We have FlashArray and FlashBlade. We're using FlashArray primarily for VMFS storage tools for the VMware environment.
We have its latest version. It is on-premises, but we operate a private cloud.
We have FlashArray and FlashBlade. We're using FlashArray primarily for VMFS storage tools for the VMware environment.
We have its latest version. It is on-premises, but we operate a private cloud.
We've had different types of storage, and three things of this solution are valuable. The first one is its outstanding performance. The second one is its stability. In the about three years that we've had it, we've had component failures, but we never had a service interruption or any data loss. The third one, which is really critical, is that it is super easy to use in terms of provisioning, storage, and managing the arrays. I'm able to maintain a multi-site environment with a couple of dozen arrays with a single mid-level storage admin.
We do a lot of data replication as well, and the replication features are all easy to set up. The networking controls for setting up interfaces and sub-interfaces are also easy to manage.
We understand that they're thinking about it, but one of the things that would be nice is if they added some basic file-level capabilities to the platform. The idea is that they would run a basic NFS or CIF share from the controllers. FlashBlade is the powerhouse for File and Object storage, but if you don't need all that power, a lightweight file function would make FlashArrays more versatile.
The other thing is multiple key support for encryption. The standard solution encrypts the whole array, but we also have certain tenants that use dedicated LUNs. So, it would be nice if, in addition to just supporting the VMware stuff, we could have a per LUN key. Even better would be interfacing with an external Key Management Server (KMS) so that tenants could manage their keys.
I have been using this solution for about three years.
It is very stable. There are no stability issues. The bugs we've encountered have been nuisances or minor things, such as how some metrics are reported, but there hasn't been anything that has affected our service.
It is very easy to scale. We have about 4,000 users.
They are very good, but we are a large enough customer. We always deal with the same people, so it's not like we're going into the tier one service desk.
We previously used Dell EqualLogic. It was going under life, and it was just a legacy spinning disk with an SSD cache. So, the main reason for switching was just a tech refresh and an upgrade.
It is very straightforward and very simple.
We consume it as a service, and that's actually something we really like, or at least I really like from the technical perspective. That's because it means there is no hassle when we need to upgrade arrays to add capacity. We just interact directly with technical counterparts, and we say, "Hey, we're filling up," and they say, "All right, here's another data pack." They ship it in, and we install it. So, the as-a-service model has worked very well. Given the outstanding data reduction rates, it has improved our profitability because we're selling allocated volumes as part of the cloud service or recovering those costs from our tenants. It is very efficient, but that has offset the premium price. It started out that way, but over time, as we've added capacity, the price per gig has gone down a lot because we have a lot of it.
If you need a high-performance storage appliance that is easy to install and maintain, you pretty much can't go wrong.
I would rate Pure Storage FlashArray a nine out of 10.
We have a contract with Pure Storage, and we use it for VMware and database server storage provisioning.
We have multiple applications in the environment, and we are provisioning from Pure Storage.
The single pane of glass is important for us because we can view all the array details in one place. We can see the details about the capacity, utilized space, available or free space, alerts, and performance in one place. This overview is important.
It did decrease the storage footprint compared to other models and storage, but I do not have the metrics.
It helps to reduce the downtime.
We are not using any replication features. We only have storage provisioning, so the provisioning feature is good. The compression and deduplication are good.
It does not require much improvement. They can maybe improve the file services. The focus is on block storage. They can also include file services such as NAS shares and CIFS shares. There should be provisioning of the file shares from a unified array.
I have been using Pure Storage FlashArray for one year.
There is no lagging or crashing. It is quite stable.
It is good in terms of scalability. We can scale up to a higher number.
I have interacted with their technical support. They were good at providing support when I requested.
Positive
We have different flash array systems from HPE GreenLake. Pure Storage is better than the HPE GreenLake flash array. Performance-wise, Pure Storage is better. The cost of Pure Storage might be high, but I am not sure.
It is on-prem. I do not know about its initial deployment because I was not there at the time of deployment. So, I do not know if its benefits could be realized immediately after the deployment. However, it has been effective in terms of utilization and capacity. We are now planning for different storage and doing the migration from Pure Storage to others because of the EOC limit that we have.
In terms of maintenance, there are firmware updates. We have to schedule a change window and then update the firmware.
It is good. Working with it is easy. Provisioning is smooth and good. The GUI and everything else is good. You can just do training with Pure Storage and get on with your storage tasks.
Overall, I would rate Pure Storage FlashArray a nine out of ten.
It's a very simple tool to use with extremely low latency and high performance.
Pure Storage FlashArray has improved the performance of applications.
Feature-wise, the solution provides direct flash storage.
Improvement-wise, Pure Storage FlashArray must support real-time incidents. I think that Pure Storage should improve its pricing.
Currently, the solution fails to support file screening. I want to see the solution supporting file screening in the future.
I have been using Pure Storage FlashArray for four years.
Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.
Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten. Presently, five people in my company use the tool.
I rate the solution's technical support a ten out of ten.
Positive
The solution's initial setup process was straightforward.
My company saw a return on investment using the solution as it helped us reduce the time it took to access applications and reduced the space required in our data center.
Pure Storage FlashArray is expensive.
When considering the use of this solution, I suggest evaluating the price and taking into account its performance and potential to reduce the space in the data center. I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten.
Our primary use case for this solution is focused on enterprise solutions, a support solution that needs either performance, reliability or cost. For example, most companies have databases, virtualized workloads, or VDI workloads. So with those kinds of environments like the Block Storage, it is perfect because it switches very well with the cost, performance, and reliability ratio. Additionally, it's easy to deploy to benefit the IT team in the management costs.
We find the ease of usability and setup valuable.
Pricing could be better in comparison to other solutions. The amount of storage the customers receive is approximately 20% higher when you compare it with similar solutions. So it can be a problem when you are positioning the product.
We have been using the solution for seven years as partners and are currently working with the latest version.
The solution is highly scalable, but scalability is sometimes undervalued, but everyone can scale. In the case of Pure Storage FlashArray, our experience with upgrading the capacity only involved changing the controllers. So, for example, if you have 20 terabytes and want to go to 100, you only have to change the controllers when paying for that storage capacity upgrade. You can also include the controllers, and the controllers' upgrade does not impact production. You can do it without stopping, so the upgrade of the machines can start with the smallest to the biggest machine that can deploy up to five petabytes. If you cannot do it smoothly, you don't have to stop production and will not have a disruption.
Our experience with customer service and support has been very good. It is very good even though they are still growing, and they are very responsive to issues. They promise a 15-minute response time and are very good at keeping that promise.
The initial setup is straightforward. Two engineers are usually tasked with deployment.
Our return on investment is good.
The licensing cost is close to zero. Every new function or functionality is included when paying the annual maintenance. Our customers value it because the maintenance is always the same regardless of whether it's the first year, the seventh or the tenth year. Additionally, the products use the same operative system with new capabilities, like ransomware and safe mode. Another thing that is quite nice to have is outstanding performance. They can provide a lot of performance, so there is not a lot of difference. Still, efficiency is something customers value because the compression can be up to twice of the second competitor. I rate licensing costs a ten out of ten.
I rate the solution a ten out of ten. The solution is good but can be improved by improving upgrade prices.
Pure Storage FlashArray is used for hosting applications, such as Vmware, HyperV, and virtualized applications.
The most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray is the all-flash storage performance, low latency, and efficiency of their de-duplication technology. Additionally, the ease of use is good compared to other storage systems. The features in data protection, snapshotting, and replication between data centers and sites are superior to other solutions.
Pure Storage FlashArray could improve the recent file storage capabilities because it is lacking a lot of features.
The integration with other vendors, such as antivirus and security vendors they are lacking.
I have been using Pure Storage FlashArray for approximately seven years.
The stability of Pure Storage FlashArray is good.
Pure Storage FlashArray is scalable.
I have used the support from Pure Storage FlashArray.
I rate the support from Pure Storage FlashArray a nine out of ten.
Positive
The initial setup of Pure Storage FlashArray is very simple and it takes four hours for a new system.
Pure Storage FlashArray is not difficult to maintain.
My customers have received a return on investment.
The price of Pure Storage FlashArray could always improve. They are still more expensive than some alternative offerings. Cost is always a concern and when there is a battle they tend to be more expensive.
There are no licenses outside of the storage. When you buy the solution, you receive all the software capabilities and license with the box.
One of the advantages of Pure Storage FlashArray to other solutions is the Evergreen Program. The program allows you to never have to purchase storage that you already purchased again. For every terabyte that you purchase, you don't have to purchase it again, they will replace it. As you maintain the solution, even if the old storage becomes at the end of life, it will replace with newer technology as part of the maintenance.
My advice to others is they should try the solution, it works well.
I rate Pure Storage FlashArray a nine out of ten.
We are using Pure Storage FlashArray for data protection. We keep our backup data on the solution.
The most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray are simplicity, ease of use, and dashboard management.
Pure Storage FlashArray could improve some aspects. There are certain features that are good and there are some features that I see some issues with at the technical level. Those issues are related to replication. They need to resolve those issues, which I have already highlighted to the Pure team. Additionally, there are some issues in the active cluster that could improve.
I have been using Pure Storage FlashArray for approximately one year.
The stability of Pure Storage FlashArray has been stable.
We have had some issues with Pure Storage FlashArray capacity. We were guaranteed capacity which we did not receive.
The solution is scalable, all storage solutions are scalable.
We do not have end users of this solution, but all of our data from the company is going to the Pure Storage FlashArray.
We plan to increase the usage of the solution in the future.
The support from Pure Storage FlashArray is very good.
The initial setup of Pure Storage FlashArray is quick and was not a difficult process.
We used the reseller to do the implementation of Pure Storage FlashArray. It took one engineer from the reseller and one engineer from my team.
We have approximately 10 users who are managing Pure Storage FlashArray.
Once you purchase Pure Storage FlashArray it is all-inclusive, you receive all the licenses needed.
I would recommend this solution to others.
I rate Pure Storage FlashArray a seven out of ten.
We use Pure Storage FlashArray for databases.
Pure Storage FlashArray has helped our organization because it effectively (price/performance) stores databases and we do not need an every day/detailed administration.
The most valuable feature of Pure Storage FlashArray is the complete set of functions it provides.
The price of Pure Storage FlashArray could be better.
I don't think NEW features are needed. And I want to point out that the Pure team regularly updates the functionality.
We have been using Pure Storage FlashArray for approximately three years.
Pure Storage FlashArray is highly stable. If we experience any issues the support resolves the issue immediately.
The scalability of Pure Storage FlashArray is good. We are able to upgrade changing disks and controllers and it is simple to do.
The technical support from Pure Storage FlashArray is perfect. If we have some trouble or we need to change something, we need to ask for support and they are helpful and answered immediately.
I rate the technical support from Pure Storage FlashArray a five out of five.
Positive
I previously used IBM, HDS, LSI Storages.
The initial setup of Pure Storage FlashArray was simple. The process took approximately one week.
We did the implementation of the solution ourselves and when we had some issues we contacted the support for assistance.
All vendor support engineers are good qualified. In case of escalation it was quick and effective.
The cost of the array includes the cost of the basic functionality. The Evergreen support includes free upgrades. This is not an inexpensive solution, you need to understand the value of your data before you buy it.
We evaluated Dell, IBM, HP, and Huawei solutions before choosing Pure Storage FlashArray, which was the best (3 years ago!).
We are wanting to expand and we are looking at other solutions currently, such as Huawei, which is a very good solution from China. However, the documentation can be difficult to understand and their support was not very good but they successfully try to improve it now.
I rate Pure Storage FlashArray an eight out of ten.
This product is for database usage and consolidating performance.
The Pure Storage FlashArray provides us with faster data access. Our processing time is faster for tasks that used to take a long time before. Now, it's a lot quicker and more responsive.
The low latency and the performance, in general, are very good.
The compression and deduplication features help to make the best use of the capacity.
Replication and active-active features are available.
The system has dual controllers but does not have a high level of resiliency built-in. For what the peak says, I'm very happy with it. However, if you compare it to similar devices with multiple controllers that are scaled-out, it's not a true active-active.
I have been using Pure Storage FlashArray for approximately one year.
Over the past year that we have been using it, the stability has been good. That said, we're still testing it. It is very low maintenance; on the Pure side, they don't have much involvement apart from a bit of monitoring.
We've not had to increase the capacity yet but it does have the flexibility to scale if we need to. At this point, we have 25,000 end-users and we don't expect that to increase. Our user base is fairly static.
We have been in contact with technical support a couple of times. They are quick to respond and we are very happy with the customer support team.
The support plan makes it simple to plan ahead.
We have used other flash arrays in the past.
This initial setup is very straightforward. A couple of hours on-site is all that was needed for the engineer to complete it. It took that long to make sure that everything was in place and available.
Overall, it is very simple.
For the deployment, we didn't need many people but we do have a wider storage team that deals with it.
Installation was included with the purchase. We didn't do it ourselves.
There are no licensing fees aside from the support. The support plan is simple and quite easy to understand, and it covers issues such as hardware failures.
We evaluated all of the options that were presented to us at the time, and Pure won.
Feature-wise, there's nothing specific that is lacking for us at the moment. The features that are there now are really what we need.
Overall, this is a good product and I recommend it.
I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
