IBM Storage Protect (formerly IBM Spectrum Protect, or Tivoli Storage Manager) provides data resilience for physical file servers, virtual environments, and applications. Organizations can scale up to manage billions of objects per backup server.
N/A
Pure Storage FlashBlade
Score 9.9 out of 10
N/A
Pure Storage offers FlashBlade, a scale-out file and object storage – architected to consolidate complex data silos (like backup appliances and data lakes) while accelerating tomorrow's discoveries and insights.
At the time when we choose Storage Protect Veeam Data Platform was not an option on the market. Later we took the opportunity to evaluate it, but we kept Storage Protect because we already had in place the configuration for it.
Tivoli is the best software backup solution for medium and large-sized companies that need a backup and disaster
recovery system that is customizable with a
very high level of reliability. I really like the way we can customize the software according to the environment. It …
Tivoli no longer has a SharePoint agent, others do. We are looking at a product that is agentless (runs in VMWare) to relieve our staff from installing and maintaining agents on 300 servers.
IBM Spectrum protect is related to the other IBM Spectrum products listed because it is part of the suite and is also the main backup product for backup and restoration of information. With Veeam it is related as they present competence in different lines of technology, often …
Tivoli sits right in the middle of these two products, all things considered. Each has its own strengths (Cohesity has bells and whistles, CommVault works well with Microsoft). Tivoli is a nice blend and rock-solid once implemented.
We have been using TSM (former ADSM), rebranded Spectrum Protect and now rebranded Storage Protect a long time already. The product served us well. Last time we compared it to competitors we found they all had something lacking. And switching backup suites is no small task if …
Pure Storage FlashBlade provided a flexible and secure solution which these alternatives couldn't quite match. The simple file management system and rapid performance made this solution come out on top for us. The only real benefit over Pure Storage FlashBlade that these other …
Pure Storage FlashBlade is in our experience far faster, performance-wise, compared to its close competitors. However, if you factor in any packages you currently have with IBM or AWS for example, you can get more value for money for your data requirements. However, if …
Pure Storage FlashBlade has certainly very good high speeds when compared to its competition. Its performance is at par with the leading competitive storage solutions and in few cases even exceeds the expectations. Pure Storage FlashBlade's support of talented engineers is very …
It delivers the following, see below, and this is why it was selected as the platform of choice. *Supports CIFS, NFS, and object *Speed and performance
The NetApp a800 we tested was 14% faster than Pure FlashBlade with NFS workloads. However, NetApp lacked ease of administration and performing simple tasks such as creating multiple NFS volumes required scripting from the command line. Our flashblade contained 15 baldes and our …
Prior to FlashBlade, we used Avamar for our enterprise backup solution. While Avamar is a solid product, the FlashBlade provides better and more predictable stable performance. Since owning FlashBlade, we have never had any hardware issues or a drop in performance over time. It …
I've used many different file storage systems in the past from various established firms. They all have their place, but in the end, I wanted a vendor and solution that was high performing, stable, cost-efficient, easy to use and manage with a Sales, Account, and Support team …
We have Oracle ZFS Appliances and the cost of Flashblade was equivalent to one shelf of SSDs in cost. We shopped Isilon and Oracle Solutions, but FlashBlade had a definite cost/performance advantage.
The main difference between them and these mentioned is pure performance. There is no comparing backup and restoration times with competitors. We are talking thrusters vs warp engines here. Data compress and dedupe was for a time when storage came at a premium. Data rehydration …
Of all the storage arrays I've used in the last 20+ years, Pure Flashblade and Flasharray are by far the simplest and easiest to configure. By miles and miles, to be frank. Additionally, performing an upgrade to software or firmware on non-Pure storage platforms in the past …
Pure is both more expensive and less configurable than the excellent HNAS. However, the HNAS is now dependent upon Hitachi storage. The Flashblade is a self-contained unit, which helps reduce cross-platform lock-in. It's not mandatory to have Pure block storage to use the …
IT Hardware Engineer/Storage Architect - Senior Staff Member
Chose Pure Storage FlashBlade
Pure is easiest to install and administer making it a perfect fit for our EDA scratch environment. Pure lacks mixed mode support which forces Qualcomm to use NetApp or Isilon for any SMB environments.
We did not evaluate other options before purchasing. My personal history is mostly around personal NAS and old platter drive arrays. This thing is light years beyond. Not fair to compare older arrays versus FlashBlade.
We considered all of the major manufacturers of storage when we were evaluating our choice of a product to replace our older storage. We considered HP, EMC, DELL, and Netapp-- all of which the team has used at various times. Interestingly enough, initially no one had experience …
Tivoli does well running file-level backups, but Exchange is clunky and restores are really hard. With no SharePoint agent, if you use SharePoint you will need another product like AvePoint DocAve. The web-based GUI console is MUCH improved over earlier versions, but you will still need to be a command-line guru to make Tivoli do everything, and local (node) config files still rule. This product was originally ported from Unix and retains may of its 'nix roots.
Pure Storage FlashBlade is best for companies that want their data stored and secure. The big storage capacity and cloud integration secure our data and ensure no third-party access without authorization. It provides us a secure data storage services for our objects. Fast and easy to install and easy to use.
Tight integration with Db2. As an IBM product, it works seamlessly with Db2. You can query what is stored in TSM via Db2 itself. You can also use DB scripts to maintain the items being stored there.
Like most of its competitors, Tivoli handles deduplication well.
Provides a GUI for browsing and maintaining items stored there. I rarely use this feature, due to the next item I will post:
Command-line interface directly from my Db2 database servers.
Both client and server-side deduplication, compression and encryption are available.
If the requirements are zLinux and DB2 support then it's the most solid solution.
Can be complex to implement, but once up and running, it is rock-solid and immensely scalable.
When reporting out a user has exceeded there quote, it only references the UID. It would certainly be nice it calls out the UID name that is clearly present in the Dashboard.
The ability to determine a snapshot total size would be helpful.
Proactive reachout to discuss new versions and assist in planning the upgrade would be a key win.
It is suitable for a huge part of our organisation, supports many operating systems (including Windows, Linux and IBM AIX), supports many databases - also for online backups (like Oracle, Db2 and SAP HANA), has an Operational Center for control, command-line and GUI for backup/restore. It just works well, once setup correctly.
Without exception, the contacts with support have been quick and extremely knowledgeable. I do not fear getting an underqualified engineer to assess or work on my arrays. In addition to this support structure, the sales engineers are top notch as well.
We have been using TSM (former ADSM), rebranded Spectrum Protect and now rebranded Storage Protect a long time already. The product served us well. Last time we compared it to competitors we found they all had something lacking. And switching backup suites is no small task if there is data you need to keep 5, 7 or 10 years anyway. Commvault gets close, but doesn't match all features.
Pure Storage FlashBlade is in our experience far faster, performance-wise, compared to its close competitors. However, if you factor in any packages you currently have with IBM or AWS for example, you can get more value for money for your data requirements. However, if performance is a must, the increased cost is not an issue.
It can be used as a disaster recovery solution when you have the right configuration (either replication or tape copies in a safe location). This way it can be a lifesaver for any company.
It can bring back the information you need if you are hit by ransomeware.
It is also needed if you are accounting for user error, sometimes people delete the files they need by accident and without a backup solution they are out of luck
Pure has greatly narrowed the performance gap between file storage and fiber channel block storage with FlashBlade. Exotic file systems and costly FC fabrics are no longer needed to run performant storage.
Training is not required for a storage admin who has never touched a Pure array. Everything is where you would expect to find it.