Red Hat Ceph Storage vs StorPool comparison

Red Hat and StorPool are both solutions in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category. Red Hat is ranked #3 with an average rating of 9.3, while StorPool is ranked #18. Red Hat holds a 14.3% mindshare in SDS, compared to StorPool’s 2.9% mindshare. Additionally, 82% of Red Hat users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of StorPool users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 5, 2024

Red Hat Ceph Storage and StorPool compete in the field of data storage solutions. StorPool seems to have the upper hand for businesses prioritizing performance and simplicity, while Red Hat Ceph Storage excels in adaptability and integration with open-source ecosystems.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage is recognized for its scalability, extensive integration capabilities within Red Hat's ecosystem, and high availability. StorPool is noted for its high performance, low latency, and ease of management, making it a compelling option for enterprises focusing on these factors.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage could benefit from a simplified deployment process, enhanced user interface, and reduced complexity in integration requirements. StorPool might improve by expanding integration options, enhancing support for varied enterprise environments, and increasing its focus on ecosystem partnerships.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Red Hat Ceph Storage presents a complex deployment model and requires substantial expertise for setup and integration. StorPool offers a straightforward deployment process with comprehensive solution-focused support. StorPool's customer service is highlighted for its responsiveness and personalized assistance, useful for organizations seeking quick resolutions.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage demands a significant initial investment, promising a strong ROI through its robust capabilities. StorPool, on the other hand, provides a competitive pricing model with lower operational costs, enabling a quicker ROI for performance-focused businesses. StorPool's pricing advantage and efficiency are appealing for enterprises seeking a high return with reduced initial expenditure.

To learn more, read our detailed Red Hat Ceph Storage vs. StorPool Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs. StorPool

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 peers since 2012

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

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 3.3%, down from 4.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 14.3%, down from 21.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of StorPool is 2.9%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Software Defined Storage (SDS) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Red Hat Ceph Storage	14.3%
Pure Storage FlashBlade	3.3%
StorPool	2.9%
Other	79.5%

Software Defined Storage (SDS)

Q&A Highlights

Julia Miller

Community Director at PeerSpot

Nov 14, 2018

Storpool or Red Hat Ceph: Which Do You Recommend?

We have been using StorPool for over 3 years now and we are extremely happy with it. Since then we have witnessed an increase in the performance, whilst the downtime simply disappeared. When choosing a storage vendor, we also tried out Ceph, because it is believed to be good for block storage, but when we ran tests on similar hardware with both Ceph and StorPool, StorPool outperformed Ceph by an order of magnitude

See all answers

Featured Reviews

MikaelHellström

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.

Read full review

Rifat Rahman

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.

Read full review

reviewer1721697

Managing Director at CloudScale365, Inc.

Great service and support with a constant addition of new features

As of now, the product has been working really well for us. They keep updating and launching new features. Their support has been great and have always been available. I have personally met with multiple Storpool engineers and spoke about different options and features. There are too many features that we don't know or use yet. My recommendation would be to promote the new features and give users different examples of how they can be used and how we can benefit from them. This is a great product.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's very easy-to-use."

"The onboarding and integrated monitoring tools are pretty good."

"Pure Storage FlashBlade is user-friendly. It's replication feature is great because it has active replication and active DR. That's the beauty of the product. It's a perfect solution for block storage."

"The snapshots, replication, and the ability to have immutable blades are the most valuable features. You're putting data snapshots out in those blades, and they cannot be touched. Its performance is great."

"I like its size. It is smaller than the other competitors. We can plug in many blades, and we can have data up to one terabyte."

"We have integrated it with VMware. The integration process is pretty good. Especially with VMware, it helps with the capacity of it."

"The initial setup was straightforward. If you know how to plug in power and network you're pretty much qualified. They were on site to configure the network, the box to fit into our network architecture. Other than that, we self-managed from there."

"The solution is able to handle workloads and is easy to use. It allows us to actually manage the boxes in less time."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"The high availability of the solution is important to us."

"The solution is pretty stable."

"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."

"The setup is very easy, deserving a ten out of ten."

"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."

"It's a very performance-intensive, brilliant storage system, and I always recommend it to customers based on its benefits, performance, and scalability."

"Without any extra costs, I was able to provide a redundant environment."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

"Creating snapshots within seconds for big disks has helped our different migration projects since it allows us to perform them in a short period of time."

"The two 10GE networks provide redundancy and increased performance as they serve as two separate networks doubling the throughput and doing multipathing and load balancing. We now have a high performance shared storage system which enables us to run on private cloud. Our previous system used bare-metal hardware, which provided high performance but inflexible management. Now we have best of both worlds, SSD-class performance with flexibility of a private cloud system."

"Performance, redundancy, scalability and cost-effectiveness. StorPool delivers superbly in all of these areas."

"With StorPool we were able to build live failover on top of our LXC infrastructure. This allows us both to live-migrate containers between compute nodes without any downtime and, in case of an entire node suffering any type of failure, we can bring all containers back online within a minute on a spare compute node."

"The team behind it was very engaged and had the skills and ability to support a service provider."

"The speed of the storage solution also allows us to provide service to applications that are very I/O intensive."

Cons

"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."

"An area for improvement in Pure Storage FlashBlade is its price. It could be reduced. The technical support for Pure Storage FlashBlade also needs improvement. It used to be good, with more experienced engineers. Nowadays, it isn't, and it takes longer for support to solve problems."

"I want efficiency. FlashBlade doesn't have efficiency now."

"There could be improvements in public cloud integration."

"Compared to, for example, Hitachi NAS, the solution is not mature at all. It's just in its infancy as far as technology goes."

"There is some room for new features related to authentication and integration with Kubernetes, and other solution using S3 Bucket."

"In terms of scalability, it doesn't expand out quite as robustly as some of the others, but it covers 90% of the market in what it does."

"I would like to see more deduplication."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"We have encountered slight integration issues."

"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."

"It needs a better UI for easier installation and management."

"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."

"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."

"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."

"If troubleshooting is needed, the response should be faster."

"Some documentation is very hard to find."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

"I have personally met with multiple Storpool engineers and spoke about different options and features. There are too many features that we don't know or use yet. My recommendation would be to promote the new features and give users different examples of how they can be used and how we can benefit from them."

"At times we need to check the disks and do some minor operations. A friendlier user interface would be useful in such cases."

"he only place we feel they could improve is the time it takes to bring new features to production."

"Monitoring and statistics UI is a bit clumsy."

"Live and historical performance statistics would be useful, though my understanding is that this is on the way in a future release."

"It would be good if, with next releases, StorPool provide a better GUI for monitoring and statistics. This would make our experience even better and complete."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I feel that the price could always be lowered."

"In my opinion, we have paid the right price for the product. I don't think that it is too much or too little."

"We used a reseller for the purchase."

"The product is very expensive."

"I rate the tool's pricing a seven to eight out of ten."

"The pricing is relatively expensive due to the FlashBlade technology. However, for companies needing quick and reliable data access, the cost is justified."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

"The price of this solution could be made more affordable."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"Most of time, you can get Ceph with the OpenStack solution in a subscription as a bundle."

"The price of Red Hat Ceph Storage is reasonable."

"The operational overhead is higher compared to Azure because we own the hardware."

"There is no cost for software."

"We never used the paid support."

"The price of this product isn't high."

"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."

"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pricing and cost advice

"StorPool software is cost-effective and gives us a pricing advantage over our competitors."

"It provides us with a significant reduction in TCO due to their pay-as-you-grow licensing model, which means we don’t have to pay upfront for hardware and licensing for capacity thStorPoolat we don’t yet need to use."

"StorPool's pricing and licensing model is very transparent. As always, one has to due his due diligence when choosing a product like distributed storage solutions."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Answers from the Community

Julia Miller

Community Director at PeerSpot

Nov 14, 2018

Storpool or Red Hat Ceph: Which Do You Recommend?

2 out of 13 answers

it_user304281

Works

Apr 9, 2018

I have no knowledge of both. I only know some others like VSAN or S2D.

Read full answer

it_user695040

Business Development Manager at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees

Apr 9, 2018

StorPool - we work closely with the StorPool team and sell their SDS software alongside Dell servers for high speed and perfoming All flash systems. Great software and technology built from the ground up

Read full answer

See all 13 answers

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

15%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Performing Arts

17%

Manufacturing Company

16%

Computer Software Company

16%

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	21

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	13
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	15

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Large Enterprise	1

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

What do you like most about Red Hat Ceph Storage?

The high availability of the solution is important to us.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 18% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 9% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 9% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 7% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 6% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 48% of the time

VMware vSAN vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

Intel DAOS vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 1% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

LINBIT SDS vs StorPool

Compared 16% of the time

StarWind Virtual SAN vs StorPool

Compared 13% of the time

Red Hat Gluster Storage vs StorPool

Compared 13% of the time

Portworx Enterprise vs StorPool

Compared 8% of the time

More StorPool Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

January 2026

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

January 2026

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Buyer's Guide

StorPool

January 2026

Download StorPool product report

Also Known As

No data available

Ceph

No data available

Overview

FlashBlade is the industry’s most advanced scale-out storage for unstructured data, powered by a modern, massively parallel architecture to consolidate complex data silos (like backup appliances and data lakes) and accelerate tomorrow’s discoveries and insights.

Pure Storage

Red Hat Ceph Storage is an enterprise open source platform that provides unified software-defined storage on standard, economical servers and disks. With block, object, and file storage combined into one platform, Red Hat Ceph Storage efficiently and automatically manages all your data.

Red Hat

StorPool is intelligent storage software that runs on standard servers and builds scalable, high-performance storage system out of these servers (software-defined storage). It focuses on the block-level storage and excels at it. It is incredibly flexible and can be deployed in both converged setups (on compute nodes, alongside VMs and applications) or on separate storage nodes.

StorPool has advanced fully-distributed architecture and is arguably the fastest and most efficient block-storage software on the market today. It is the best storage system when building a cloud.

StorPool

Sample Customers

ServiceNow, Mercedes-AMG Petronas Motorsport, Dominos, Man AHL

Dell, DreamHost

CloudSigma, Kualo, Togglebox, Neterra, Serveo, Superhosting.bg, GroupOne, DRFortress, Metanet, Dia, Server Storage Solutions

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs. StorPool

January 2026

Free Report: Red Hat Ceph Storage vs. StorPool

Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat Ceph Storage vs. StorPool and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Red Hat Ceph Storage vs. StorPool report.

See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors.

We monitor all Software Defined Storage (SDS) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.