VMware vSAN Reviews

My primary use case of this solution is to combine old storage into logical volumes. You can create a VMS partition and deploy it among the host, which provides the best performance.

I've been using vSAN for almost three years.

The scalability is good - storage is expandable with no extra cost.

Setup is simple because the product is automatically installed once the license is activated.

The pricing is something of a concern.

I would say that if you need more storage-level performance, scalability, or security, you can definitely consider using this solution. I would rate this solution as nine out of ten.

We have a backup server using this technology. We move data in real-time. 

The solution is very stable.

The scalability has been quite good.

The initial setup is pretty quick and easy.

We would like to see even more storage capacity. 

Technical support could be more knowledgeable.

I've been using the solution for two to three years. It's been a while. 

The stability is good. The solution doesn't have bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very reliable and the performance has been great.

The solution is scalable. We have already upgraded to extend it. We do plan to extend it again and we are going to expand.

We've dealt with technical support previously. It would be helpful if they were more knowledgeable. We had a bottleneck with the technical support team. We required a part and we just couldn't get it and it was delayed. It caused an issue around storage for us.

We did previously use internal storage solutions.

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's so simple you don't need any technical assistance or anything like that.

The deployment is pretty fast and only takes one to three hours or so. It's not a long process at all. 

We do have an integrator that can assist with the implementation. 

We do have to pay a yearly licensing fee. It's a subscription for the hardware.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. We are very satisfied with its capabilities.

I would recommend the solution to others.

VMware comes with different stacks like VMware Cloud Foundation, which is integrated with different VMware modules. There's interoperability between VMware products. 

Another good feature is that you can create profiles for each VM. You can mirror one set of VMs according to another set of VMs. You can also define the quality of service for that profile.

I would like to see more support for applications. I think currently it only supports applications between two vSAN clusters. I heard that VMware is planning to have applications using vSAN at the hypervisor layer. I'm not sure whether it's available or it's being planned for the next release. I would prefer it to be on the storage layer than on the hypervisor layer.

I've been working with VMware vSAN for two years.

I haven't had any issues with the stability of VMware vSAN.

I haven't had any issues with scalability, but I think historically it supports only 64 nodes. It's a VMware limitation, but in our deployment in Sri Lanka, hardly any customers use that many nodes. If you consider that aspect, then scalability is okay. The largest customer we have here uses two nodes.

For Nutanix, there is no such limit as far as I know.

I'm not happy with the VMware support. There are so many delays attributed to different reasons, like when you transfer the case from one engineer to the other, the second engineer is not aware of what the first engineer has done, so we need to update the second engineer from the beginning. 

Their response is also not that fast. We have seen that sometimes the competency of the backend engineers is not that high, and because of that VMware support is a bit of a concern for us. Apart from that, I don't have many issues with the product.

Setup is not that difficult. We have had a few issues with the implementation. Initial setup is not as straightforward as Nutanix.

Compared to Nutanix, the design of VMware vSAN is probably the highest in the marketplace in terms of market penetration. I think it's number one, and Nutanix is not that far behind.

From an upgrade perspective, it's not as straightforward compared to a Nutanix. You need to do a lot of checks and balances before you do the upgrade. With Nutanix, you don't need to worry about it at all, probably because those nodes are coming from Nutanix itself. Because of that, they kind of keep everything to a single file where all these checks will be done initially when you run it. With vSAN, the server could be coming from different vendors like HP or Huawei. So it won't be that easy to come up with a single package to check all of these formula licenses because the upgrade is not that smooth compared to Nutanix.

I would rate this solution 7 out of 10.

My advice is to plan well which workload you're going to use for VMware vSAN. Not all workloads are suitable for VMware vSAN. Before using VMware vSAN, you should consider implementation planning, network sites, and group layout.

I work at a small company, and we have VxRail. Like Rubrik, VxRail can be upgraded brick by brick. Now we are studying considering deploying another traditional setup comprising a host and SAN Storage. VMware vSAN is a virtual SAN Storage. 

We are planning to expand the resources of our system, including CPU, RAM, and storage. Currently, we are utilizing the basic VxRail setup, which consists of only three nodes, and we're in the process of acquiring another. I'm upgrading because it's at capacity, so we have no choice but to add another node so we can expand the loads for some new applications that we need to employ under the virtual servers. Our expansion to a new data center will add some more capacity to the current setup.

In the end, we could wind up with around six nodes, SAN storage, or flash array storage. But we don't have a definite plan yet. Everything is being drafted at the moment, and we're researching some details on backup solutions and VR solutions. We also have some cloud-based and server-hosted applications from Azure and AWS. So maybe the on-premises solution could involve some VMs or a hybrid backup solution that goes back and forth between the cloud and on-premises. 

If we decide to expand, vSAN could offer us some flexibility. We are researching ways to set this up from a new data center, which is located somewhere different from the current location right now.

I would like to see better integration between the cloud and our VMware virtual environment. We only have one virtual environment, which is VMware vSAN. Right now, there is little interoperability with the cloud solution at the moment. We are currently researching to figure out if we can achieve that. 

It's possible that we'll need to acquire new infrastructure for the new data center. And for that, we need to consult some architects, whether it's a VMware architect or some AWS and Azure architects. And we could come up with a workable blueprint that to use as a guideline so we can manage our infrastructure.

I am new to this company, but I worked with different solutions at my previous company, including vSAN and the traditional VMware vSphere setup. So I've been using vSAN for two years or three years.

VMware vSAN is stable, although there's is some room for improvement. 

I've been working with VMware technical support since I had my own company. It's pretty dependable because I used to work primarily with level three infrastructure support. We are the last escalation. I am one of the contact people between the company and the VMware vendor. The final escalations would be working with the vendor itself or some VMware engineer, whether it's vSAN, vSphere, Center, or anything else within the scope of our license.

In my environment right now, we only handle a limited set of VMware products. These solutions are not perfect because we must apply patches and updates to deal with glitches and minor bugs. Byt I think vSAN will be reliable, especially if the after-sales support and engineers are excellent and could help us work seamlessly and comfortably.

Our initial vSAN setup is a backup from Rubrik being thrown up to AWS for Glacier. But in the near term, maybe we could migrate that kind of solution in a more seamless and resilient way. That's what we're considering right now.

VMware is quite expensive compared to Microsoft's Hyper-V. However, when you factor in flexibility and comparability of use, it's reasonable enough. For the high price of VMware, you get seamless operation and manageability. At the same time, I think VMware is lowering the price for its cloud-based solutions. And it's stable enough that some organizations might want to put part of their setup on the cloud and the other part on-premises. VMware's advantage is that they were already preparing for cloud solutions many years ago. 

There are several virtual solutions that I have hands-on experience with, including VMware, Hyper-V, and some open source software. I could only compare Microsoft and VMware. VMware is significantly more expensive than Microsoft, but I still prefer VMware because it's manageable and easy to set up.

As a VMware customer, it's hard to judge the value I'm getting for the price in terms of operability and manageability. Then there are other factors, such as the amount of resources used. So when we're evaluating, we're not just looking at the price. We don't want to settle for something cheaper that might cost us some headaches.

I rate VMware vSAN seven out of 10. I prefer a traditional SAN storage solution. Right now, we're only using vSAN for small solutions. At the basic level, it's good enough because it operates the same way as the traditional setup. It's suitable for companies that are starting and might expand in the near future. For those use cases, vSAN is a great choice compared to Hyper-V. It's much easier to maintain. However, I haven't deployed vSAN for a larger configuration.

We primarily use the solution for virtualization for our organization.

The solution is easy to manage due to the fact that it uses the same dashboard as Center.

vSAN is okay for HCI.

The solution fits well with my requirements. 

The stability is good.

The product can scale.

I have always found the technical support to be helpful and responsive. 

So far, the solution is okay with me. 

It would be ideal if the solution offered some intelligent monitoring. Right now, most of these features are in another subscription such as Log Insight.

I've used the solution for three years. 

The stability has been very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

We currently have ten people that directly use the solution in our organization. 

The scalability is simple. It's very easy to scale the HCI node.

We rarely use technical support. We might use them for consulting purposes sometimes if, for example, we have a new system and then we are concerned that it might or might not be running on vSAN. We might need them to probe it first. So far, we have been satisfied with the level of support we get.

I was not a part of the implementation process and therefore cannot speak to how easy or difficult it may be. 

The solution has very few maintenance requirements. Occasionally, they may recommend a fix or patch by updating it, and we do so. However, other than that, it's pretty simple to maintain.

Normally we use a local system integrator or distributor to do the setup for us.

The pricing is competitive with other vendors. It's mid-range in terms of pricing. It's not cheap and it's not overly expensive.

We are a customer and an end-user.

We are using the latest version of the solution at this time. 

I'd recommend the solution to other users. It's easy to deploy and great for virtualization. 

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

We use VMware vSAN to manage our resources. It has secured our resources, such as power and server management. We needed one console that can manage all the servers.

The interface is a little complicated, it could be simplified with more graphical gadgets. We have many servers, and the built-in functions, such as rate configuration, are a bit complex.

I have been using VMware vSAN for approximately 11 years.

VMware vSAN is stable.

I have found VMware vSAN to be scalable.

We have approximately 50 people using this solution in my organization.

The technical support is good. We are always thankful for the technical support from VMware. They are very supportive when we have a technical problem.

The initial setup is easy because our architecture is simple.

Our architecture is very simple to understand a new version. We only need to document all the configurations of the servers with all the maps that are designed. Any new person can understand fully within a day. However, we need more simplified versions of VMware vSAN in the future.

VMware vSAN is a little bit expensive and we pay annually. We have an educational institute where we receive discount prices from VMware. We do receive a reasonable discount but it's still expensive.

I advise those people that have a large amount of data and they need very fast retrievals, they must use the scalable feature of VMware vSAN.

I am fully satisfied with VMware vSAN.

I rate VMware vSAN a nine out of ten.

We use VMware vSAN to build storage for our virtual machines.

I like the tolerance of VMware vSAN.

The integration could be improved. I would like to see integration with other platforms.

We have been using VMware vSAN in our environment. I have used this solution for more than five years.

VMware vSAN is a stable solution.

It is easy to scale VMware vSAN.

In our organization, we have 100 members.

We may increase our usage in the future. With the company's growth, there are plans to expand in the future. We may require additional members. It's possible that we'll be able to scale this solution more in the future.

We read the manual, which provided us with a thorough explanation. It was sufficient. We use technical support only on rare occasions.

Nutanix is a product that I am familiar with. We were able to use the Nutanix supported trial version.

In Microsoft's system center, both Nutanix and VMware can be easily maintained.

We will not be using the Nutanx system at this time.

Nutanix's integration with other platforms could be improved.

This solution was easily installed by our team.

We have a team of four people to deploy and maintain this solution, including one administrator and one manager.

This solution requires the purchase of a license.

Because of COVID-19's impacts, we looked for a different IT system that would match our budget.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I would rate VMware vSAN an eight out of ten.

VMware vSAN is a software-defined storage solution and there are no hardware dependencies. We use it for general-purpose workloads or Virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI).

The solution has high performance.

VMware vSAN could improve by adding NAS and object storage.

I have been using VMware vSAN for approximately four years.

The solution has been stable.

VMware vSAN is scalable.

We have approximately 5,000 people using this solution in my organization. 

Our last customer in India had over 180 servers running.

The technical support has been great from VMware vSAN.

The installation was straightforward. We did not find it difficult.

We have a team of 50 that does the maintenance and support of the solution.

We pay for a license to use the solution through our company CapEx and then we continue to pay annually.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate VMware vSAN a nine out of ten.