IBM FlashSystem Reviews

IBM FlashSystem is used for online transaction processing in TP solutions.

The price-performance ratio is most valuable.

It is simple to use.

Both the performance and interface are good.

We are in our second year of using IBM FlashSystem.

IBM FlashSystem is a stable solution.

It is a scalable product.

In our organization, we have more than 1,000 people using this solution.

In general, we plan our investments for three to five years in advance. Because technology evolves every five years, the solution is usually changed after five years. As a result, we had to replace everything.

We don't have any plans to purchase additional licenses in the near future.

We haven't needed any assistance from technical support so far.

We use a variety of solutions from Hitachi, EMC, and NEC.

We switched to IBM FlashSystem because of the scalability, it was a beneficial option for us, as well as the price-performance ratio and technology.

They compare the IBM features with those of EMC and HP.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is easy to install.

It takes very little time to deploy. The initial implementation will take two days. The data will then be moved by wifi over a three-week period due to the implementation study.

The installation is being managed by a team of two engineers.

A company called Compro assisted us with the installation. They were good.

They don't offer subscription-based payments. You pay for the license.

I would recommend this solution to anyone else who is interested.

Because technology is evolving at a rapid pace, they should compare the benefits. Of course, solution technology is important, but the most important aspect is service and knowledge.

I would rate IBM FlashSystem a nine out of ten.

We were using the solution for storing data. Recently we were having problems not being able to do a flash when we attempted. We will need to relay to IBM the challenges with taking the flash. Once this problem is resolved, we can do a better comparison with other solutions.

When it comes to the interface of the solution we did not encounter any challenges. Additionally, the solution has good documentation. 

We had issues when attempting to do a flash, we hope to resolve it soon.

I have used the solution for approximately three years. 

The initial setup of the solution was easy. 

I find the pricing of the solution to be very reasonable. 

We are presently evaluating NetApp and this solution. By the time we finished with our evaluations, I will be able to come back to IBM on what challenges we have encountered. We use IBM in all other aspects, including service. That is why we think that combining the IBM storage will be much easier for us than other entirely new solutions.

I rate IBM FlashSystem a seven out of ten.

The IBM FlashSystem is the primary storage for files and data in our organization.

The most valuable features are deduplication and compression, which together, enable you to have more space.

Performance is a major advantage of this storage.

When you add more flash drives or more NVMe, that is the bottleneck or shortcoming with this type of storage. When you fill the first enclosure, you won't be able to add more NVMe until you add more SAS drives.

The security features can be improved such that the encryption does not affect performance in any way.

I have been using IBM FlashSystem for about four years.

The stability is very good.

We have approximately 1,500 people who are directly or indirectly accessing the data that is residing on this storage.

The technical support is pretty good, especially the local team in Pakistan. Normally, the response time is very good.

This is the first flash storage system that we have used. Prior to that, we were using a hybrid Dell EMC storage.

The initial setup is not very difficult. I would say that it is similar to the way other storage systems are set up. I believe that it took one week for our deployment, which included testing.

We have three administrators who take care of the different applications and data that are hosted on this storage. We don't perform maintenance on a daily basis. We may extract some stats for the performance and for evaluating capability. However, when it comes to maintenance, we probably work on it once or twice a month.

Before purchasing this product, I recommend that everyone should do a PoC because there are multiple flash drive systems now available. All storage vendors are now making flash drives because it is a new technology that replaces existing hybrid systems. I would suggest doing some analysis and some R&D because Huawei, for example, is doing well. EMC is also top of the line, with IBM. There are slight differences in features, however, so it is important to do a comparison before making any decision.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution is deduplication.

The feature I find most valuable is the deduplication because the nature of the data that we are using in our current environment has a lot of replicated data. You tend to create a copy of the same system multiple times for different reasons. So if you use a flash system that is deduplication-enabled, you end up using less capacity. 

I would like to see an improvement in the handling of large amounts of rights. An automatic flash system that doesn't do compression or deduplication will flush through the rights directly from the host to the flash modules. It doesn't keep them in the cache. For compression and deduplication systems, they have to do compression, deduplication and the memory and cache for the controller. So they have to keep the data there otherwise you will find yourself stuck with performance issues.

The solution is currently hosting our core banking system and we haven't faced any stability issues, so it is very stable.

I have only four boxes now, so it's not the best scalability you can get, but it is still acceptable. Since we are hosting our core banking on it, we have about 20,000 employees working on it.

I will rate their technical support an eight out of ten. If you send them a question, it takes them ten days to come back to you with an answer. But besides this, we've had no other issues. 

We use EMC devices and IBM FlashSystem concurrently, but we have a different evaluation for these products. They are not the same because our critical applications are hosted on IBM FlashSystem. The less critical applications are hosted on VMAX.

The setup of the IBM devices is really straightforward. The actual deployment for the IBM FlashSystem took about seven hours. One of our partners was responsible for this, and we are very satisfied with his performance.

My advice to others would be to go for the big one, the A9000. It is a little bit more expensive but it offers a better total cost of ownership.

In the next version, I would like to see external virtualization. We are currently using LVC for external virtualization, and then we are using the boxes under LVC. If IBM embeds the LVC feature inside the box, I will only need to use the box and then virtualize the smaller boxes behind it. It will simplify my issues.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case for the solution is virtualization.

The most valuable feature of the solution is compression.

The marketing could be improved. Additionally, awareness in the marketplace could be improved.

We have been using the solution since it was introduced and currently use the latest version.

The solution is stable. I rate it an eight out of ten.

The solution is scalable, and approximately 100 clients are utilizing it. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support, but it sometimes takes a while to resolve an issue. I rate them an eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward and took three days. I rate it an eight out of ten.

We implemented it with a vendor team and in-house staff.

I rate the pricing an eight out of ten.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. The solution is good, but its marketing awareness can be improved.

It is useful for SAP, landscape or banking systems. The product system is good.

The storage system is one of the best in the world.

The setup could be improved.

We have used this solution for 12 years and are using versions 5200, 5300 and 9000.

It is a stable solution.

It is scalable. We have more than 12 customers using IBM FlashSystem in my country.

I am satisfied because we have global technical support and other options. In addition, IBM has two specialized service centers based on the business partners' platform.

The initial setup is complex, and the deployment depends on the project. It could take two hours or two or three months. We usually work with integrators working with companies, service and business partners.

Our clients pay for software licenses or other advanced licenses they need, such as Metro Cluster. The licenses are usually annual.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. I recommend this solution to others.

We use IBM FlashSystem with our VMware environment, however, there are times when we need to connect centers or just servers.

Data deduplication is one of the most valuable features of this solution. 

The Fibre Channel connection is excellent, as well as the extremely fast performance.

There should be more licenses included in the standard price.

Additional licenses might be added for the fundamental licenses, such as those for copying and flash copies.

I have been dealing with IBM FlashSystem since it has become available.

I am a reseller. We sell 5,025,5,100, and 5,200, versions.

IBM FlashSystem is quite stable. I would rate the stability a ten out of ten.

IBM FlashSystem is scalable.

There isn't a lot of software linked to that IBM software.

It is very easy to scale.

It depends on the client's needs because there are small-sized companies with 50 customers to begin with and such. And it is occasionally used. I would say 220 or more are there for the users.

External support is sufficient to keep this solution functional.

The technical assistance is excellent, which is why I recommend this solution to my clients.

 I would rate the technical support a five out of five.

Positive

We have just purchased Lenovo FlashSystem this week for our clients.

I worked with Storage-Tech, IBM Sharks, EMC Clariion, and other similar products.

The initial setup is simple.

Network with your coding laptop or something similar then set up the network. It's not complicated, it's quite easy.

If five is a good price and one is a high price, I would rate the price a two or three out of five.

I was looking into the differences between Lenovo and I went to some other sites to check. I looked at YouTube, but there isn't much but there is something.

After the research, in my opinion, IBM FlashSystem is better than Lenovo.

I would rate IBM FlashSystem an eight out of ten.

I find almost all the IBM FlashSystem features beneficial. The performance and the minimum latency IBM FlashSystem provide to the applications are good.  Parsing is the most valuable feature inside IBM Spectrum Virtualize software, which allows us to virtualize any third-party storage for IBM or non-IBM systems. A lot of features like replication/copy snapshots. All of them are very important and amazing, and we have benefited from them with most of the applications.

The generic functionality of IBM FlashSystem, IBM always dismisses using file share or sharing protocols inside their storage hardware, and they only focus on the block-level storage.

I have been using IBM FlashSystem for 10 years.

IBM FlashSystem is a stable solution.

I have found IBM FlashSystem to be scalable. However, with a specific type of FlashSystems scalability is limited. 

The local support for IBM FlashSystem is very weak. Most of the customers are suffering from the IBM support here inside Egypt.

The initial setup is easy. It is not complex at all.

I price of IBM FlashSystem is reasonable and competitive.

We provide this solution to many customers.

I rate IBM FlashSystem an eight out of ten.