Pure Storage FlashArray Reviews

The most valuable feature is replication.

Areas for improvement would be the financial operations. In the next release, I would like to see a NAS protocol included.

I've been working with this solution for two years.

This is a very stable solution.

Technical support is very good.

There are some additional costs.

I would rate this solution as ten out of ten.

We use the on-premise deployment model of this solution for the bank. We use AWS as our cloud provider. 

High speed has been an improvement for our organization.

We are using the private cloud version. I run it on vSphere, vCenter, and vRealize. 

It benefits our IT organization in the way that it's easier for the administrators to manage. 

The performance is the most valuable feature. 

There could be better storage.

I like this storage because it is very easy.

Scalability is good. 

I haven't needed to use support. My employees say their support very good.

The initial setup was easy and straightforward.

I don't know the exact cost but it's around $1,000.

The team that worked with this program say it's a very good program, so I'd recommend it.

My coworkers say it's very good, so I would give this a nine out of ten. For me, no product ever gets a ten, because nothing is perfect.

We use the private deployment model of this solution and VMware for our storage provider. Our primary use case of this solution revolves around our clients. We have different tiers of storage. We use the Pure Storage FlashArray for our tier-one storage, our higher-level storage to support not only multi-tenant clients but also our private cloud clients, and to provide them with an all-flash storage solution.

We used to use a product called XtremIO which was a pretty significant improvement on the old way of deploying storage which was through standalone SANDS and we also used EMC VMAX. That was really expensive. We saw a vast improvement when we switched over to using the Pure Storage model over the XtremIO. It just made us that much more competitive. We were able to offer those workloads to our clients, we sold more, and we keep selling it.

VMware absolutely benefited our IT organization. VMware has always been just above the rest in terms of virtualization. I was not part of the organization prior to VMware being a prevalent powerhouse like it is today. But I know that back in the day of our organization, we used to have every server in a single box. Now, we've trimmed down so much of our infrastructure as well as some of our other client's that we've moved to VMware and it's been a significant improvement.

We are and we aren't running VMware on Pure. We have our ESXi hosts are not running on Pure Storage but we use Pure Storage for the back-end data stores that we run. We don't necessarily run the Hypervisor on Pure, but we run a lot of our client's virtual machines on Pure Storage.

The main driver of running VMware on Pure is for more IOPS. It's a growing trend in the industry that we have to have more clients that have more IOPS and low latency. It's an ongoing battle with the industry. When it comes down to it there's going to be a higher demand for even lower latency; even more speed, and more IOPS. We haven't hit that quite yet, but it will happen. It's just the nature of the business.

The joint solution has benefited our organization. It's with the ability to have the tier-one storage from Pure Storage that's allowed us to not only sell more at a higher cost but also it's allowed us to separate certain workloads from others. We have the tier-one storage, then we have tier-two storage on a different provider that allows us to have more storage, but also to really just give Pure Storage to those that really need it. This provides better performance for those VMs.

For us, the most valuable feature is the compression and deduplication. Being able to deploy a three to one ratio for storage is absolutely critical in today's world with the growing need for storage and the growing need for more space. Everything needs more space. For us to have a solution that allows deduplication and that lets us deploy more on less.

It's a very stable solution. Even going through maintenances we can individually bring down certain nodes without any disruption in performance. It works really seamlessly with our current implementation.

The scalability of the solution is not as good as it probably could be. In regards to storage and SANDS, it's very difficult to have a scalable solution when you're talking about hardware stores. It's just really difficult to do that. Overall, I think Pure does a good job with scalability.

I don't interface with technical support too much. Overall whenever I've had to interface with technical support it's always been a very positive experience.

We previously used XtremIO. We knew we needed to switch because of the trends in the industry. It's always going be a battle for consumer-based demands. Consumers are always going to demand more, and more; now. What that means is that you need to build apps that are quicker, faster; or have a more sleek run without as much code, or they're more highly available. That's what it really comes down to.

The initial setup was straightforward. 

Pure Storage did the deployment for us. 

We have seen ROI. 

Pure was on our shortlist. There are not a whole lot of other competitors that do what Pure does. They architected their own SAND right from scratch and it's a versatile product.

It's a pretty simple and pretty straightforward solution. There's a lot of one pane of glass type of things that we have with Pure and I don't see much in terms of improvement.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten. My advice to someone considering this solution is to just get it. 

It is for storage.

It gives us capacity planning.

It saves us on administrative work.

The most valuable feature is its speed.

It is easy to use and manage.

The time to value of the solution is pretty quick.

The stability is good.

The scalability is good.

The technical support is great.

The technology that we had was outdated. We were using HPE SAN.

The initial setup was straightforward. We just followed the information on the screen: click, click, click. 

The start up process is very easy.

We haven't seen ROI yet.

The licensing is $100,000.

Darktrace, which we are also using.

I would recommend buying it.

We tested our VDI environment on this array and it performed flawlessly and boosted the user experience.

Data reduction and compression. Sub millisecond latency.

Had some issues with Purity not being entirely compatible with VMware ESXi.

Had some issues with Purity not being entirely compatible with VMware ESXi.

No.

Very good.We did a PoC.

We use NetApp because of the variety of protocols it can support.

Initial setup was by far the easiest. We racked and stacked the array and were up and running in 4 hours.

There is always room for negotiation.

Nimble and NetApp.

Look at other competitor products as well.

We use the space and optimize the makeup of the storage products.

It simplifies the connection between our infrastructure and storage.

The most valuable feature is how it simplifies the management of the SAN.

The product has made our infrastructure more stable and simplified.

I have not had any issues with scalability.

In the past, we had Lenovo. With the Pure Storage, it improved and simplified our connections.

The initial setup was very simple. We put it on the rack, switched it on, and it worked.

We use a reseller for the integration. We had a good experience with them.

We have seen a $15,000 ROI.

The total cost of ownership is not that much lower for flash than SSD.

I would prefer that they lower their pricing.

We only considered Pure Storage. 

My company stays focused with one solution (product) for approximately three years. Then, every three years, we make discussion whether to keep the solution or not.

I would recommend Pure Storage, as it is well-established. It also simplifies and optimizes the right space.

The predictive performance analytics are good.

We use it for storage of critical data, and for storage of replicated backups.

We use Zerto Virtual Replication software. We write all of those backups to Pure, then we use those in our disaster recovery scenarios. 

It has simplified our storage. We use it for a pretty specific use case of replicating between sites. I have two data centers, a primary data center and a secondary data center, with a Pure Storage device in each location. We do backups of critical data in both locations, then replicate them back and forth between the sites. 

The value for the storage, in the way it stores the data, but also the robustness of the product, it's very stable. And then the support that we get when we have an issue.

One to three years.

The stability is very high with almost no problems. 

Excellent. Best of any of the vendors we work with.

Everything with Pure Storage is so straightforward. It was an easy setup, and we were storing data almost immediately.

We used a third party for deployment. When we bought it, we built-in some professional services who did great work. 

We actually originally went with a competitor's product, and after about eight months, a lot of wrangling, had them buy it back from us. And then we bought similar Pure Storage product, and it's just been great.

We're providing some ESXi solutions to our customers with high performance.

We working now with VM Analytics to provide our customers some strategies about their VMs directly.

Asynchronous and synchronous replication between two data centers. Our platform is housed in two centers, and we're using Pure Storage for their replication.

We are very happy with the data deduplication and compression ratio that we have on the platform.

The console is simple to use. It has good performance. It is easy to install, understand, and manage, with a good ratio of deduplication and compression. It is doing its job.

They could improve the price.

It is very stable.

We did some add-ons months ago without any downtime.

Technical support is good. They are proactive about the upgrades and reactive when we have any issues.

Before working with Pure Storage, we were working with an SP and multi-tier solution. Most of our customers were looking for performance. So, we made the choice to have an all-flash platform with replication. At the time, Pure Storage was the only one to be able to provide some all-flash storage with replication, and replication was mandatory for our customers.

It is quite easy to set up.

We have seen a reduction in TCO.