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
Scality ARTESCA
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Scality in San Francisco offers scalable file and object storage for media, healthcare, cloud service providers, and others.
N/A
Pricing
IBM Storage Ceph
Scality ARTESCA
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
IBM Storage Ceph
Scality ARTESCA
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
Contact vendor for booking demo and pricing information.
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 …
MongoDB offers better search ability compared to Red Hat Ceph Storage but it’s more optimized for large number of object while Red Hat Ceph Storage is preferred if you need to store binary data or large individual objects. To get acceptable search functionality you really need …
I have not experienced any other reliable storage platform. This software catches up with the daily changes in our workloads. It caters to all our market demands and effectively safeguards every information that is generated from our company. The installation and deployment …
Red Hat Ceph storage offers an object store, which the other solutions do not. In addition, it is perfect for providing scalable block storage to virtualization products.
Red Hat Ceph storage is most comparable with VMware Virtual San which we currently use in production. It had about the same default resiliency although we had far more customization options with Ceph albeit more difficult to configure. VMware Virtual San is such an expensive …
Our data centers use simpler hardware & Red Hat Ceph Storage is simpler to use for moderate-sized data centers with simple hardware. Also, glusterFS is more suitable for a large amount of data (Zetabytes) with large file sizes which is not our requirement. It is easy to make …
In reality, it did not become a substitute for AWS, since it allowed us to maintain a much more compact and rigid system by taking advantage of the support and evolutionary trend that Scality has and keeping AWS as a leader.
Due to the nature of our business we require extensive encryption and availability for sensitive customer data. The erasure encoding that Scality provides gives us the assurance that documents are rest are never in a state of being downloaded or available to a casual data …
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
When high availability and keeping sensitive information safe are top priority Scality is a great option and has good features that make it ideal for these type of applications. For small companies with limited resources to administer extensive systems Scality would not be a good match. It takes people dedicated to this platform to keep it functioning at its best.
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.
As an organization, it took us a while to understand the shift from a traditional black box SAN to software-defined storage, but now we are much more certain of what this means. The time invested and the resources were not very high, thanks on the one hand to the technical support and on the other to the coherence and good development of the platform.
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
In reality, it did not become a substitute for AWS, since it allowed us to maintain a much more compact and rigid system by taking advantage of the support and evolutionary trend that Scality has and keeping AWS as a leader.