Pure Storage FlashArray Reviews

The primary use case is for on-premise storage.

I have personally used this solution for 15 years, and now, four years with my current company.

It's a product that we hardly ever call tech support for, because it just works. The performance and ease of use are all there, which is what we were looking for. We don't want to always have to call into tech support for something. It's one of those products where you forget about it because it just works.

It is an easy to use product for all of my team members.

Granular growth of the storage needs improvement. Right now, if I wanted to add storage, I have to buy a whole shelf. It would be nice to just buy a few drives.

I would like to see data tiering to AWS.

We put a lot of stress on it, and it is very stable. We have only had one tech support call in the last four years for a hard drive replacement.

The scalability works. We are using between 30TB to 50TB.

I would evaluate the technical support as good, I have a team who calls in for support, if there an issue. They have not complained to me about any problems.

The configuration was very easy.

The cost of the storage needs improvement.

We also evaluated Dell EMC and locally attached storage. We chose Pure Storage because it had the best performance of all the products that we tested. Also, its virtualization performance is extremely fast, and it has good ease of use.

Definitely test the performance, compression, and deduplication. You are going to get more out of the storage than what you anticipated.

We are a Cohesity customer. We have use cases where we integrated Pure Storage with Cohesity.

We are using Pure Storage as an all-flash product. It is a niche product, and only used for high performance data.

With Dell EMC, they have all-flash arrays, but they also have other types of storage. Our client use the solution for DevOps and their high speed databases. 

It reduces space and the the polar consumption. It also accelerates the applications.

The VME feature is interesting. Additionally, I like the way they went to market with their All Green Program.

The connectivity needs improvement. You do not have the possibility to have a file and block connectivity at the same time on the same machine. It has limited ability to do so.

The scalability is good. 

I have 19 years experience with Dell EMC products, and almost two years of experience with Pure Storage. The main difference between Dell EMC All Flash and Pure Storage FlashArray is that the Dell EMC product is building on a traditional architecture. You have more functionalities and more connecting possibilities with Dell EMC at this moment. Of course, Pure Storage FlashArray is on a quick road to closing the gap.

It is easy to install. It took us only a half an hour to deploy. If you have a complex environment with a lot of servers, it may take a bit more. I would say the average setup time is one to two hours. 

It is key for a customer to consider the ROI of the product. One has to consider the price, and the architecture of the product. 

The pricing of Pure Storage is all-inclusive. It is very fair, and very easy. In comparison, Dell EMC has licensing that needs to be added if you wan to work in a complex environment or in specific functionalities. 

When comparing Pure Storage and Dell EMC, I think that Dell EMC has to improve its real performance. Also, Pure Storage is a lot easier to install than the Dell EMC product. 

It's really fast.

So long as it's powered, it is stable. We had someone drop the power to our Pure Storage array once, then everything went down. However, that wasn't Pure Storage's fault. It was just what happened.

The support has been good.

We moved off of VMAX storage. It wasn't keeping up with the workloads that we had. Pure has done this for us.

From my previous employment, where we used it, everyone thinks about Pure Storage running their EMR or HIMS. One of the lesser sung advantages was when we started running our interface engine on Pure Storage. The ability to process messages and pass them through in our organization skyrocketed purely because of a disk that I owned which we were getting out of Pure Storage. People should think about that with their help record. They don't think about that with something like their messaging platform or their interface engine.

It's expensive, but you get what you pay for.

I recommend the solution to my colleagues.

It upgrades in place which means we'll be using it well into the future.

I recognize it's a difficult challenge, but I would like to see them make the pricing more reasonable. Of course, it is, after all, solid-state. It's not the same as "cheap and deep."

It's a very stable product, all self-contained and very well-supported as well.

It's definitely scalable. It can grow with a company's needs.

It's one of the easiest out there, in terms of installation.

It's a great return on investment, based on the mission. When you're interested in high-performance there isn't much else that competes with it.

We looked at everything. In dealing with this, we got mission-specific. It's like different kinds of planes or sailboats: What's the mission? For this high-performance mission, that's what Pure is about.

I would recommend it to colleagues. When performance is important, that's what Pure is all about.

I rate the solution at ten out of ten. Solid-state storage makes a lot of sense, they're 100 percent solid-state when you need that kind of performance. The pricing is very attractive and it delivers performance for the money.

We run our production Oracle workload on it.

We have been able to scale it to ten terabytes. Whereas, before we were stuck.

The most valuable feature is it never goes down. We can expand and create volumes.

I would like to migrate to the cloud in the future and know how that would actually work with this product.

Stability has been really solid.

The technical support has been fantastic.

We were previously using Dell EMC.

We used an integrator for the deployment.

We have seen ROI. Because of the SSD, it is cheaper because I am not purchasing so many disks.

It makes things ten times easier.

The most valuable features would be its performance, retrieval, recovery, and backup. It meets the customer's expectations. 

I would like to see them lower the costs. They could also include data mining in their next release. 

We have performance monitoring tools and it's hard to integrate them with this solution. 

It's very stable, we haven't had any issues with it. 

Their technical support is great. We don't have to contact them frequently because we don't have many problems. 

We also looked at IBM and Oracle. We did internal evaluations and we decided to go with Pure Storage. We chose Pure Storage because of the processor's performance. 

I would rate this solution a nine. It's extremely stable and has good performance. The only issue is the cost. I would definitely recommend this solution to somebody considering it. 

Redundancy and the fault tolerance of the platform are the most impressive. Also, this allows all the hardware and software updates to be completed while the system is completely online.

The internal garbage collection process has been fixed recently in some OS updates so it is more efficient but that could be just a little better. That’s it!

Everything related to the hardware or software update of the system(s) are active with absolutely NO downtime and NO service interruptions.

The m50 will be our production machine for a brand new property, we have almost finished building. I can personally state that the Pure Storage Flash Systems are the best built and Pure has the utmost professional customer care. Pure only focuses on Flash and they do it well.

The FA-450 pushes around 200,000 32k IOPS and with our load, which is not small by any means, we top-out around 50k-60k IOPS. It’s fantastic! We will soon upgrade both boxes to the newer m70 with some added capacity and all of which will take probably 30 minutes to complete.

We primarily use the solution for general block storage. Usually, the storage product owners are the users.

It's just very easy for general block storage. Generally, the ease of use is what customers comment on. It's very user-friendly.

The initial setup is very straightforward. 

Scalability is possible. You can expand the solution.

The stability and reliability are great.

Technical support has been helpful in general. 

The solution needs an integrated NAS platform, file platform. The file functionality could be better.

I've been dealing with the solution for a couple of years. 

The solution is stable and reliable. The performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

We find the product to be quite scalable. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. 

The solution is extensively used. Likely usage will increase in the future. 

Technical support is great. They are helpful and responsive. We're quite satisfied with the level of support they offer customers. 

I used to work with Hitachi and switched to this product for ease of use and for performance.

The initial setup is very straightforward and simple. It's not overly complex. 

The actual startup and deployment take about half a day.

From an ROI standpoint, if you consider compression and de-duplication and all that, you get a pretty good ratio.

The pricing of the product is very competitive to others in the market for Flash and NVMe storage. That covers the cost of hardware and support.

I'm a reseller.

I'd advise potential users to try it out and consider it as an option.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten based on the overall performance, scalability, and reliability.