Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cloudian HyperStore vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Pure Storage FlashBlade
Sponsored
Ranking in File and Object Storage
8th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (12th), Software Defined Storage (SDS) (9th)
Cloudian HyperStore
Ranking in File and Object Storage
11th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat Ceph Storage
Ranking in File and Object Storage
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined Storage (SDS) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.5%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cloudian HyperStore is 2.7%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 14.7%, down from 21.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
File and Object Storage Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Red Hat Ceph Storage14.7%
Pure Storage FlashBlade5.5%
Cloudian HyperStore2.7%
Other77.1%
File and Object Storage
 

Featured Reviews

MikaelHellström - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at Regin Dalarna
Has handled backup storage needs reliably and supports seamless upgrades
In environments requiring high throughput and low latency, Pure Storage FlashBlade provides high throughput and normal latency, but we do not have any application that requires low latency right now, so the latency of three to five milliseconds is considered kind of high. Pure Storage FlashBlade's ability to integrate with enterprise applications is not important for us, as we only want to present an S3 bucket for our backup, which we have done, and it works very fast. We use the Purity software's data reduction techniques; we have a backup software that compresses everything before sending it to the S3 bucket, achieving a data reduction of 1.1 to one. I would recommend Pure Storage FlashBlade to other companies because it's a very fast and scalable solution for anyone who needs it. On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution an 8.
NS
Sr Infrastructure Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Object storage has reduced costs and improves data protection for web application workloads
Cloudian HyperStore can be improved by making upgrades easier. Currently, I see that upgrades are very complicated, and most of the time I require Cloudian support whenever I want to upgrade. I think Cloudian has the opportunity to improve in self-service capabilities. If they make upgrades less vendor-dependent, that would be beneficial. I would also like to add that more automation APIs would be valuable. If more APIs were available for S3 compatible tasks, that would be great. I rate the product eight because if they make updates easier, make firmware upgrades easier, make compaction available on CMC instead of requiring scripts, make node cleanup straightforward, make forecasting simple, make capacity planning easy, and provide self-healing opportunities, I believe the rating would be a ten.
Rifat Rahman - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Architect & CEO at Tirzok Private Limited
Offers reliable performance and availability for large deployments
I would like to see improvements in Red Hat Ceph Storage not because I necessarily think it needs improvement, but because I generally prefer to do things manually rather than following the containerization part. Current deployments are based on containers, but I deploy manually with my scripts and controls. If there are no Kubernetes-like requirements, I often prefer to deploy a whole manual process. I don't ask for improvements in the deployment model because Red Hat has its own philosophy about making things, but it's my personal choice that I prefer things manually. Some features are available only in the containerization part, so if those are also available in manual deployment, that will help.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"We have integrated it with VMware. The integration process is pretty good. Especially with VMware, it helps with the capacity of it."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the rewrite speed and the nonstop services."
"It has absolutely simplified our storage because the dashboards on the consoles show a clear understanding of where you are, and it is also very easy to provision. This been a big help for our teams."
"The most valuable features include the ease of implementation, ease of use and the speed that you can do backup and recovery on."
"What I like best about Pure Storage FlashBlade is its object storage functionality, plus it has fast underlying hardware. Pure Storage FlashBlade is also very stable. I find its stability one of its valuable features."
"The solution is able to handle workloads and is easy to use. It allows us to actually manage the boxes in less time."
"The tool's most valuable features are data warehousing, speedy recovery, and analytics. Its latest release is cost-effective."
"The performance of FlashBlade is excellent. It does not necessarily leverage the SOS API that some of the newer products leverage, but I found its speed pretty much on par and comparable. It is fast, and it does what it is supposed to do."
"Cloudian HyperStore is one hundred percent stable."
"The cost was the main reason we chose to use this solution."
"The most valuable features are its scalability and Amazon S3 compatibility because we can move back and forth with a hybrid cloud."
"Cloudian HyperStore has significantly improved our organization by making our data storage more efficient, scalable, and overall cost-effective."
"Cloudian HyperStore impacted my organization positively because we started to use it at least eight years ago, and at that time, we did not have many choices on the market, and I do not recall a truly good enterprise solution for using S3 storage in a private data center."
"It is very durable and that is particularly important."
"Cloudian HyperStore has significantly improved our organization by providing scalable, reliable, and cost-effective object storage for our growing volumes of unstructured data."
"The tool has S3 capability. Its scalability is excellent. From a security and encryption perspective, the solution supports SSL encryption. It is a seamless solution offering data encryption, quality service, and security encryption."
"The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."
"radosgw and librados provide a simple integration with clone, snapshots, and other functions that aid in data integrity."
"The scalability feature is used by all users and is critical for our operations."
"Data redundancy is a key feature, since it can survive failures (disks/servers). We didn’t lose our data or have a service interruption during server/disk failures."
"Replicated and erasure coded pools have allowed for multiple copies to be kept, easy scale-out of additional nodes, and easy replacement of failed hard drives. The solution continues working even when there are errors."
"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."
"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."
"The setup is very easy, deserving a ten out of ten."
 

Cons

"Commvault has mainly driven the Analytics, providing data and reports. However, the product has room for improvement, especially regarding storage analytics. Upgrading firmware has caused issues, requiring feature disabling to revert to traditional backups. The firmware upgrades sometimes affect Commvault backups."
"We initially encountered challenges with the assembly process due to issues with the documentation required during setup, an area where Pure Storage needs improvement."
"Recently, while upgrading the version code, one of the controllers failed. Replacing the controller took between 14 to 20 days."
"I have not seen ROI."
"In terms of technical support, the experience has been mixed. The support is done through email and is not that great, making it a very problematic area I've been dealing with for over four years."
"I would like to see the licensing fees improved as well as the price per terabytes."
"I would like to see more VM-Aware features in the next release of this solution."
"There could be improvements in public cloud integration."
"The initial cost has not been recouped because of performance issues, leading to a lack of customer trust with this product, as I cannot sell it quickly enough before the new licensing costs hit, resulting in losing money by the end."
"As it is an S3 solution with the same protocol as the one we have with AWS, having better integration with AWS will be beneficial."
"Cloudian HyperStore's scalability is not as good as I wanted it to be because if I want to add anything new to the current environment, the process is extremely lengthy and takes a lot of time."
"Cloudian HyperStore needs to incorporate AI and predictive analysis. It would be helpful if the solution could analyze and predict how to manage data better. The end users should not have access to protected documents. They should be able to drop the documents. The capacity management dashboard can be better. We also want two-factor authentication using Google Authenticator or Microsoft Authenticator as MFA. Hence, the user would access the console not just by logging in with a password and username but with third-party applications as well."
"It is a cloud-based environment and at times, it is not very simple to use."
"The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."
"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."
"It took me a long time to get the storage drivers for the communication with Kubernetes up and running. The documentation could improve it is lacking information. I'm not sure if this is a Ceph problem or if Ceph should address this, but it was something I ran into. Additionally, there is a performance issue I am having that I am looking into, but overall I am satisfied with the performance."
"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."
"If troubleshooting is needed, the response should be faster."
"Ceph does not deal very well with, or takes a long time to recover from, certain kinds of network failures and individual storage node failures."
"The management features are pretty good, but they still have room for improvement."
"This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We used a reseller for the purchase."
"Support is a separate line item. Support is a different cost, but whatever your support is now, that's what you're going to pay forever. If your support's $100 today, six years from now it's $100. It doesn't fluctuate unless you upgrade it, or change it, etc."
"It's a costly solution, but Pure Storage FlashBlade doesn't require additional licenses. All of the software is combined into one bundle."
"The product is very expensive."
"Pure Storage FlashBlade is a hardware appliance, and it's very expensive if you compare its price with other solutions. You can get the same features and benefits from its competitor, VAST Data, but for half the price of Pure Storage FlashBlade."
"The pricing for FlashBlade is between cheap and moderate."
"In my opinion, we have paid the right price for the product. I don't think that it is too much or too little."
"Our licensing is renewed annually."
"The solution is cheap."
"Our fees are approximately half a dollar per gigabyte."
"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten."
"The price of Red Hat Ceph Storage is reasonable."
"If you can afford a product like Red Hat Ceph Storage then go for it. If you cannot, then you need to test Ceph and get your hands dirty."
"The operational overhead is higher compared to Azure because we own the hardware."
"The other big advantage is that Ceph is free software. Compared to traditional SAN based storage, it is very economical."
"We never used the paid support."
"The price of this product isn't high."
"There is no cost for software."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File and Object Storage solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
7%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise21
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Pure Storage FlashBlade?
The tool's most valuable feature is its fast performance, especially in handling snapshots. It helps during power out...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashBlade?
Regarding pricing, it is okay; we needed exactly this in size, and the price was a lot lower than competitors, making...
What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?
In my opinion, one way Pure Storage FlashBlade can be improved is by having more compatibility between the FlashArray...
What needs improvement with Cloudian HyperStore?
Cloudian HyperStore can be improved by replacing the Cassandra database since it seems to struggle. I would add that ...
What is your primary use case for Cloudian HyperStore?
My main use case for Cloudian HyperStore is for immutable backup storage. I use Cloudian HyperStore for immutable bac...
What advice do you have for others considering Cloudian HyperStore?
My advice for others looking into using Cloudian HyperStore is to consider it a good product to add to their portfoli...
How does Red Hat Ceph Storage compare with MiniO?
Red Hat Ceph does well in simplifying storage integration by replacing the need for numerous storage solutions. This ...
What do you like most about Red Hat Ceph Storage?
The high availability of the solution is important to us.
What needs improvement with Red Hat Ceph Storage?
Areas of Red Hat Ceph Storage that have room for improvement include more promotion. Many people do not know about th...
 

Also Known As

No data available
HyperStore, Cloudian HyperStore Object Storage, HyperStore Object Storage
Ceph
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ServiceNow, Mercedes-AMG Petronas Motorsport, Dominos, Man AHL
NTT Communications, Casale, Kumo
Dell, DreamHost
Find out what your peers are saying about Cloudian HyperStore vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.