HPE Data Fabric vs. IBM Storage Ceph

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
HPE Data Fabric
Score 9.4 out of 10
N/A
HPE Data Fabric (formerly MapR, acquired by HPE in 2019) is a software-defined datastore and file system that simplifies data management and analytics by unifying data across core, edge, and multicloud sources into a single platform.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
HPE Data FabricIBM Storage Ceph
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
HPE Data FabricIBM 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
HPE Data FabricIBM Storage Ceph
Best Alternatives
HPE Data FabricIBM Storage Ceph
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

StarWind Virtual SAN
StarWind Virtual SAN
Score 9.9 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Cloudera Manager
Cloudera Manager
Score 9.9 out of 10
StarWind Virtual SAN
StarWind Virtual SAN
Score 9.9 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM Analytics Engine
IBM Analytics Engine
Score 7.1 out of 10
IBM Storage Scale
IBM Storage Scale
Score 6.5 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
HPE Data FabricIBM Storage Ceph
Likelihood to Recommend
7.2
(0 ratings)
8.7
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
HPE Data FabricIBM Storage Ceph
Likelihood to Recommend
If you need Hadoop and just need raw speed for I/O and have a Hadoop savvy group of engineers who don't need/like web UIs, then MapR is a great fit for you. If you are new to Hadoop or have DevOps folks that are not Hadoop gurus, choosing MapR as your Hadoop vendor will have a steeper learning curve as you will need to do more training and build more admin consoles for them.
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
  • MapR allows easy integration with HBase and MapR DB.
  • Easy trial server setup for product testing.
  • Excellent training program to help new users get up-to-date with MapR and related products.
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
  • I think MapR's main problem is name recognition. Hortonworks and Cloudera both are big names in the industry, but their deployment mechanisms are a little more difficult to use, especially when trying to fully automate it's deployment.
  • Documentation could always be better. But really, if that's your main weakness, it's everybody's weakness.
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
Alternatives Considered
Hortonworks and Cloudera are both sort of hacky. We have to do a lot of extra steps to automate those two. MapR has far fewer issues and doesn't force you into a once size fits all deployment scenario. There are multiple ways to deploy and some are more amenable to automation, MapR just has that in spades
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
  • Less manual intervention for maintaining a cluster.
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