful information I can get from those tools. I am glad they are there.

It is very easy to manage. I am focusing mostly on Nutanix Files because of our use case. I did not have a chance to look at Objects, for instance. We will start looking at Volumes at some point this year. With regards to Files, it is very intuitive. It is easy to manage, and it makes it much easier for us to manage the corporate system. Everything is consolidated in one place rather than having to jump all over Europe, which is how spread it was before. That is a big win for us.

It is hard to say what can be better because we have been using Nutanix products for 11 years. We have been with Nutanix for a long time, and it is difficult to find flaws. The moment we find something that is not up to our expectations, we raise a request for a new feature or engage with support. We usually get an answer fairly quickly. There is not much we are missing. When it comes to Nutanix Files, one thing that would be great is a slightly easier way of managing snapshots and restore points, especially when a third party is involved. We have a third party for backups. They look after the data that we are managing. At times, it is difficult to discern which recovery point has been generated. In a new iteration, they can perhaps amend that piece of management. It is a tiny detail. It already works, but if they can implement a more straightforward way of managing those recovery points, it will be a good thing.

I have been using Nutanix Unified Storage for about two years now.

It is very stable. I have not had any issues. Even when we roll updates, nobody notices what is happening in the background, so it is very reliable.

We have not had the need or the requirements to scale. It seems that it would be fairly straightforward. It will be as easy. It will be a one-click to deploy a new node or add a new node to an instance or anything like that.

We have a good relationship with our Nutanix account manager. Whenever we have a technical question, we drop it to them. If we are unsure of what to do, we reach out to tech support. They usually get back to us super fast.

Their customer support is very good. They are very knowledgeable. I do not think there has ever been an issue that they could not resolve. If that happens, it is because it may be a new bug. If we find something that nobody else found before, they reach out and tell us that it is something that is going to be fixed in the next three days. They give us a workaround. If they are not able to fix it immediately, they let us know that it is in their roadmap. They would do it in one of the next releases or add it to the list of features that they plan to add because nobody has asked before. In that sense, it is awesome.

I would rate them a ten out of ten.

Positive

We did not have anything similar. It was a custom-built or internally-built solution based on the existing features of Nutanix. We just managed it manually.

In terms of implementation, it was as easy as you could imagine. Even migrating the data was very straightforward. It took us plenty of time because of the amount of data that we had to move. Other than that, it was fine.

It was supposed to replace a different solution. It was just a matter of deploying the instance that I was looking for and then slowly migrating the data over. I did not encounter any major issues there.

I am saving a lot of man-hours in managing or figuring out issues or finding solutions for the problems that arise. In the past, I would have had to check everything in the chain to figure out what was wrong. It is a lot easier, especially with regard to permissions on a file system. The solution we had in place before was a pain in the neck.

It is above my role. I am not the one who makes the calls, but it seems to me that it was very competitive. Other solutions would have required dedicated hardware, so an additional CapEx has to be put in place. In that sense, it was definitely a more competitive option to go with Nutanix Files. We did not get storage for every node just for the sake of adding files, but it was a wider solution for that.

We had other options. We do have different storage devices in place. We decided to centralize on Nutanix because we have been working with them for quite a long time, and we have been very happy with their products. It seemed like a fairly straightforward decision, but then, of course, we tested it. It proved to be a much more efficient way of dealing with what we had in place.

We do not have any data-intensive workloads. Our use case is mainly for the corporate file system. When I start using volumes, I expect the same performance as standard VMs. I will be happy to see a very high performance like everything else so far.

Implementing Nutanix Unified Storage has not resulted in a reduction in the number of storage nodes due to increased storage capacity per node. We implemented Nutanix after purchasing storage-heavy nodes.

We are not using Nutanix Data Lens. We have Files Analytics. I was looking into Data Lens. Unfortunately, it did not fall within the budget for this year. Perhaps next year, we will be able to give it a go.

I would rate Nutanix Unified Storage a nine out of ten. It is not yet perfect. They are going to implement a more consolidated interface. There are basically three products that fall under the storage piece. They are not in the same pane of glass, but it is a very solid product, so I can give it a nine. It meets my needs and resolves all my problems so far. I am sure that when we start implementing volumes, it will prove to be a good solution for that. It is in our roadmap to start using volumes to solve a couple of issues that we have at the moment. I am already confident that it will do so.

We use Nutanix Unified Storage for object and file storage.

We wanted to improve the availability of our storage solution by implementing Nutanix Unified Storage.

Nutanix Unified Storage is a flexible solution that is efficient.

Nutanix Unified Storage has enabled our organization to consolidate our storage needs, eliminating the need for multiple storage solutions.

Nutanix Unified Storage helps us with file and object storage on the same platform.

We are able to easily manage Nutanix Unified Storage from any location.

Nutanix Unified Storage effectively eliminates the silos in our storage and provides centralized access to all our locations across the country from a single location.

Nutanix Unified Storage integrates well with other Nutanix solutions.

The most valuable features of Nutanix Unified Storage are the unified dashboard and the ease of administration.

The integration could be improved by addressing the outstanding tasks that need to be completed before implementation can begin.

The documentation on the support site needs to be improved.

I have been using Nutanix Unified Storage for one year.

I would rate the stability of Nutanix Unified Storage ten out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of Nutanix Unified Storage ten out of ten.

The technical support is quick.

Positive

We previously used Azure NetApp Files.

The initial deployment was intricate due to the comprehensive set of requirements that needed to be fulfilled prior to implementation. It took four weeks and five individuals to complete the deployment.

Nutanix Unified Storage was cheaper than other solutions we evaluated.

I would rate Nutanix Unified Storage nine out of ten.

We have 1,000 users in our organization. Nutanix Unified Storage is currently deployed for a small group of people, but it will be deployed across the organization soon.

Nutanix Unified Storage requires some maintenance.

I recommend Nutanix Unified Storage.

Nutanix Unified Storage is our primary storage solution, and I primarily use its volumes to provide additional disk space for machines. These volumes are shared between vision machines and technical servers. However, for some projects, this solution was discontinued. I currently have all of my additional systems running on bare-metal machines, which fully utilize the available hardware and provide ample storage capacity. To accommodate this, I've repurposed the volumes to share them over the network and connect them to the bare-metal hosts and storage systems. This approach has proven to be highly effective for multiple companies I've worked with.

Another use case for Nutanix Unified Storage is sharing storage through the SMB and NFS protocols. This has been particularly beneficial in my work, as it allows both Windows and Linux machines to access shared files seamlessly. This is a valuable feature for large-scale projects.

Nutanix Unified Storage also offers object storage, which I have used in large-scale environments. However, I have not been entirely satisfied with the available options. Therefore, I have opted to use AWS object storage instead. Currently, I do not utilize Nutanix object storage internally due to ongoing limitations. A year ago, I attempted to integrate object storage into my workflows, but it fell short of my requirements. Consequently, I reverted to the AWS system. Overall, I am pleased with the file storage and volume options provided by Nutanix Unified Storage, as they have significantly enhanced my productivity in various tasks and projects.

I previously worked at a hospital where I utilized Nutanix Unified Storage to facilitate data sharing and capture from the laboratory. I developed a shared design using Nutanix Unified Storage over the network infrastructure. This design enabled seamless data transfer whenever a machine-generated a test result. Upon receiving a blood sample, the machine, connected to a printer, would automatically print the blood test results and the blood type. Additionally, a copy of these results was generated and shared via the Nutanix Unified Storage platform. Using the 'fixable to call' function, I mounted the shared file to the machine, enabling the automatic printing of one hard copy and the simultaneous sharing of a soft copy. This allowed lab technicians or lab doctors to conveniently send the test results to the attending physician at the clinic or directly to the patient.

Nutanix Unified Storage has proven to be flexible to meet our needs.

Unified Storage is good at unifying our organization's block files.

Implementing Unified Storage has streamlined the way I manage and execute tasks across our multiple branches. Unified Storage has enabled me to consolidate data, effortlessly mount it to machines, and share files and folders with colleagues in different locations.

Unified Storage's ability to remove silos is good.

The integrations between Unified Storage, Kubernetes Engine, and the database service are complete. We have not encountered any incompatibility issues.

The Nutanix block files are the most valuable feature.

Unified Storage failed to fulfill our object storage requirements.

The virtual volume has limitations. If I create more than one disk, it encounters limitations. When I mount the volume group to the physical machine, it updates the same disk or partition on the machine, which is not desirable. I was working on a media project that required ten gigabytes of data. I created a volume group of that size, but due to the limitations of the virtual disk, which can be up to 64 terabytes, I had to create a mini disk. Once I mount the disk to the physical machine, it creates a mini virtual disk or mini partition, not just a single partition.

I have been using Nutanix Unified Storage for five years.

Nutanix Unified Storage is stable.

The technical support is one of the best support services we have used.

Positive

I previously used VMware in another organization.

The initial deployment is straightforward and I can do it myself.

I would rate Nutanix Unified Storage ten out of ten.

The security of Unified Storage is comparable to that of other SDS solutions, and we have not encountered any security concerns.

Our positive experience with Unified Storage has prompted us to further invest in Nutanix products to establish our private cloud with on-premises data centers.

I would recommend Nutanix Unified Storage for anyone researching enterprise data storage solutions.

Everybody calls it three-tier, but we came from traditional Big Iron, so app hosting was on clustered Unix or Linux systems. It was nothing to have SAN, NAS, iSCSI, and all kinds of disparate storage in the environment. When we did a run-off of HCI products, we did VxRail, HyperFlex, and Nutanix. It was only a benefit to realize that there was a storage element that we did not account for. 

I was trying to beat out having to have all these products to do VMware. In the long run, there was this benefit where we started to think about what other things we could do now that we had this storage. There were files, objects, or whatever you wanted to turn on, so to me, it was a huge win for no money. It was just available. You just took advantage of it when you needed to.

We scaled out the second or third cluster in anticipation of removing EMC CLARiiON products at the time, which then became Dell EMC CLARiiON products. We scaled out a ten-node cluster. It had 300 or 400 terabytes in it, so we were able to migrate from traditional SAN-based infrastructure. I got rid of the SAN-based infrastructure. I got rid of the refrigerator full of disks and power cooling. We did not have only storage; we could also run compute on it, and everything runs local. We did some storage-centric nodes for a while. They were fun, but they were just large disk arrays that presented themselves inside the cluster. I figured that it was easier to have FAT nodes with enough storage in them to take advantage of both compute and memory versus having any sort of storage-centric nodes, but you could not run any workloads on them. It was a nice Flex environment where you could move stuff into a cluster because it has a ton of storage, but when you tried to uplift it or were close to it, you discovered that some of these nodes do have limitations. In the long run, it was better to have all the compute nodes with memory storage and an all-in-one compute platform for our use cases. Now that disks are fast and everything like that, it does not hurt in the long run. There is no downside.

In the long run, there was money savings. In simple terms, you had to continue either to pay maintenance for the SAN infrastructure and storage environment and then present that to physical nodes that just get shared out when all of that is rolled into one bottle of wine. Imagine taking two-thirds of your infrastructure away with no impact. It is a no-brainer that you are going to save a ton of money. In the long run, you did not have to convince your customer. It would probably be termed as reinvesting into this product. Do not just buy one and consider it done. Start to do the evolution—no more stack delivery, which is also a benefit. You do not have to forklift anything in. Just buy a few nodes every year. It is easy. It is a no-brainer. It saves tons of money.

When it comes to latency or throughput improvements, most of our infrastructure runs on what you would consider just traditional factors. If we had a database or if people had hosted apps, it all ran in the local environment. We rarely separated the infrastructure where we had a database server living somewhere in the environment, and then we had the front-end web servers living somewhere else. A lot of times, they were just combined, but with the all-flash capabilities that Nutanix has in Unified Storage, if you want to move workloads in or tier it, there are no issues. Nutanix has solved all of the problems. I never experienced any issues. I never heard any complaints. No one ever came to me. We have moved things to it. It is hard to get compliments when you are the cloud for your customer, but very frequently, you get asked if something changed. If you ask them why they're asking, they say. "It is a little faster." When it works a little faster, I pat myself on the back. We have been using it significantly, and we never ran into any problems.

In terms of a reduction in the number of storage nodes due to increased storage capacity per node, by being able to be clustered in the same process, we get some benefits from it as compared to traditional tiering. However, at least in my world, as soon as you make some savings, someone will take advantage of it. There might have been some savings, but I would not know. As soon as there is some space to be had, somebody needs space. The customers like it because any benefits that I somehow garner out of the infrastructure, or as I add, they win. If they give me money and I buy something, they instantly see a benefit. They never argue when I say that it is the time to buy. Nutranix MAKES it easier. It is not me. I just do the implementation.

For somebody like me who grew up building what others call three-tier and I call traditional architecture, the valuable thing is that you can now buy it. You can have new deployments and infrastructure up and running with very little infrastructure behind it. If you have networking and you buy the cluster, you are done. The flexibility it provides with growth is a no-brainer. It could be node-based or cluster-based. We have multiple clusters. We DR to different sites. We have now bought specific clusters for high-end compute for data analytics and data lakes. There is nothing that it cannot do, and it does everything better than ITS COMPETITORS. 

A pet peeve of mine is the integration with the hardware platforms. Each one of them presents its own use case. They have let Cisco on stage and they are bragging about it. Generally, when you buy UCS products, they want you to have FIs. FIs are nothing more than just fancy and smarter switches with a GUI. Now that they are partners with each other, you get LCM. LCM did not exist for UCS before. HPE is similar, but the integration points could be made better. 

At the surface level, they have done the handshake, and all those are wins. We are able to pick the platform of our choice and deploy it with the confidence that Nutanix is going to back it, but after having used almost all of the products that they have, except for Lenovo and Dell, I would still go with Supermicro. I would still go with the x nodes all day long. The flexibility is there. We only go to one vendor when something breaks. It just makes life easier. There is no short side to it. It is not deficient in some way based on the other ones. They are all equal, and there is more flexibility at a different price point. I don't integrate with extra partners and have to deal with whatever they have. In the long run, it would be just the devil in the details when it comes to hardware.

It was the second cluster we wanted. We started using it in 2017 or 2018.

The customer service from my partner and from Nutanix directly is unrivaled. At Nutanix NEXT 2024, somebody was on stage saying that he treats Nutanix as a part of his business, and that is probably the most apt way of phrasing it. I implement it. I see it as an extension of my knowledge or support, so I get to call people and people show up. I do not call hotlines and put in tickets. It is like having two extra guys on your staff that you do not pay for. 

I would rate them a ten out of ten. If possible, I would even rate them an eleven. There is not one bad instance that I can think of. 

Positive

We used other products, but it would have been ad hoc.

It is all on-prem. Its initial deployment was pretty straightforward. We had deployed a few clusters before, so it was not a big deal to get the cluster up, but it was interesting to learn the lessons. You think you have all the storage and you can outsmart the unified storage environment by creating a FAT VM, and then I will give it a bunch of storage space. What you realize is that you do not get the benefits of unified storage without using unified storage. Just because you have storage does not mean that it works the way it is supposed to. You learn those lessons. You think that you can outsmart these guys and realize that you cannot. In the long run, it was easy. Once the cluster was up and running, it was just making sure our licenses and other factors were in place.

It is very intuitive. There is a wizard guide for creating shares, objects, etc. It is pretty easy.

The biggest return on investment is that it frees up revenue and the data center space cost of dealing with power, cooling, etc because now I can just put more Nutanix in there when needed. It never outgrows itself. As these nodes get denser and smarter, racks stay the same. When I scale out, I never need ten more racks of equipment. I can just fill out some older nodes, and they are now denser, so I stay in the same footprint. That to me is the biggest benefit.

We are not using Nutanix Data Lens. It is probably something I should do.

We are not using much to protect unstructured data in our organization. Most of the infrastructure data that we get is in huge datasets. We store that on larger storage platforms that are designed specifically to hold petabytes of data and then it is read into Nutanix clusters for analytic purposes. I do not have to deal with it. I am pulling from somebody else who hosts huge data frames.

I would rate Nutanix Unified Storage a ten out of ten.

We use it for daily operations, primarily to store our enterprise data.

In the beginning, when we first started using Nutanix, we wanted a single solution that could handle both file and block-level data. So it's a single platform, and we also needed inbuilt ransomware protection.

So, we found that Nutanix was the best solution for that. We also researched the deployment process and found it to be quite easy. 

Additionally, we had a POC with them and saw that the interface is user-friendly, making it possible to use it without extensive training.

Nutanix successfully adapts to difficult or challenging life experiences

When it comes to resiliency, Nutanix has built-in redundancy. We can create snapshots with detection, de-duplication, and completion of all the data. So, it's very easy to have replications of free data. If any attacks happen, we still have the data with us.

We are able to store a large amount of data without needing multiple solutions. Nutanix can be scaled for storage and computing independently, which makes us more cost-efficient.

It also simplifies data management operations, giving the speed and flexibility to build more modern applications in on-prem, cloud, and edge environments.

It also protects unstructured data from ransomware and other cyberattacks.

Unified Storage has a remote feature that allows you to manage data from various geographical locations.

Our sales representative can direct us to the appropriate resource, whether it's a PSC, an SE with the system, or someone else who can help. Additionally, if we create a ticket directly with their support team, they have very good product knowledge and are really helpful.

If we are stuck a problem – not necessarily a bug, but just need help navigating something – do we contact our sales representative first, and they can route us to the right resource.

If bugs occur, they work on them and release fixes as early as possible.

First of all, we like the user interface, which is quite easy. And it helps our day-to-day operations very easily; we can do it very easily. 

And afterward, the pre-sales guys are very supportive whenever you get stuck in anything. They will help you on that day. I really have good hands-on experience with the product, and also the support team is very strong.

The flexibility is great. We can easily integrate it with other products as well. Like, it is designed to scale up and scale out easily, allowing the organization to store as much capacity as they need.

We can easily store and manage unstructured data, such as audio and video, in Unified Storage without any extra work.

From a management side, the one thing I would prefer is if it were a bit less expensive for smaller enterprises. It's a bit costly. 

If they provided flexible modules where you could pick and choose features, and only pay for what you use, that would be an improvement.

I've been using it for about two and a half years.

We've observed some occasional lagging when transferring large amounts of data – many GBs at once. This could be due to network factors or something else, but it's not severe. 

For smaller datasets, the transfer happens in real time with no lag.

Nutanix has a good team of people on the technical support side. Usually, when we log a ticket, a support engineer promptly assists us through a remote session or email. 

One thing I want to highlight is that they have excellent product documentation available on their portals, written in simple, easy-to-understand language.

Positive

We used a storage solution from Dell. My company has a policy that requires us to change our security products every five years. 

So, we were looking for a stable and superior product, and after thorough research on the community, we found that Nutanix offered the best solution with its single-platform approach.

We also use the Nutanix Hypervisor (AHV). However, we haven't done the integration because we keep our storage separate.

We had a POC first. During the POC, we worked closely with the sales team alongside the engineers, and it was pretty easy to deploy. 

Once we decided to purchase, the full deployment only took about one or two months. If all prerequisites are ready, it can even be done in under 20 days.

We use the cloud deployment model.

On the Nutanix team, we probably needed around two people. We also had support from our network and security teams, in addition to someone managing the Nutanix deployment itself.

Every product needs maintenance, but with Nutanix, it's mostly about software upgrades. They provide an excellent user interface, and with every release, they resolve issues from previous versions.

It is worth the price. Your investment will be in safe hands. 

The pricing is a bit too high. I would like more flexibility. 

We considered Commvault, but our management and overall team felt that Nutanix was a better solution.

On a scale of ten, I'd give Dell an eight out of ten for security features. And Nutanix a nine out of ten rating.

I'd definitely say go for it. It's a great product. My main advice is to negotiate the pricing with the vendor. Beyond that, it integrates well with your current network environment and should work without needing major changes or disrupting your existing setup.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.  

It is a great solution for small enterprises looking for storage options. While it is a bit expensive, the value provided by Nutanix justifies the investment. Your investment will be in safe hands.