Pure Storage FlashArray Reviews

We use Pure Storage FlashArray as well as FlashBlade. In Pure Storage FlashArray, we have the SAN and NAS storage models. 

We focus on performance when it comes to enterprises. We need both types of storage, one is for better performance and the other one is for larger space requirements. We use both types of storage at the same time.

Pure Storage FlashArray is helpful in meeting the performance needs of critical services. Different models are available, and each model has a different series. For example, you have the C model, and in this model, you have the 50 series and 90 series. Similarly, in the X model, you have the 70 series. We now get a lot more models of Pure Storage than before. Previously, not many models of Pure Storage were available, so we had to rely on other vendors, such as NetApp, but we faced performance issues with NetApp. It also required more troubleshooting. We started to get a better response time after we moved from NetApp to Pure Storage.

We have a single pane of glass for management. It is good.

With Pure Storage, the creation of LUNs is easier and quicker than others. We have not had any issues with it. The response time improved significantly, and the entire process became much more efficient, eliminating previously existing troubles.

Some storages do not provide an easy IOPS report, but with Pure Storage, we can see performance impact directly on the storage itself. That is the best feature.

Additionally, creating a replication pair is straightforward without the need for CLI commands. With other storage solutions, we have to use the CLI commands, whereas we do not need to do that with Pure Storage. We can simply create a replication pair. That is another good feature.

I like the performance. Performance-wise, it accommodates the needs of highly-critical servers. It is reliable. That is the third best feature. 

Awareness about Pure Storage needs to increase. Currently, people mostly think of Dell and NetApp when it comes to storage. More documentation and presentation would help reach new users. They need to come up with new ideas and ways to improve their brand awareness.

They also need to see if the system can handle creating a large number of LUNs at the same time. Any automation or a way of doing that could be helpful.

We have been using Pure Storage FlashArray for about two and a half years.

I would rate it an eight out of ten for stability. It has been good.

We have a lot of applications with millions of users. There are five data centers. Three of them are in Hyderabad and two of them are in Mumbai.

We have 150 people working with storage solutions.

I would rate the customer service a seven out of ten. Depending on priority cases, the vendor's response time can vary. For P1 or P2, a case owner is assigned within 15 to 20 minutes. Everything is great from the vendor's side.

Neutral

In my environment, different types of storage vendors are there. We have NetApp, Hitachi, Dell, and other vendors. We have been using Dell PowerStore Storage and we have been migrating some of them too. We have been using Pure Storage FlashArray and FlashBlade for a long time, and we have seen a lot of differences compared to the other storage solutions. 

The performance, latency, and throughput of Pure Storage FlashArray are good. The throughput is 5 GB or 12 GB per second. Latency is also below 5 milliseconds.

The replication process is easier with Pure Storage compared to others. Replication was one task that I found difficult with other storage solutions.

The deployment and associated activities are handled by a different team. They take care of everything necessary for the new environment.

With proper approvals, we can implement it within a month. It does require some maintenance from our end, but the vendor takes care of all the upgrades.

Pricing is moderate. It is neither cheap nor expensive.

We are happy with Pure Storage. About six months ago, we had a Pure Storage event in my company, and I liked attending that Pure Storage event.

Pure Storage should focus on creating more awareness and providing documentation and presentations. It should also aim to reach lower-end clients who are currently focused on other storage types.

I would rate Pure Storage FlashArray an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is for tier 1 critical applications on-premises. 

Our organization takes advantage of the VMware integration developed by Pure by integrating with vRealize.

With this program, all of our applications are able to perform faster and this enables us to provide faster platforms and services to our customers and employees. This solution is, therefore, a huge benefit to our IT organization. 

VMware is basically the platform that our entire on-premise residence runs on and we incorporate vRealize, vOperations, and SRM. We're also looking at partnering with a backup solution Zerto, so it just gives us a lot more flexibility.

What I like most about this solution, is the speed, resiliency and scalability.

In the next version of this program, I would like to see increased security, higher encryption, and faster throughput.

The stability of this solution is extremely solid.

I am very impressed by the scalability Pure offers.

I haven't had any need to make use of the technical support team yet.

We realized that we needed to invest in a new solution when we ran out of space. We didn't really switch over to Pure, we basically just put the non-critical apps on our Unity storage and brought in Pure to be the tier 1 for the performance of critical applications. We had a few programs on our shortlist, like Dell EMC and Pure. We actually have all three on-site currently. 

The initial setup was very straightforward and we used FlairTech for the deployment. 

I would like to see a reduction in the cost and speed, but I still think that this program deserves a ten out of ten rating. My advice to others would be, if you can afford it, get Pure. 

The primary use case is virtual machines.

We can now quickly roll out multiple instances of virtual machines or FlashArray storage, more than we could before.

Speed: Things function pretty quickly for our SAN management team. We have seen a good reduction in the amount of total storage space that we're using because of the deduplication.

It runs fast and is easy to use, and our SAN manager likes it.

The way Pure Storage does the controller storage warranty or replacement has been an issue for some people who just replace the controllers every couple of years, and that's where some of the confusion with pricing and support has come in. They should be clear on the way the controller replacements happen, as it is important to know whether or not you can get a good return on them, because it can be a little confusing.

I rated the solution as a nine out of ten because I knew about a disk failure. Other than that, it would probably be a ten. Disk failures are out of anybody's control. 

The stability is good.

It seems highly scalable.

From what I have heard, the technical support has been good.

We went with Dell EMC first. When we had a ton of trouble with it, we dumped it for Pure Storage.

We are fairly new to using it, so we'll have to wait to see what our data usage is over the next year or so.

The cost was initially high, but once more people were using it, the costs came down. This was because the University was reselling it to other departments.

It simplifies storage. Data deduplication features make it easier to manage storage and forecast growth.

Our primary use case of this solution is to keep our production and DR data in this storage.

This solution has improved our organization in the way that we used to see latency but now with this solution we don't. It also has good performance. Latencies have come down for our performance in the SQL databases. We can put a lot more in a lot less in terms of space savings. We also save data center space and have good deduplication. 

It has also helped us simplify storage in the way that it's easy to manage. It's the most simple storage solution. 

We like that there are good deduplication savings in terms of the usage in the data center and that the product itself works well. 

Scalability is good. We can do an upgrade in which both of the controllers will be on which has reduced the downtime. The scalability has definitely improved. 

I would like for them to do testing on their upgrades. 

This solution is stable. At times their product of grates could get a little tricky which can be problematic, but they quickly address it.

Scalability is going well. We have been expanding it and we have about five customers now. 

Technical support is very good. We have a dedicated person who helps us which has been a good experience. 

We switched because our old solution wasn't great and we wanted to replace it with a better solution. 

The initial setup was straightforward in the way that the configuration was simple. It's simple to manage. 

The reseller helps with all of the implementation processes. 

We also considered Hitachi and Dell EMC XtremIO. Pure Storage made the cut because of its PoC performance. 

I would rate this solution a nine because there's always room for improvement. They should work on their upgrades, they're not smooth. 

If you're considering this solution, I would tell you to do a PoC and if it meets your requirements, go for it. It's a good product. They're a good company and they have achieved good work. 

We mainly use FlashArray to provide flash storage for SQL and Oracle databases in production.

FlashArray has improved the stability of our servers and critical databases stability and server stability. We began seeing benefits two to three weeks after we deployed. The platform is more flexible and has lower latency.

The Direct FlashArray stands out as one of the best features in the market. The Pure1 storage management lets us see the details about utilization and everything else for all 40 storage boxes in one place. This is a crucial feature if you're using FlashArray for critical databases. 

I would like FlashArray to add reports that help us forecast our predicted resource needs based on current usage. 

We have been using Pure Storage FlashArray for three years.

I would rate the stability of FlashArray as nine out of 10.

I rate FlashArray's scalability nine out of 10.

I rate Pure Storage customer service nine out of 10.

Positive

We previously used Dell EMC. Creating storage groups and mapping was more complex. Pure FlashArray is simpler and easier to use, and our storage staff doesn't struggle as much with it.

The initial setup is easy and does not require much expertise. Even individuals with five or six years of experience can handle it.

We have seen a return on investment as the solution has reduced resource requirements, allowing less experienced personnel to manage the storage. You don't need 15 years of experience to work on this. It can be easily handled by someone with five years.

I would rate Pure Storage FlashArray a nine out of ten.

The cost of Pure FlashArray is a bit high compared to peers, but its sustainability and features justify the price.

I rate Pure Storage FlashArray nine out of 10. I recommend FlashArray. It protects your data and has low downtime. 

I use Pure Storage FlashArray to provide LUNs or volumes for end users who want to work on a database for zoning, enabling them to operate effectively with end-user arrays.

The device gives us a lot of protection in maintaining our data in the storage. It gives high throughput across many locations.

We have faster data processing with low file consumption. This includes multi-terabyte databases in memory with read-write speed four times faster than any HDD. 

Pure Storage FlashArray offers numerous valuable features, such as low latency and high throughput. It has significant data protection in the form of snapshots. It allows data portability around the cloud and on-premises devices. Performance backup is also a key feature.

The support that we received from the vendor during upgrades has been very good. They instructed us very well through the remote connection.

I have worked with two types of Pure Storage FlashArray. So far, I have not found any issues. There is not a great need for improvement, but better pricing could be beneficial.

I have been using Pure Storage FlashArray for three years.

It is stable. I would rate it an eight out of ten for stability.

There is always downtime when working with production servers. I have to plan downtime of three or four hours when launching new servers or logging into new servers with new LUNs. If a lot of people are logging into a FlashArray server, it will require downtime if we have to modify anything.

It is scalable. I would rate the scalability of Pure Storage FlashArray a nine out of ten.

It is being used at a single location. We have 30 people using it.

Their support is too good. As soon as I log a case with them, they are always available. They are very fast. I would rate them a ten out of ten.

Positive

I have worked with different storage boxes such as Quantum, NetApp, and HPE, but they are different. They are block storage. Pure Storage provides a unique compatibility when working with LUNs and volumes, offering a totally different SAN product. It is also easier than the others.

The initial setup was straightforward and took about 40 minutes.

The solution has saved us time and resources. It has saved about 20% of my time.

I would rate it a seven out of ten for pricing. It could be improved.

I would recommend Pure Storage FlashArray to anyone because it offers great resilience, high throughput, and excellent storage provision to users on SAN boxes. It simplifies the process of zoning or taking backups.

I would rate Pure Storage FlashArray a nine out of ten.

We use it for block storage workloads. We don't use a lot of the features on it.

It has reduced provisioning time. There is ease of management.

The availability and ease of use are the big features. 

Larger capacity and more storage ports would be the two things I'd like to see.

I have been working with this solution for about three years.

It has been really stable.

That's the only feature that isn't as good. It doesn't scale as large as some of the competitors, but they have started to make them bigger.

We probably have a dozen or so admins who use it, including me. I take care of its maintenance. It is pretty light in terms of maintenance.

It is being used extensively. We'll be increasing its usage. I'm on the networking side. Our IT group is a pretty heavy user too. Both of us will be increasing its usage, but their scale is a little bit bigger than ours.

I would rate them really high. On a scale of one to five, I'd give them a four.

Dell EMC and NetApp would be the two big ones that we used before. We switched because of the cost and the ease of use. Those are the two big ones. In terms of the cost, a lot of it was just introducing a second vendor.

Its setup was really straightforward. It took about half a day. It is pretty quick. All the cabling and facility stuff is usually the longest part.

We had the vendor do most of it. It is like a team, and there is usually one installer guy. Our experience with them was great. Our account team with them is really good. 

Its setup is easier than you think. It is a pretty straightforward deployment.

They have been correcting a couple of things. One of them was that they didn't really scale that large. So, we had to deploy a lot of arrays. They have started to make them bigger now. In addition, until recently, they didn't do a file on the FlashArray. Now, you can share files on it. They recently implemented that, but we haven't tried it yet.

I would rate it a nine out of 10. It does everything we wanted to do.

We are in the health industry and use this product for block storage. We have VMware hosted on our Pure FlashArrays and we have a Citrix environment. We also have Oracle running as our SQL database. Our VMs run from Pure.

We have also done a couple of PoCs with the Blade solution for using the file share system.

One of the requirements from our developers and test and development team is that from time to time, they want to clone the production environment. We are able to accomplish this within seconds, using a script. This is one of the best parts that I have seen. This feature is not available with other storage solutions.

Performance-wise, it is giving us a very good result.

We are happy with the data compression and deduplication capabilities.

The interface is user-friendly and very easy to use.

Taking a snapshot and cloning data is very easy to do. We can create a script and it will clone the environment. Similarly, we can replicate the environment from one site to another site, and we can restore the environment where we choose.

The management features are well organized and they have a very good dashboard. For example, I can see all of the utilization and it has port monitoring capabilities. With other storage vendors, multiple tools are required for this, and there is an additional charge.

Data reduction is an area that needs improvement. There is a garbage collection service that runs but during that time, system utilization increases.

Integration with VMware tools can be improved.

The reporting can be better.

We have been using Pure Storage FlashArray for between five and six years.

This is a very stable product and we haven't had any downtime. We use this product extensively and I have seen that we have a 90% I/O load in our environment.

This is a flexible system that is easy to scale.

We initially purchased two FlashArray systems. One of them was small or midsized, and the other was high-end. Then, later, we started upgrading. As per the Everygreen contract, we get free upgrades. Every three years, we get a new controller upgrade, free of cost.

We have also upgraded our capacity and now everything is on the X series. We have four FlashArrays in total and all of our database users are connected to them. The infrastructure and database teams are directly involved with it.

The response from the technical support team is very good. We have not found any difficulties with their ability or engagement.

We have worked with solutions from HPE, IBM, and Hitachi. We don't work with any of these vendors now. We switched because Pure storage is much easier to manage. It is also more stable and it is very easy to work with.

For example, there is no shutdown procedure. If you want to power down the environment then you just unplug the power and that's it. Once you reconnect the power, it is up. With legacy storage, there is a shutdown procedure. You have to shut down the host, then the SAN switch, then the storage.

With legacy storage, there is also a procedure to bring it up. You have to power up the enclosures, then the controller, then the SAN environment, and then the server. We had to follow a long set of steps with more dependencies.

After a power outage, the storage devices from the other vendors did not always come back online. For example, we implemented a PoC with the IBM FlashSystem and a power outage occurred. The management tool crashed and did not come back up. We had to wait for IBM engineers to come and fix the issue. Whereas, with Pure, when the power came back on, the system came back online immediately.

The other storage systems were not as user-friendly. For example, I had a Hitachi G600 and I wanted to extend the block capacity. I had to spend between 30 minutes and one hour to complete it. It's quite complex. With Pure, that would be taken care of in seconds by going to the console, selecting the volume, and performing the reset.

The initial setup is straightforward and very easy.

The day that we received the box, we unpacked it, racked it, and configured it. The next day, we were able to utilize it for production.

Upgrading the hardware, such as performing a controller upgrade, is a seamless process. We are planning to do a major upgrade and it will be done on the fly.

We engaged Pure to assist us with our implementation, and our experience with them was very good. The technical team came onsite for the deployment. If we have any problems then they will return to our site to help.

Only one person is required for deployment and maintenance.

You can pay extra for Evergreen support, which gives you free upgrades when new features are introduced.

We completed a PoC with most of the leading brands.

My advice for anybody who is considering this product is that I can recommend Pure. We were the first customer for Pure Storage in the UAE. It's stable, reliable, and you can trust it.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from using Pure FlashArray is that it's user-friendly, easy to manage, and very flexible. You can scale out and it's easy to upgrade. The upgrade process is not complex and it can be done on the fly, without any disruption.

My main complaint is that the garbage collection mechanism draws heavily on the resources. They have integration with VMware tools, although they can improve it slightly, and I would also like to see some improvements in the reporting.

We have been using it heavily and all of our people are happy with it. This includes the DBA team. Whenever we have a requirement of it, it's very easy and it can be done within seconds. With our previous storage solutions, we had to spend more time looking into problems and they were not user-friendly.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.