HPE 3PAR StoreServ Reviews

We use this product as our primary storage. 

We are in the manufacturing industry and we use the HPE 3PAR StoreServ to store our company data and then we can retrieve it as required.

All of the features this storage product has, work well.

This is a very robust product and it offers everything that we are looking for.

There is a slight difference between what we expected and what was delivered.

I have been working with HPE 3PAR StoreServ for the past three years.

This is a very stable storage solution and we plan to continue using it.

This product is scalable and we have more than 100 users. We are planning to increase the amount of storage space.

We are satisfied with the HP Enterprise technical support.

The initial setup is straightforward.

HPE installed it for us and we did not hire a third-party consultant to assist with it.

This product is a little bit costly, although this is because it is a high-quality product.

There was a one-time cost when we procured this product and there are no monthly or yearly licensing fees.

We purchased this solution with an open tender and we invited several vendors to present their products.

In general, this product works well. That said, it is not perfect because there is always a difference between what we expect and what is delivered. There has to be a gap.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for everything. We have server files and we have SQL's.

It's a flexible solution.

Currently, we are finishing the possible quotation to upgrade the 3PAR we have here in Portugal. 

It's a case of obsolescence. Since we have had the machine for four years we must remove the old one to put in the new one.

I would like to see more storage, a better interface, and to move from mechanical disks.

I have been using this solution for four years.

We have had the solution for four years and the software has been updated.

It's a stable solution.

This is a scalable product. We have approximately 1,000 users in our organization.

We are considering the possibility of a move to Primera or PowerMax.

We have contacted technical support and it's pretty good.

We purchased VMAX three years ago.

We also used the NetApp Series but decided to go with 3PAR.

The initial setup is straightforward with the help of the technicians from the company.

The deployment was completed in one week.

We had help from a consulting integration company for the deployment.

We also have a production team of 34 admins and engineers to deploy and maintain this solution.

We don't pay for any licensing fees.

We would recommend this solution to others.

It works well and we don't have any issues with it.

I would rate HPE 3PAR StoreServ a ten out of ten.

 The primary use of this solution is exclusively for VDI.

 I find the most valuable feature to be compression and deduplication. 

The solution could be improved in regard to space reclamation by adding automation. This should be added to the next release.

I have been using the solution for four years.

I have only had to adjust the solution four times in the time I have used it, it is stable. 

The solution is moderately simple to scale. We have approximately 1000 computers using the solution.

The technical support has been fantastic.

The initial setup was straightforward, it took approximately 45 minutes.

We purchased the solution as CapEx and we only pay support now. I find the pricing fantastic. 

My advice to others looking into the implementation of the solution is to pay attention to detail if you are on iSCSI. 

I rate HPE 3PAR StoreServ a nine out of ten. 

We have deployed HPE 3PAR systems on all database-related storage including MSSQL and Oracle. All of the SQL databases are running on VMware, and the database-related storage is mounted as RDM. The Oracle database is mounted directly to HPE 3PAR with remote-copy enabled.

HPE 3PAR provides fast and reliable storage for our critical systems like the database (MSSQL and Oracle). It also improved the availability of the system and at the same time provides a Disaster Recovery solution by using the remote-copy feature.

The adaptive optimization is also a factor in maximizing the capability of the system.

The most valuable features of this solution are Remote-copy and Adaptive Optimization. 

Remote-copy provides high availability and disaster recovery for the connected clients.

The Adaptive Optimization provides tiering and optimizes the storage requirement of the client based on its load from time to time.

The cloud-based monitoring Infosight would be better if users are automatically enrolled in the cloud/group based on the configuration or information gathered or uploaded on the internet.

The auto-discovery of the system is not easy for first-time users.

I have been using this solution for 5 years.

This is one of the best solutions if you want to have a stable and highly reliable system.

This is a highly scalable system.

Technical support assisted us with a smooth and fast installation.

Previously we were using HP EVA but since this is an old solution, we wanted to upgrade. We wanted to try a newer solution with almost the same features, like HPE 3PAR.

The initial setup for this solution is indeed straightforward, although HP will not allow non-HP engineers to do the initial setup.

The implementation was completed by an HP engineer through the vendor.

The cost is reasonable given that the licensing is all included once you purchase it.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing this solution.

The setup is pretty straightforward but HP only allows their engineers to do the setup. This gives us peace of mind for the setup.

This solution hosts our core banking system. Mostly everyone in the bank uses it — about 1,000 users.

The features which are most valuable are the availability of the system and the management.

We do see room for improvement, especially in regard to expanding the defined storage areas.

The alerting system could also be improved. If there are issues with the system, it's supposed to send emails and SMS alerts — this could be improved.

I have been using this product since 2017 — about five years.

It's very stable. It has never broken down.

It's scalable. Only now it has reached end-of-life.

The technical support is very good.

We were working with an HPE storage called HPE EVA. We switched over to HPE 3PAR StoreServ because EVA's technology was end-of-life.

The initial setup was complex because we didn't have experience with it. 

We had a consultant set it up for us. It took about a month.

This solution is expensive. We pay every year for support. It's a lump sum because we pay for data center support services, and everything is included in one. 

Currently, we're looking at HPE Primera and Nimble Storage. 

It's a very good system, especially the All-Flash system. That's quite good. The only downside is the price — otherwise, the product is perfect. Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

I want to build a MetroCluester in VMware.

The speed is very good.

This solution only provides active-passive replication, as opposed to active-active. Competing products also provide active-active replication.

Adding support for Virtual Storage Platform (VSP) would be an improvement.

I have been using HPE 3PAR StoreServ for more than seven years.

3PAR is a stable product.

This solution is easy to scale. It is done online.

I have been in contact with technical support and I would rate them an eight or nine out of ten. They are very good.

I am also using HPE Nimble.

I also have experience with HPE Primera, which is a better product. It's a merge of 3PAR and Nimble and it's a more stable storage solution.

If I were comparing a group of products then I would rate StorageWorks MSA a five, Nimble a seven, 3PAR an eight, Primera a nine, and StorageWorks XP a ten.

The initial setup is very simple.

The installation and configuration are quick. You can complete them in one or two hours, which is fast.

The deployment and maintenance are done in-house.

We are always using the latest version because I upgrade every year.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use it for all kinds of needs, such as infrastructure needs, and application services. We are using the latest version of this solution.

Their support is the most valuable. The support that we are getting from HP Turkey is very good. 

This product is better than some of the other products in terms of reliability. It is very reliable.

We are using a built-in solution in 3PAR. We are using All-Flash Storage, and there are some difficulties with it. HPE has now developed a new tool system to support All-Flash, and that's why we are changing our investment.

They must increase its performance. I want unlimited support, which is very important for performance. I am not interested in spinning disks. HPE is developing new storage systems called Primera, but they must be developed more.

I have been using this solution for more than five years.

3PAR systems are stable. We don't have any problem, but in the past, we had a problem with the 3PAR disk. I don't remember the disk vendor, but it was about the disk. That's why we changed all disk parts, which was a bit of hard work for us. We didn't have any other problem other than the disk problem a few years ago.

It is easily scalable. It is easy to scale, but if you plan to increase it substantially, it can be a bit difficult.

I'm a service provider. We provide support for Unix servers for many companies and customers. Some companies have more than 1,000 3PAR users.

The support that we are getting from HP Turkey is very good.

We are using IBM Flash Storage. In Turkey, IBM has more support and more products for the flash systems, which is an advantage. Performance of the storage is also better. 

We are also using FUSE Storage, which is also All-Flash Storage. Their performance is also better than HPE 3PAR. HPE 3PAR doesn't support any images.

The initial setup was simple.

Our storage team deploys the HPE 3PAR system. Sometimes, we also need some support from the local HPE support team. Its maintenance is done by a vendor.

It is a bit more expensive. IBM is cheaper than HPE in Turkey.

The most important things are availability, scalability, reliability, stability, and performance. We are service providers, and the customers want availability. You must focus on these things before buying storage. I advise going for All-Flash Storage to all people because spinning disks take too much space and electricity and provide less performance. That's why NVMe is better.

I would rate HPE 3PAR StoreServ a seven out of ten.

We use the 3PAR to host our SQL Database and Oracle Database. We also use it for VMware and vCenter.

We do not manage this product ourselves, so we are not familiar with all of the features that it has.

We had an issue a few months ago where we experienced a degradation in performance.

Every time you scale by adding more capacity, you need to pay for re-balancing services that cannot be performed in-house.

I would like to see an automatic re-balancing system or functionality for adaptive optimization.

We have been using HPE 3PAR StoreServ for almost five years.

This product is stable, aside from the performance problems we had.

We have added capacity to this solution between four and six times. Each time we did, we had to purchase services for re-balancing. It has to be done by a 3PAR engineer, rather than by our staff. It's a complex process. With some other products, you can just add a new disk to increase capacity, and you don't need to perform re-balancing.

There are three of us in the company who uses it.

For development, we have an IBM DS5000 storage system.

As it is for development, I cannot compare the two solutions. Our 3PAR is adapted for production.

The initial setup is complex because it needs a special engineer from HPE to take care of the setup and load balancing.

Our equipment is managed by a holding company. I request the load and capacity, and they configure it for me.

This is not an expensive product but every time you add capacity to it, you need to pay for re-balancing.

This is a product that I do not recommend because it is too difficult for people to manage, and it should also be a little bit cheaper.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.