FlexPod XCS Reviews

The most valuable feature is the mirroring and FlexClone capabilities on the storage side and with the Oracle database. It quickly creates a new database and copies the original, but it doesn’t need to disturb the original if you don’t want it to.

Probably decreased working time, as we now have a faster deployment of development and test databases.

We switched to the new NetApp clustered environment and discovered that the monitoring and reporting features are a little behind the older versions.

We have been using NetApp for over 10 years, almost 15 years at this point.

It's been really stable, and I don't think we've had any issue or outages since we've been using it.

Scalability has not been an issue for us in this environment, but in other environments it scales very easily by adding more storage.

Overall, the support from the NetApp side has been very good, and is quick to respond if there are hardware issues, etc. They are usually very good, although they don’t have their own field technicians, and a quick response time as well. This is true on the server side as well, quick response and it shows up in the expected time.

Deployment was not overly complex, it takes time but not overly complex. For our use, and the Oracle database, it’s more complex on the Oracle side of things (E-business suite).

We always speak to other vendors, whether EMC, Oracle for Exadata, those are the main ones.

We went with NetApp in the end because it's established in the environment already, and we just had to upgrade the hardware. It was something we knew worked and would do the job.

Customer references are important and peer reviews are very important. Sometimes we do a test or POC, but that’s hard to do.

Ease of deployment is the most valuable feature.

I think that there are lots of benefits to using FlexPod. It goes back to the ease of deployment, especially with the projects I’ve been involved in. If you need a refresh on the whole infrastructure, it helps immensely.

I think that there is always room for improvement in any product. I guess the training availability and infinite scalability could be better, and it’s getting there.

It’s great – no issues with stability.

I didn’t run into any issues with scalability, and although I haven’t looked at the specs recently, but I believe it scales to most environments needs, and I’m still considering it for my new environment. We have a 30-petabyte environment, and we're looking to FlexPod for our database infrastructure.

I would say that I haven’t had to contact FlexPod specific support but Netapp overall I would give them an 8-9/10.

My initial setup was a partner, I didn’t know there were walk-through guides, but once I found those it was immensely better. It was cumbersome, but then eventually the installs were much simpler.

I would say that you should seriously consider it. It’s very worthwhile.

The guaranteed compatibility is our most valuable feature.

I would say we’ve seen a speed increase – faster backup times as a result of using the Cisco UCS. We can now do HP failover better, and we can also have bigger clusters.

I would say that since I haven’t seen SnapManager, I don’t know yet.

The integration with VMware could be a bit smoother.

It’s been rock solid so far. We’ve been using FlexPod for almost a year.

We started out with one chassis and have now increased because the first one worked out so well. Even though we bought a brand new NetApp head, we were able to use our old disc shelves, which helped us.

It’s been really good so far – we haven’t had any calls to say this or that isn't working since our installation. We have had calls to grow things and change things, but that’s been pretty easy.

It was pretty straightforward – we got it done in like a week.

If you’re looking for a mixture of companies and you’ve played the point-the-finger blame-game – it removes all that. FlexPod helps to minimize that kind of blame-the-other-vendors. When you have an issue, it gets resolved faster.

We can already see that the most valuable features is that everything is tested and certified to work together.

The package price is also something we like about it.

I don’t think we have enough experience at this point to see the weak points.

We have been using it for three to five months.

We're migrating to it now and so far, compared to HP and our Dell chassis which was an old environment, it has taken care of the performance and reliability issues we were having.

The scalability seems to be a valuable feature to me; it's easy to roll out, as we just order another pod they install it.

I'm only involved with the storage aspect so we work with NetApp, whose service is excellent.

I'm not involved much in setup, but we architected it and we had CDW and engineers help us who did the physical installation.

It all depends on your specific needs and what you're looking for, which depends on your environment.

The most valuable feature is the flexibility and the ability to use the various components nicely together.

It's very good as we've had very few outages.

I think its pretty good. We have been able to grow our environment without any major reconfigurations.

NetApp support is great.

We had an issue with one of our UCS plates and we thought it was an issue with NetApp, but then ultimately it was an issue with Cisco and we would have had to open multiple tickets.

However, with FlexPod being a joint solution of NetApp and Cisco, having to get support only through NetApp solved our issue quicker.

I personally only worked with NetApp support, which has been very good.

Initial setup was straightforward.

It's well worth looking into.

Standardization, so there's no question about how something is or how something should be set up.

Variety is the spice of life, but in what we do, variety kills you. We were an HP shop and we used different SAN vendors, but since going with Flexpod, we only deal with NetApp and Cisco.

Drives out variation. It’s easy to have someone at NetApp and Cisco to come in the door and know what they’re doing.

There’s a lot of talk about security, but very little action. I’d like to see something from NetApp/Cisco that’s beyond simple encryption so that data is not useable or visible when breach occurs.

No issues other than human error.

Very scalable, and we’ve been very pleased. We had a hard time planning for the future because of projects that we get. But, it scales very well and we can plan with it, impressively so. We often do things in emergency situations, which means adding storage or additional shelves, and we can do that with FlexPod.

It's very, very good.

Very smooth and quick setup. We got it and knew exactly what to do with it. So complex, but we knew what to do, and still, very smooth.

We’ve looked at everything and did footwork, so just go with Flexpod to save yourself time and effort.

• Certified architecture
• Unified support

• Unified support
• Reference architecture

The service catalogue and gallery. I find it difficult to go through documentation, and I would like to see user cases we can refer to. Would like to follow a specific work flow.

There's been no issues, and it's been great.

With cDOT, it's very easy to scale out, and that's the reason we went with it in the first place.

It's been great, and any issues have been taken care of right away.

It's complex because we didn’t buy FlexPod out-of-box, we put it together ourselves and went through lots of changes in our environment, so it's complex because of our own doing.

Pick your partner wisely, as they have a lot in your success. Go with someone with a history in FlexPod.

• It's simple as the software is in the fabric instead of having to install the software
• Management is easy through the UI
• You can see all the data
• Integrated networking

It’s two vendors who have a good track records, so it’s a safe bet, and it’s innovative in that it's planned and being planned. It’s reliable, but has an enterprise cost; however, from an IT perspective it’s worth it.

Storage and compute could be better managed. Right now, there are two separate consoles for NetApp and Cisco components. There's no unified management available, and an add-on for that should be a standard option. Also, the cost.

Very stable as an enterprise-level product.

The fabric interconnecters with our older version is fine.

Haven’t had to use tech support because it hasn’t given us trouble.

Not around for initial setup, it would have been complex four years ago, but now it's straightforward

It’s a good product, and I wouldn’t say not to go with it. If you are heavily invested with another vendor, for example HP, don’t change.