IBM FlashSystem Reviews

We have not had a good experience with this platform.

The installation and service was very good. But, the services to help us migrate our NAS data from an existing EMC VNX system has failed once already with ACL permissions issues specifically on how the V7000U NAS works. I have had to involved IBM Global Support by actually contacting high level Vice Presidents. As of January 26, 2016, we have not successfully migrated our NAS data.

It has not improved anything yet within our environment.

They could increase the maximum storage capacity so more disk shelves can be added.

We've had it for eight months, but still have not successfully migrated our NAS data yet. Also, it contains drives for AS/400 system and Exchange Archive data.

Software functionality issues that were not known until our NAS data migration failed. We hit further ACL Permissions issues as well.

We have performance and spiking issues of which IBM applied a work-around patch.

There have been no issues with the scalability.

6/10

It's average.

We switched to Pure Storage because of the way the system performs and does everything in 32K sizing. The IOPS are high and the support and customer server are exceptional.

Fairly simple as it took about two hours to rack and get on-line.

It was installed through one of our partners who did a good job.

We feel that the pricing is fair and the licensing process was easy.

We evaluated EMC (which we already had), DELL and HP.

The sales team was great as was the technical team. I now feel the EMC VNX and NetApp are both better NAS systems. If I had to do it over again, I would stayed with the EMC VNX for NAS.

The most valuable features of all the products are the high performance and micro latency.

I'm a Solutions Architect, so I don't have any from my company, but I do some projects for some clients where the unique performance and micro latency of the flash provides real- time information that is used to make strategic decisions.

Because the product is already mature, it doesn't need any improvement.

From about two years when IBM first bought FlashSystem. I knew some things about it when it was Texas Memory System,

I didn't have issues with models 900 and v9000, but on previous versions, like the 720, I had some questions.

It is stable, because it's use an ASIC in it's development. Therefore, that does the job and it doesn't have software at its core.

It has great scalability.

It's very good because IBM always make sure they have good customer service.

Not so good in my country because they only have a few people with great knowledge about FlashSystem.

I've never used another solution.

The initial setup was very simple, because IBM have a default interface for all their storage systems.

I did the implementation in-house.

It's a little expensive, so it's you need to have a good architect involved to explain it and make sure the project goes well.

Have good knowledge about the clients business.

My main use of this solution is for backup.

The data reduction pool feature sucks and is not recommended for use with heavy workloads. I also understand that the APIs don't work well and need improvement. In the next release, I would like to see a better monitoring system for metrics.

I've been using this solution for around five years.

This solution is scalable.

The technical support is good.

The initial setup is straightforward and can be done in an hour and a half by one person. 

IBM FlashSystem is fast and reliable. However, we also use Huawei, which is more reliable and has less frequent upgrades. I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.