VMware vSAN Reviews

The main use case for VMware vSAN is auxiliary services, such as Windows, Linux, and not a specific server, but mixed loads.

We were able to replace lots of negative servers and replace them with VMware.

VMware vSAN is compatible with the legacy hypervisor solutions and most of the features are good.

I have been using VMware vSAN for approximately five years.

The solution is stable.

The scalability of the solution is good. The node cluster they are using has been enough for them.

we have approximately 1,000 users using this solution.

The technical support, it's not satisfactory. Whenever we raise a ticket it takes a lot of time to have an engineer get involved sometimes, or we receive a less experienced engineer. We then have to repeat the situation to the next engineer which all takes time.

The setup is not complicated. The deployment of VMware vSAN with VxRail can be completed in three to four hours, for one cluster out of the physical setup. The physical setup could take approximately one day. After that, deployment is very easy to complete.

We have four people that do the deployment and physical setup of the solution.

The price of the solution package depends on the nodes and other factors. The cost some of our customers paid was $500,000. The licensing cost for the components is very good.

My customers were comfortable with VMware and then they decided to use VMware instead of another solution.

My advice is if someone is interested in VMware vSAN it is a good solution. It is stable, supportive, and compatible with many solutions. VMware vSAN is the best.

Customers have to consider when choosing VMware to receive a lot of features, such as replication backup, and if they went with another solution it would be more expensive.

I rate VMware vSAN a nine out of ten.

I work at a small company, and we have VxRail. Like Rubrik, VxRail can be upgraded brick by brick. Now we are studying considering deploying another traditional setup comprising a host and SAN Storage. VMware vSAN is a virtual SAN Storage. 

We are planning to expand the resources of our system, including CPU, RAM, and storage. Currently, we are utilizing the basic VxRail setup, which consists of only three nodes, and we're in the process of acquiring another. I'm upgrading because it's at capacity, so we have no choice but to add another node so we can expand the loads for some new applications that we need to employ under the virtual servers. Our expansion to a new data center will add some more capacity to the current setup.

In the end, we could wind up with around six nodes, SAN storage, or flash array storage. But we don't have a definite plan yet. Everything is being drafted at the moment, and we're researching some details on backup solutions and VR solutions. We also have some cloud-based and server-hosted applications from Azure and AWS. So maybe the on-premises solution could involve some VMs or a hybrid backup solution that goes back and forth between the cloud and on-premises. 

If we decide to expand, vSAN could offer us some flexibility. We are researching ways to set this up from a new data center, which is located somewhere different from the current location right now.

I would like to see better integration between the cloud and our VMware virtual environment. We only have one virtual environment, which is VMware vSAN. Right now, there is little interoperability with the cloud solution at the moment. We are currently researching to figure out if we can achieve that. 

It's possible that we'll need to acquire new infrastructure for the new data center. And for that, we need to consult some architects, whether it's a VMware architect or some AWS and Azure architects. And we could come up with a workable blueprint that to use as a guideline so we can manage our infrastructure.

I am new to this company, but I worked with different solutions at my previous company, including vSAN and the traditional VMware vSphere setup. So I've been using vSAN for two years or three years.

VMware vSAN is stable, although there's is some room for improvement. 

I've been working with VMware technical support since I had my own company. It's pretty dependable because I used to work primarily with level three infrastructure support. We are the last escalation. I am one of the contact people between the company and the VMware vendor. The final escalations would be working with the vendor itself or some VMware engineer, whether it's vSAN, vSphere, Center, or anything else within the scope of our license.

In my environment right now, we only handle a limited set of VMware products. These solutions are not perfect because we must apply patches and updates to deal with glitches and minor bugs. Byt I think vSAN will be reliable, especially if the after-sales support and engineers are excellent and could help us work seamlessly and comfortably.

Our initial vSAN setup is a backup from Rubrik being thrown up to AWS for Glacier. But in the near term, maybe we could migrate that kind of solution in a more seamless and resilient way. That's what we're considering right now.

VMware is quite expensive compared to Microsoft's Hyper-V. However, when you factor in flexibility and comparability of use, it's reasonable enough. For the high price of VMware, you get seamless operation and manageability. At the same time, I think VMware is lowering the price for its cloud-based solutions. And it's stable enough that some organizations might want to put part of their setup on the cloud and the other part on-premises. VMware's advantage is that they were already preparing for cloud solutions many years ago. 

There are several virtual solutions that I have hands-on experience with, including VMware, Hyper-V, and some open source software. I could only compare Microsoft and VMware. VMware is significantly more expensive than Microsoft, but I still prefer VMware because it's manageable and easy to set up.

As a VMware customer, it's hard to judge the value I'm getting for the price in terms of operability and manageability. Then there are other factors, such as the amount of resources used. So when we're evaluating, we're not just looking at the price. We don't want to settle for something cheaper that might cost us some headaches.

I rate VMware vSAN seven out of 10. I prefer a traditional SAN storage solution. Right now, we're only using vSAN for small solutions. At the basic level, it's good enough because it operates the same way as the traditional setup. It's suitable for companies that are starting and might expand in the near future. For those use cases, vSAN is a great choice compared to Hyper-V. It's much easier to maintain. However, I haven't deployed vSAN for a larger configuration.

We primarily use the solution for 95% of our hyper-converged infrastructure deployments.

The solution is very stable.

The installation is very easy. The deployment is fast and only takes, at a maximum, 2 days.

The scaling could be a bit better.

The monitoring capabilities could be improved. It would be ideal if clients didn't need to monitor the solution on a daily basis.

I've been using the solution for about five years at this point. It's been a while. 

The solution is quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. the performance has been good.

We do have plans to continue to work with the solution. However, we do not use the solution ourselves. We are integrators. Deployments and their sizes depend on the clients.

We have about 60 to 100 clients that use the solution.

The initial setup is not overly complex or difficult. It's very straightforward and very simple to set up.

It took us about two days to deploy the product.

We had about five people who handled the deployment.

We did not need the help of a consultant or integrator. We are integrators ourselves. We were able to handle everything in-house with our own team.

I can't speak to the licensing arrangements or specific costs of the product.

We are integrators and a partner to the vendor.

We are working with the latest version of the solution at this time.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. Our clients are pretty happy with it overall.

I'd recommend it to other users and companies. 

We are service providers. 

vSan is a system with defined storage, it doesn't work on a public cloud. It works and is built in your private cloud.

The most valuable features are Erasure Coding, Deduplication, and Compression, and the advancement in stretching regarding replication.

They should provide Deduplication and Compression over the hybrid drives. The Deduplication and Compression are locally only on all flash drives.

When you compare with Nutanix, you will find the performance in the Deduplication and Compression is over hybrid and on the flash drives. This feature is needed in vSan.

I have been working with VMware vSan for five years.

We are using the latest version.

VMware vSAN is very stable.

It's scalable up to 96 nodes. We have over 500 users in our company who are using this solution.

VMware technical support is remarkable.

We did not work with a similar software preciously. We were working with traditional solutions such as storage, and servers, but not software-defined storage like vSAN.

The vSAN is very easy to deploy.

To deploy a full cluster in a data center, can take four hours.

We are all engineers. We don't need a team to maintain this solution, as everyone services themselves.

The price could be lower. vSAN has many versions with standard and advanced including Enterprise and Enterprise Plus. Regarding the Enterprise and the Advanced, it could be lower.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The most valuable features of vSAN are:

• Instead of having a separate SAN storage, VMware uses all the local storage of the servers to combine its virtualized storage.
• Hyper-converged, an infrastructure system that is software defined: It integrates the computing, storage, and networking into a single platform.
• vMotion: This is one of the best features in this setup. From the name itself, vMotion allows migration without downtime. Others call it live migration. Planed server downtime is dramatically reduced by this feature.
• High availability (HA): This is my favorite. vSAN requires you to have at least three servers. Those three servers are being combined into one platform; that's vSAN. HA actually works during server failure. The server will automatically distribute to other servers in the environment.
• SSD tiering: You can combine a magnetic disk and solid-state drives to have a hybrid drive. This is actually fast because the SSD will be used for caching and the magnetic disk will store the actual data.

The most valuable feature of ESXi is that it is free. I strongly recommend this for those who have a huge development environment. ESXi is the best no-cost virtualization platform in the market right now, where you can consolidate your server into one platform.

The virtualization itself really helped me as a network and system administrator with a lot of servers to maintain. That's a pain. A virtualized environment is really easy to manage. Almost everything is in one dashboard. This really gives us more time in our research and innovation, and less time for maintenance or upgrades.

The minimal downtime alone is a winning blow for both the management and the ITs. Unexpected downtime is inevitable. It's been part any organization. Addressing that pitfall really gives an edge (from a business perspective).

Long-term savings in both buying more server in the future and absolutely the power consumption, not to mention the data center space it released or freed.

The mobility, flexibility, and scalability are really amazing and astonishing features.

I would like to see lowered cost. vSAN is very expensive.

I have used vSAN for two or three months. ESXi has been with us for around three years.

We are using vSAN 6.2, ESXi 5.5 and 6.0, and vSphere 6.0.

We have not had any stability issues so far.

Scalability is one of its strengths.

We haven't called technical support so far. But the web (Google) actually has plenty of good articles and forums and discussions. The website has also one of the best FAQ and DIY sections; 90% level of technical support.

We did not have a chance to try other virtualization platforms because the first one we tried really gave us a strong enough reason to stay loyal.

Initial setup was straightforward. You'll only have what you want.

Hopefully, over the next few years the pricing will be dramatically lower.

We are biased from the start to use VMware products only.

Study and evaluate your current setup. Conduct a case study to see if the advantages really outweigh the disadvantages. Virtualization really is the future. Especially here in my corner, almost all or most of the data centers are still in bare-metal setup. Because of the big price (CAPEX), most of the time, management will disapprove this project. But, if you help them see the big picture, I'm sure they are going to promote you for providing this project.

Snapshot: You know, that is amazing.

In our routine work, there is repeatable testing and validation. With the snapshot feature, we are able to keep our system in a specific status, including application parameters and network settings.

That has totally reduced our valuable time.

Currently, the work style of our organization has changed; when we get new projects, we can rapidly handle them.

If vSAN developed a "unified system" (that can support block + file + object), it would help users a lot in facing hybrid cloud environments.

I would prefer to use a complete and deep dashboard so I can give a supervisor a way to easily monitor the status of all drives and pool tiers. I think that would be a powerful feature for the future.

I have used it for two years.

Stability is great; however, you have to notify your counterparts if the system breaks down. :-D

Many popular SDS products can support up to 1000 nodes. This is an area where I hope vSAN is improved.

Hmmm, the level of technical support depends on the engineer who supports you when you contact the call center.

Traditional storage is scale-up type, which means there are a lot of supplier limitations and it costs too much.

Why not break though this situation? Now, flash is getting cheaper and bigger. With the changes mentioned, I think it will just stimulate SDS.

Initial setup was very simple for me. It is easy to set up if you get used to using vCenter.

SDS is going to be popular and common. If vSAN wants to remain #1 in the market, offering more discounts or something to attract customers is inevitable.

Currently, our environment is running VMware; therefore, we can consider using original distributed storage that connects directly to the kernel. That would reduce latency and data transfer loss.

It is easy to use and rapidly build up.

We plan to switch products since the hardware nowadays is a little bit outdated and we need to scale up a bit. We are looking for better performance and storage. This is why we are examining other solutions, including VxRail. 

We have been using VMware vSAN for at least 10 years.

The solution is quite stable. We have encountered some minor issues but, overall, are quite satisfied.

While the solution is scalable, I feel that this can be better. 

Although we have not made much use of the technical support, we found them to be good and helpful in finding solutions. 

The solutions we previously used were dissimilar to the current one. We had VMware for an extremely long time, at least 15 or 16 years. First, there was VMware servers, followed by us building and setting up VMware custom within a couple of servers.

I feel the pricing to be reasonable. We pay monthly. 

We have 50 users making use of the solution in our organization.

I rate VMware vSAN as an eight out of ten. 

We are a solution provider and VMware vSAN is one of the software-defined storage products that we propose to our customers. Most of the use cases that we see from our customers are where they need to utilize their own hardware. When the environment grows then they buy additional storage.

This product has very good performance when it comes to virtualization storage and works well with solutions such as SAP HANA, Exadata, Hadoop, and Big Data Analytics.

The most valuable feature is the integration with vSphere.

The deduplication and compression work well. 

One of the benefits of using this solution is that when you need additional storage, you just add it.

More focus has to be put on deduplication and compression with a hybrid architecture. The reason is that some customers need to have a more cost-effective solution so they don't want to implement all-flash. As such, they need to use a hybrid environment.

I have been working with VMware vSAN for more than ten years, from when vSAN first began.

This is a very reliable product.

It is easy to deploy additional machines when you need them for your workload.

vSAN can be expanded up to 96 hosts.

The support is very good and they respond quickly.

The initial setup is very straightforward. The length of time required for deployment depends on the number of nodes that it will be installed in. The typical setup takes from one week to two weeks.

The pricing vSAN is very expensive. Enterprise customers can customize their licenses according to their own needs and budget.

There is a cloud offering of this solution but our customers always choose the on-premises version. Most of our customers do not use vSAN as a standalone solution but rather, as part of a hyper-converged infrastructure. We normally propose its use with a product like VxRail and my advice is not to implement it standalone.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.