Cisco Cloud Object Storage (COS) vs. IBM Storage Ceph

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco Cloud Object Storage (COS)
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Cisco Cloud Object Storage (COS) provides distributed, resilient, high-performance storage and retrieval of binary large object (blob) data. Object storage is distributed across a cluster of hardware systems, or nodes. The storage cluster is resilient against hard drive failure within a node and against node failure within a cluster. Nodes can be added to or removed from the cluster to adjust cluster capacity as needed.N/A
IBM Storage Ceph
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
IBM® Storage Ceph® is a software-defined storage platform that consolidates block, file and object storage to help organizations eliminate data silos and deliver a cloud-like experience while retaining the cost benefits and data sovereignty advantages of on-premises IT.N/A
Pricing
Cisco Cloud Object Storage (COS)IBM Storage Ceph
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Cloud Object Storage (COS)IBM Storage Ceph
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco Cloud Object Storage (COS)IBM Storage Ceph
User Ratings
Cisco Cloud Object Storage (COS)IBM Storage Ceph
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(0 ratings)
8.7
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco Cloud Object Storage (COS)IBM Storage Ceph
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco Cloud Object [Storage's] primary objective is to offer a secure, standard, and professional storage space, for the content that the company has. Further, Cisco Cloud Object Storage makes the access and the [sharing] of every detail efficient and remarkable. Again, the monitoring and overseeing of the database from Cisco Cloud Object Storage is [progress] that the developer established. Finally, the application [enhances] data migration, an effective way of managing content.
Read full review
It is absolutely, hands down the best storage solution for Open Stack. I would even argue it is the only solution if a company is operating at petabyte scale and need resiliency. The storage solution allows any organization to scale their environment using commodity hardware from top to bottom. It has a battle tested track record where it is even being used as the data storage back end for the Large Hadron Collider at Cern
Read full review
Pros
  • Content Monitoring
  • Data Storage
  • File checking
Read full review
  • Highly resilient, almost every time we attempted to destroy the cluster it was able to recover from a failure. It struggled to when the nodes where down to about 30%(3 replicas on 10 nodes)
  • The cache tiering feature of Ceph is especially nice. We attached solid state disks and assigned them as the cache tier. Our sio benchmarks beat the our Netapp when we benchmarked it years ago (no traffic, clean disks) by a very wide margin.
  • Ceph effectively allows the admin to control the entire stack from top to bottom instead of being tied to any one storage vendor. The cluster can be decentralized and replicated across data centers if necessary although we didn't try that feature ourselves, it gave us some ideas for a disaster recovery solution. We really liked the idea that since we control the hardware and the software, we have infinite upgradability with off the shelf parts which is exactly what it was built for.
Read full review
Cons
  • The first tools configuration can be easy.
  • Handling complex data storage is not easy.
  • Moving a large media files functionality can be improved.
Read full review
  • Authorization on object level could be improved
  • Helper libraries to access Red Hat Ceph Storage from various languages could be improved
  • Ability to attach structured metadata to stored objects could be improved
Read full review
Usability
Cisco Cloud Object Storage (COS) stands out in terms of scalability, reliability, and security. Even the storage plans are competitive with other cloud object storage providers. It provides great performance for unstructured data and large datasets, which are highly used in industries requiring analyses of large datasets. For an efficient user experience, it also provides content delivery for the users spanning across the globe.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Read full review
VSAN (Virtual SAN) and Ceph are both software-defined storage solutions, but they have some key differences in terms of their architecture and capabilities.VSAN is a software-defined storage solution that is built into the VMware vSphere hypervisor. It allows organizations to create a shared storage pool using locally attached storage on multiple ESXi hosts. VSAN is designed to be highly available, and it can automatically detect and recover from hardware failures.Ceph, on the other hand, is an open-source software-defined storage solution that can run on a variety of different hardware and virtualization platforms. It provides object, block, and file storage in a single platform, and is designed to be highly scalable and highly available. Ceph is also known for its ability to handle large amounts of data, and it can be integrated with a wide variety of different applications and services.In terms of functionality, VSAN is more suited for virtualized environments, as it is built into vSphere and it is designed to work well with vSphere's other features such as vMotion and DRS. Ceph on the other hand provides more flexibility as it can run on multiple platforms and it can handle more types of storage like object, block and file storage.I
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Cheaper to use Cisco Cloud Object Storage (COS) than the on-premise storage and hence savings in infrastructure cost.
  • Using Cloud based storage has reduced the manpower resources required to maintain the storage infrastructure, further reducing costs.
  • Overall, end-user latency has reduced by using Cisco Cloud Object Storage (COS) as a content delivery network for the media files.
Read full review
  • Cost saving in terms of capex (you can reduce EMC & NetApp like dependency)
  • One time setup & then easy provisioning of storage
  • Requirement of competent engineers for maintenence
Read full review
ScreenShots