Red Hat Gluster Storage vs StorPool comparison

Red Hat and StorPool are both solutions in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category. Red Hat is ranked #11 with an average rating of 10.0, while StorPool is ranked #18. Red Hat holds a 3.2% mindshare in SDS, compared to StorPool’s 2.7% mindshare. Additionally, 80% 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

StorPool and Red Hat Gluster Storage compete in the software-defined storage space. StorPool holds an advantage in terms of performance and user satisfaction due to its simple, scalable, and high-performance solutions, while Red Hat Gluster Storage is strong in enterprise features and integration capabilities.

Features: StorPool is characterized by its seamless scalability, high-performance efficiency management, and ease of expansion, making it highly reliable even under high I/O loads. Red Hat Gluster Storage is noted for its robust integration with enterprise ecosystems, its flexibility with various workloads, and its open-source architecture, which allows for extensive customization.

Room for Improvement: StorPool could enhance its documentation, expand integration capabilities with third-party systems, and offer more flexible deployment options. Red Hat Gluster Storage could benefit from simplifying its deployment process, reducing initial setup complexity, and providing more intuitive user interfaces.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: StorPool provides straightforward deployment and attentive customer service, facilitating an efficient setup and quick resolution of issues. Red Hat Gluster Storage, although offering extensive documentation and advanced configuration options, has a more complex deployment process which can be challenging for users.

Pricing and ROI: StorPool is known for its competitive pricing model and quick return on investment, appealing to businesses seeking cost-effective solutions. Red Hat Gluster Storage, while having higher initial setup costs, is valued for its expansive features that cater to enterprise-level applications, offering long-term ROI.

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

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Gluster Storage vs. StorPool

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,733 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 February 2026, in the Software Defined Storage (SDS) category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 3.4%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Gluster Storage is 3.2%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of StorPool is 2.7%, 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 (%)
Pure Storage FlashBlade	3.4%
Red Hat Gluster Storage	3.2%
StorPool	2.7%
Other	90.7%

Software Defined Storage (SDS)

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

GiovanniRamirez

Senior IT Consultant at Xerif

Flexible and scalable file system for growing storage needs

Gluster FS is used for various purposes, including virtualization, collaboration, and data center environments. It is also applied in personal environments. Some specific use cases mentioned include scaling a three-terabyte file system into a 12-terabyte file system with minimal downtime Gluster…

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

"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 initial setup is pretty easy and simple."

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

"Speed and ease of use are the two most valuable features."

"It has also helped to simplify storage for us in the way that it's easy to manage. Their automatic monitoring really helps when things break or are about to break. They see a problem coming and alert us even before our own system does."

"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."

"It is very easy to use, and it is very fast."

"We can capacity plan at a greater level than we used to."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"The price tag is good compared to the amount of data and high availability provided."

"Notable features of Gluster FS include flexibility, scalability, stability, and ease of use."

"The technical support team is excellent."

"It's very easy to upgrade storage."

"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."

"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 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."

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

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

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

Cons

"The feature that we're waiting on is better integration with the cell services."

"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."

"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."

"The speed could be improved."

"Its configuration should be easier."

"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."

"They need better integration with public clouds along with a better hybrid solution."

"On our dedupe during our initial buy, we were expecting a number a little higher like 4x. However, we are getting about 3.6. While it is close enough, it doesn't quite hit the numbers. So, this has been a challenge."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"The system should be more intuitive and easier to manage."

"The user interface could be simplified."

"The performance of the solution must be improved."

"There is a feature in Red Hat’s commercial version that could be beneficial if integrated into the open-source version."

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

"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."

"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."

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

"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

"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."

"We used a reseller for the purchase."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

"I understand that it is competitively priced compared to other brands."

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

"The pricing for FlashBlade is between cheap and moderate."

"The product is very expensive."

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

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"If you need cheap storage, but still need high availability, it's a good product to look at."

"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."

"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."

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

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Comms Service Provider

Performing Arts

17%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Computer Software Company

15%

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

No data available

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

What needs improvement with Red Hat Gluster Storage?

There is a feature in Red Hat’s commercial version that could be beneficial if integrated into the open-source versio...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Red Hat Gluster Storage?

Gluster FS is used for various purposes, including virtualization, collaboration, and data center environments. It is...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat Gluster Storage?

I would highly recommend Gluster FS to others considering it. The system is robust, flexible, and easy to use. I'd ra...

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 8% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 7% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 6% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs Red Hat Gluster Storage

Compared 11% of the time

LizardFS vs Red Hat Gluster Storage

Compared 9% of the time

Veritas Access vs Red Hat Gluster Storage

Compared 9% of the time

LINBIT SDS vs Red Hat Gluster Storage

Compared 9% of the time

StarWind Virtual SAN vs Red Hat Gluster Storage

Compared 6% of the time

More Red Hat Gluster Storage Competitors

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs StorPool

Compared 48% of the time

StarWind Virtual SAN vs StorPool

Compared 15% of the time

LINBIT SDS vs StorPool

Compared 15% of the time

Portworx Enterprise vs StorPool

Compared 9% 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

Software Defined Storage (SDS)

January 2026

Download Red Hat Gluster Storage product report

Buyer's Guide

StorPool

January 2026

Download StorPool product report

Also Known As

No data available

Red Hat Gluster, Red Hat Storage Server

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 Gluster Storage (formerly known as Red Hat Storage Server) is a software-defined storage (SDS) platform designed to handle the requirements of traditional file storage—high-capacity tasks like backup and archival as well as high-performance tasks of analytics and virtualization. But unlike traditional storage systems, Red Hat Gluster Storage isn’t rigid and expensive. It easily scales across bare metal, virtual, container, and cloud deployments.

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

NTT Plala, McMaster University, University of Basque Country, Goodtech ASA, Cox Automotive, Raidió Teilifís Éireann (RTÉ), SaskTel, Glashart Media, Casio

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

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Gluster Storage vs. StorPool

February 2026

Free Report: Red Hat Gluster Storage vs. StorPool

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Red Hat Gluster 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.