Notifications
Notifications
CDW Logo

Pure Storage FlashArray //X Chassis Datapack - flash storage array

Mfg # DFM-CHASSIS-DP-22TB CDW # 5277491

Quick tech specs

  • Flash storage array
  • 10 bays 2.2 TB x 10
  • 22 TB
  • rack-mountable
View All

Know your gear

Pure Storage FlashArray//X, the world's first 100% all-flash end-to-end NVMe and NVMe-oF array, now optionally includes a storage-class memory boost to address the most demanding enterprise applications performance requirements. FlashArray//X supports a modern data experience, delivering major breakthroughs in speed, simplicity, flexibility, and consolidation. It's intended for everything from departmental to large-scale enterprise shared-storage deployments, high performance, and mission-critical applications.

This item was discontinued on August 10, 2023

Enhance your purchase

Pure Storage FlashArray //X Chassis Datapack - flash storage array is rated 4.80 out of 5 by 17.
Rated 5 out of 5 by from An evergreen solution with low latency but pricing is expensive What is most valuable? Pure FlashArray X NVMe has low latency and high Ops. It is an evergreen model. What needs improvement? The tool's portfolio is minimal. It is expensive. For how long have I used the solution? I have been working with the product for three years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? Pure FlashArray X NVMe is stable and easy to migrate. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? The tool is scalable. How was the initial setup? The tool's deployment is easy and can be completed in an hour. Deployment is plug-and-play. What other advice do I have? I rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe an eight out of ten. Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2023-11-22T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Reliable and feature-rich solution that meets our diverse storage needs effectively What is our primary use case? I use the Pure FlashArray X NVMe solution to enhance our storage infrastructure. What is most valuable? We are incredibly satisfied with the product's performance and flexibility. The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes. The platform's robust features include excellent sustainability tracking, and a comprehensive dashboard offering insights into IOPS, bandwidth, performance, and virtual activities. This not only streamlines our operations but also provides a clear and detailed overview of our storage environment. Additionally, it has multiple controllers, letting us balance the load smoothly. What needs improvement? In terms of improvement, the dual-controller configuration is effective, but I'm eagerly anticipating the roadmap's promise of introducing multiple controllers, which could significantly boost scalability and resilience. For how long have I used the solution? What do I think about the stability of the solution? I would rate the stability of the solution as a ten out of ten. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? We have approximately eight users of Pure FlashArray X NVMe at our company and we rely on it every day. How are customer service and support? I would rate the technical support as an eight out of ten. How would you rate customer service and support? Positive Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch? We switched to Pure FlashArray X NVMe from Hitachi because it is easier to use, offers better visibility, and has automated reports. The user-friendly interface allows us to extend volumes in seconds, a huge improvement compared to our previous experience with Hitachi, which took five to ten minutes for the same task. The simplicity and efficiency of Pure FlashArray made it the better choice for us. How was the initial setup? The initial setup is relatively easy. Our deployment was quick, taking just one to two days. The first day was about setting up the hardware and basic configuration, while the second day focused on provisioning. The system's automation features, like running scripts to create volumes, made it a smooth process. Doing it in-house was straightforward, and the solution integrated seamlessly into our setup. It only takes one person to maintain the solution. What was our ROI? Pure FlashArray X NVMe has shown a solid return on investment, especially with the Evergreen feature. With this, you don't need to reinvest in the array every few years. Instead, by opting for the gold subscription every three years, you get a free upgrade to the latest controller release. It is a cost-effective way to stay up-to-date with the technology. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? It is on the expensive side. I would give it a nine out of ten in terms of costliness. What other advice do I have? Overall, I would rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe as a nine out of ten. Which deployment model are you using for this solution? Public Cloud Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2023-11-22T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from A highly reliable solution that has run for over eight years without instability What is our primary use case? Pure Storage has a hybrid deployment, and customers can get Pure Storage on AWS or Azure. What is most valuable? Pure created this technology of the NVMe. They have very good features. Pure has signature security technology, which cannot be deleted, even if you are an administrator. It's NTP protection. Also, if your customer doesn't care about the usable space and just wants space to put their data, Pure makes one to four applications, which could take 250 or 300 terabytes of space. The solution is fast and reliable and has good install-based referrals. What needs improvement? Given its price, Pure is not the first option. If the customer only needs 500 terabytes and doesn't care how much data they'll put in the server, IBM is cheaper than Pure. Customers ask if there is Turkish language support, but Pure Storage doesn't have it. Only partners give support in Turkish, or customers need to speak in English. It would be good if Pure Storage could improve this. For how long have I used the solution? I've been in this sector for 28 years, and I've worked with Veeam for two or three years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? I have one client who installed Pure Storage almost eight years ago. During the eight years, there have been no problems such as hardware failure or stopping. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? I rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe's scalability a nine out of ten. How are customer service and support? Pure has good storage, but they don't have Turkish language support. How was the initial setup? The initial setup is very easy. Recently, they made an upgrade, a live system working on a bank, which is a non-interruption upgrade from one service to another one. The upgrade was very useful and easy to do. We didn't need to stop anything. The maintenance and the updates are very easy. Which other solutions did I evaluate? Pure Storage is better than IBM, Dell, and other solutions because it makes a good application and keeps its promise. Pure Storage has stability and works very fast. They keep their promise for what they build. For example, if they promise one to four with an application, they do that. Even if they can't do that, they put in an extra hard drive to keep their promise, and it's a free hard drive. The most important position of Pure depends on whether you are talking about net space or the use space. Of course, Dell and IBM have good solutions, but that depends on what storage level we are talking about, such as SIP or NAS. If the customer needs a certain size, say about 500 terabytes of usable space, Pure is not a good solution because it will be expensive. IBM could be a better choice. What other advice do I have? I rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe a nine out of ten. Pure might be better than other products could be. But in some projects, IBM is better for the customer. However, I must understand what the customer needs. I am not saying that Pure is the best, but In some projects, I prefer to go with Dell, HP, or IBM. I need to understand the customer needs and budget before comparing them. Pure has better technology right now, but if the customer has a small budget and if we are just talking about the use space or the net space, Pure doesn't work. Which deployment model are you using for this solution? Hybrid Cloud Disclaimer: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer:Partner
Date published: 2023-11-03T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Has good speed and offers good virtual volumes What is our primary use case? We are using version //X70 of Pure FlashArray. Our primary use case is to have a very fast storage array. What is most valuable? The virtual volumes and clarification around storage arrays are the most valuable features What needs improvement? In terms of what needs improvement, the dashboard and management could be simplified. For how long have I used the solution? We have been using the Pure FlashArray for about five years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? Overall stability is very good. It is a very stable solution. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? The solution is very scalable as you can add capacity very easily. We have about 2000 users using the storage array. How are customer service and technical support? The technical support was not good in the beginning. I would rate the support at a five out of 10. It has improved though. How was the initial setup? The initial setup was very straightforward. It took two weeks from start to finish. What about the implementation team? We were able to complete the setup in house without any vendor support. Which other solutions did I evaluate? We looked at IBM and NetAPP before choosing Pure FlashArray. What other advice do I have? I would definitely recommend Pure FlashArray. I would rate the product at ten out of 10. Which deployment model are you using for this solution? On-premises Disclaimer: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer:Partner
Date published: 2020-02-28T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Excellent diagnostics, intuitive console, and fantastic support What is our primary use case? We needed a flash array to support our core databases for maximum performance. We use SQL. We were using vSAN before, but we were having some problems with it. So, we wanted to isolate the databases with dedicated storage. Rather than using a vSAN solution using servers, we tested a couple of solutions, and we figured out that Pure FlashArray X NVMe was giving us the best performance. How has it helped my organization? Fundamentally, we have more visibility to what is happening in the storage for the databases. We can determine if the problem is something that is bound by IO or the problem is related to the database structure itself. The amount of time that a DBA has to spend figuring out whether it is a physical problem versus a programmatic problem has been reduced significantly. Before moving to this solution, when the database was running slow, we were asked to check our disks, but we had no way of verifying that. It was a nightmare. Now, we have reports that we can send on a daily basis, and they know what their performance is like. We can now ascertain that it is not the physical problem with the array that is causing the delays on the database. The DBAs can then look at the database and figure out various reasons or solutions for this, such as maybe the tables are value structure, maybe they need to run optimal queries, or maybe they should change the way they are accessing the data. You can pretty much take out of the equation the fact that the hardware is the problem. What is most valuable? It is very easy to install and configure. It has got excellent diagnostics. If you really need to see how the box is performing, the console gives you a lot of information. You can set thresholds as well as alerts based on the thresholds, which is a very powerful functionality. They are very proactive. They know how to monitor and manage the systems. They see a problem, and they are all over it before us. They see the problem before we see it, which is very good. What needs improvement? Right now, the box itself is just strictly working as a backend storage system. It would be fantastic if we could access it directly like a NAS device through network access or SIS drives. I think they have an interface, but I am not sure how good it is. If we could address a box directly on the network without having to go through a server, it would be great. The replication schemas could be improved. We are not using replication on the storage level right now. We use a different type of replication. If their replication would be as good as the one that we have, I would probably run the replication schema because it might be faster, but I don't know that for a fact. So, I cannot say that they have good replication. All I can say is that they need to inform us better. For how long have I used the solution? I have been using this solution for almost a year. What do I think about the stability of the solution? It is stable. It has been almost a year, and we haven't had any problems. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? Scalability-wise, it is expensive but good. They love to add boxes, and they did a very good job. You can easily add boxes to the array cells, both disks or controllers. The nice thing about it is that you don't have to change your schema. In other words, you don't have to reprogram or reconfigure anything. You simply add a box, and you have more disk space. Essentially, you can extend a disk to whatever services you are running without having to reconfigure a lot of stuff. That's actually a huge benefit. We have 200 employees in our firm, and almost everyone in our firm uses this solution. All the databases in the firm are running off Pure FlashArray X NVMe. How are customer service and technical support? Their technical support is fantastic. They are very good. Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch? We were using Compellent from Dell. We switched because the Dell technology was at least one generation before in the type of SSD drives that they were using. Pure FlashArray X NVMe had the latest versions of the EV disks, which Dell did not have on their systems. They were about to bring it into the market, but we would have had to wait for another three months, and it would have been a new product that wasn't yet tested. The infrastructure or the technology for Pure was built specifically for flash arrays, whereas Dell came from spinning disks and then moved into flash arrays. So, the controllers were not built specifically for SSD drives or flash. Even if you have flash, you still run into delays because the controllers were not designed to run just purely flash, whereas Pure was designed for flash from the beginning. They never had any spinning disks in their boxes, and that makes a huge difference. The thing that makes these boxes powerful is the algorithm that they use to decide where to put the data and how often they read it. Because SSD drives have a finite life, if you do the algorithms correctly, you maximize not just the performance but also the longevity. Pure is doing a very good job. I'm not fully a mathematician in the longevity piece of it, but I'm expecting that this box is going to give me three to five years of use with good performance. A Dell box would have to be replaced in three years for sure. How was the initial setup? The initial setup is very easy. Its installation is very simple. The console is fairly intuitive, and I understood more or less what my team was doing. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? Its price could be better. It is not too expensive, but it is the high-end cost. It is kind of a Rolls-Royce. You pay a lot, but you get a lot out of it. So, the price pressure on the way down would be great, but at the end of the day, if you need to do the work, you just pay for it. What other advice do I have? I would absolutely recommend using it. I would also suggest negotiating and testing it. I bought a very small system of 10 terabytes that I put in one of our labs for testing so that my team can learn it, and I could play with it. We tested it, and after we were comfortable with the capabilities of the system and building things in VMware, which is a really critical part of the whole integration, we tested three different solutions from HP, Dell, etc. After the testing, it was clear to us that the Pure FlashArray X NVMe was the easiest to manage and configure and had the best performance that we had seen in all the arrays. We are not testers, but we could tell. We could see the speed at which the databases came up and everything else. After testing, you will be convinced that Pure FlashArray X NVMe is probably the best box or right there in terms of performance. We tested in early 2019. There might be another solution that is doing better today. I would rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe a nine out of ten. The only reason I won't give it a ten is the price. Its feature set is pretty complete. I'm pushing it right now. It is like you buy a sports car and then you complain that you don't have a big trunk to put a lot of luggage. You are complaining about the wrong thing here. You bought the thing because it is fast. Similarly, we bought it because it is fast. From that perspective, whether they can address NAS or other things like that is just icing on the cake for me. Its price is a little high right now. Otherwise, I would have given it a ten. Which deployment model are you using for this solution? On-premises Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2020-10-10T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Works well, is easy to implement, and has upgrade analysis capabilities What is our primary use case? Currently, it's our tier-one storage. We use it mostly for our Oracle databases. How has it helped my organization? It has drastically improved the performance of our high-end Oracle databases and allows us the ability to replication to a DR location with ease. What is most valuable? We love the product. Pure Storage works really well. The CAT tool and also the ability to upgrade the unit's place grades are great. It allows for in-place control or upgrades. It's a very simple implementation. They have a good tool to analyze upgrades. The stability is good. Technical support has been excellent. What needs improvement? I cannot recall coming across areas in need of improvement. We would like to see more visibility into garbage collection and CPU performance in the GUI. For how long have I used the solution? I've used the solution for three years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? The product is very stable. We've had no issues that are related to the array. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? We haven't done much scaling. We're ordering an upgrade this week and therefore we will know soon enough how easy it is to expand. We're upgrading the controllers and the disks this month. Scalability so far seems good. The users are 90% Oracle admins and then 10% SQL admins. It's used pretty extensively. It is our top-tiered storage for the entire company in our major data centers. We have two of them and we are upgrading them this month. How are customer service and support? Technical support has been very helpful and responsive. How would you rate customer service and support? Positive Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch? We used to use a Dell EMC VMAX. We upgraded from that product due to high costs, and little flexibility. This solution also offers specialized Oracle tools. How was the initial setup? The solution is very straightforward to set up. It's easy. It's not difficult. Deployment of an array took an hour. Implementation of the product did take a while, due to our complexity, however, it works right now. I have one staff member for managing the array and then the database team is about four people and it's a global database. What about the implementation team? We handled the initial setup ourselves in-house We did not need outside assistance from consultants or integrators. What was our ROI? We noted a net ROI in about 11 months. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? We only pay the support costs. The support cost per array is about $20,000 a year for 24/7 support. There are no additional costs. Which other solutions did I evaluate? We did evaluate Dell PowerMax and NetApp AFF. The reason why we picked Pure was that it was reasonably priced and had better upgrade capacity, as well as better scale-out capacity. It also had better Oracle tools, especially the CAT tool. What other advice do I have? We're customers and end-users. We really like the product and their other tools are all great. I would advise new users to look into it for your higher-end Oracle and SQL needs. It does really well with the database products and with low latency requirements with a lot of transactional data. I'd rate the solution a nine out of ten. It handles all our needs. The only reason why it didn't get a ten is the fact that the tracking of high CPU and garbage collection is still needed. That's kind of important to us. Which deployment model are you using for this solution? On-premises Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2022-04-26T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from We can monitor our storage from anywhere, and it is light in maintenance and very stable What is our primary use case? We use it for databases and VMs. We are using its most recent version. How has it helped my organization? Its speed is superior to our existing Unity x00 model. There are three different models of Unity. There is x00, which is the original model for Unity. There is x50, and now you have x80s. It has performed substantially better than our x00 model and a little bit better than our x50 model. I cannot rate it against the x80s on the Unity class, but from what we've got, it has beaten those two models performance-wise. This is bearing in mind that those x00 models were there before they had their own X-series with the NVMe flash. What is most valuable? The Pure1 App is most valuable at this point in time when comparing it with EMC. Pure1 is where you can see your diagnostics and cases in the cloud, so you can look at things from your mobile phone. EMC has not unified both diagnostics and cases into a single App that I am aware of at this time. What needs improvement? You cannot tag a LUN with a description, and that should be improved. What I like on the Unity side is that when I expand LUNs or do things, there is an information field on the LUN. This is the Information field that you can tag on your LUNs to let yourself know, "Hey, I've added this much space on this date". Pure lacks that ability. So, you don't have a mechanism that's friendly for tracking your data expansions on the LUN and for adding any additional information. That's a downside for me. Their technical support is excellent, but I can't get hold of engineers directly at Pure even when an engineer is assigned to me, which is a downside. For how long have I used the solution? I have been using this solution for two years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? Its stability is excellent. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? Its scalability is good. I wouldn't call it excellent because you're limited on capacity customization. You get that limitation with any array, but it seems there is a little bit more flexibility on the Unity side from a scale-out standpoint. Pure is not flexible on your datapak expansions. You're locked into a certain amount of storage. You can't customize your Pure flash storage to the degree that you can on the EMC Unity side. Currently, its usage is pretty extensive. We're considering purchasing C-class arrays for our next use case, and we're about to use them more because of several factors. One of them has been that EMC is now starting to lose our organization's trust because of subpar support coming mostly out of India. The offshore talent in Asia or Australia is good, but the offshore talent in India is not good. Usually I know more than their L1/L2 support folks about their product. How are customer service and support? Their technical support is excellent, but I can't directly get hold of engineers at Pure directly. Their support system is such that even with an engineer assigned to me, I can't phone them directly even if an extension at an 800 number. I have to basically jump through a manager on duty, to try to get to the engineer, whereas with EMC, the engineer might not pick up the phone, but I've got extensions for whoever gets assigned to a case to leave a voicemail on top of an email. Pure wants to handle most of their support thru email exchange unless Zoom warranted. This is a downside that Pure has. If you get into an issue after you've got your initial engineer and you need to follow up, getting to them directly can take a little bit longer or more effort. While Pure has an "Escalation" button on their support portal they forget humans like to talk to humans directly when urgent. True you can email please call me. How was the initial setup? Its setup was more straightforward than EMC Unity's setup. It took about two hours. It is not maintenance-heavy. Its maintenance appears less than an EMC Unity array. I handle the array, but in terms of maintenance, you can schedule the upgrades with Pure, like EMC. It is done all remotely by Pure's own people. That's one thing that is not good with EMC because you have to deal with their Indian offshore team for upgrades which is lacking many times. Pure support is how EMC used to be. EMC used to be follow-the-sun, where you had support in Cork, Ireland, the US, and then Australia, but like a lot of our US companies, they have now offshored and it is reflected in worse support in several ways, one being communication barriers. Resolution times have been extended more than it should due to offshore support. I have had extended turnaround times to get solutions because of their lack of talent. There is a language issue, and their L1 support team is clearly not as good as it should be. What I do love about Pure is that it is lighter in maintenance. What about the implementation team? We used an integrator, and our experience with them was great. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? Pretty much everything that you need is licensed when you buy the product. Licensing to me is different than the maintenance cost, but they can bleed into one another. We buy the product, and we expect three years of support bundled into what we negotiate on our storage arrays. I would start to see maintenance costs going into the fourth year, but we're not there yet. What other advice do I have? I would rate it a nine out of 10. It is hard for anyone to get a 10. Which deployment model are you using for this solution? On-premises Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2022-01-13T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from The duplication algorithm enables us to get a lot more use out of less storage What is our primary use case? We use this solution primarily for production data for our virtual environment. We run a lot of SQL out of it. We use the on-premises deployment model. How has it helped my organization? Speed has definitely been a big improvement for us. We were running a bunch of iSCSI to EMC VNX and that had a gigabyte bottleneck. Now, since we're running through a true fiber channel to the Pure array, we're getting 32-gigabyte bandwidth. That means the speed and accessibility for our users and our customers have definitely improved. The Hypervisor that ESX and vCenter use, as well as the Orchestrator for some automation, have helped to improve my organization. There's a lot that VMware does for us. Probably 95% of our infrastructure is built on VMware's platform, hosted on-premises. This is soon to be 100%. We have some physical stuff that we're converting and VMware has made it possible to pick up and drop those servers onto their platform. We'll reach 100% by the end of the year for sure. We do have VMware analytics stood up. It's a simple Linux machine that runs a Kubernetes container that talks back to Pure1, which is their public website for support as well as for analytics, which we're using also. It's just a simple API. We also use vRealize. It helps us pinpoint issues as they come. We haven't done a whole lot of the automation through vRealize, but we're probably going to work towards that so that if we have an allocation issue, it can automatically shift things for us. But the DRS and HA kind of do a lot of that for us inherently. There hasn't been a huge drive to do any of that quite yet. What is most valuable? The duplication algorithm allows us to get a lot more use out of less storage. We're running a five terabyte array right now and we're running probably about 30 terabytes on it. So the duplication rate is pretty phenomenal, without a cost to performance. It still runs pretty smoothly. What needs improvement? They can tout the functionality and cutting edge technology that they have, but that's where the price tag comes in. The cost is high, but I think as they grow their business and get more customers that it will probably go down a little bit. What do I think about the stability of the solution? I think it's a lot better than what we were running for production as far as the VNX, which has fail drives about every month. It had the EMC VNX protocol. And it's not the VNX product itself, it's just that we have a much older one so it has older disks and drives that will fail. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? We absolutely see this working as our company grows. Even though it is fairly simplified in the way that they do their RAID and everything like that. It makes pulling drives and putting new ones in super simple. The costs could be improved though because it is quite expensive. How are customer service and technical support? Their customer service is phenomenal. In their escalation paths, everything is laid out in black and white and it's very streamlined. Then they even go so far as to actually talk with other vendors on those integrations. If there's a potential issue with VMware and there's a potential issue with Cisco, Pure engineers will actually talk to Cisco engineers or VMware engineers and come to a resolution together instead of pointing fingers and saying, "Well, it's their problem, not ours." I've actually seen that in action so it's not just talk. You can actually do that. It ended up being an incompatibility on the Cisco end for the UCS from one of the drivers that we had installed based on the firmware that we installed for that particular blade. But rather than Pure just saying it's Cisco's problem, call Cisco, they actually got on with a TAC engineer and talked us through it. With this method, they came to a resolution a lot quicker than it would have been to just open a ticket with Cisco and start the troubleshooting process all over again. If you previously used a different solution, which one did you use and why did you switch? I had worked at a different company and we switched from EMC's XtremIO flash array to Pure and we were actually one of Pure's first customers when we did that. Their simplified support model and then their Evergreen program where they upgrade controllers as they come out was pretty phenomenal. I carried that over into the company I work for now. I kind of suggested that as a route to go in. We used VNX, which we still have. I think one of the main driving points at the time was that we were running out of space on the VNX and the flash pool, and we could have added additional space, but the cost comparison between getting a Pure array and adding a new shelf to the VNX was about the same. I felt like we would get more bang for our buck going to Pure, which we have. How was the initial setup? The initial setup was very straightforward. It's pretty much plug and play. What about the implementation team? We actually used Pure professional services, which we didn't even really need, but we used anyway because it came with the implementation purchase. We did use a reseller to buy. We used RoundTower to buy the Pure array. We used professional services from Pure. It was probably set up within 20 minutes ad we could've done it ourselves, but it's always good to have trained hands on it. What was our ROI? A SQL job that would normally take six minutes running on VNX takes two minutes on Pure. That's been pretty beneficial because we're constantly running reports out of those SQL instances. We've seen enhancement and efficiencies from that. Which other solutions did I evaluate? EMC still has good products so they were still there. We were looking at adding additional space to the VNX. And then for general purpose, we did look at some stuff through Cohesity, but we needed more performance-oriented space. So that's why we went with Pure. What other advice do I have? Try to get as many discounts as you can if you go with Pure. If you don't need performance-oriented space or storage, Cohesity is very well priced and scalable. If you just need file server storage, you might not want to go with Pure. You might want to go with something a lot cheaper or more cost-effective like Cohesity. The Systems Engineer that we worked with was a huge help, too. I would rate this solution as a nine out of ten. It's very functional and very cutting edge. Technology just costs a lot. Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2019-09-10T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Reliable, easy to install, with good support What is our primary use case? We use this solution mostly for our databases. What is most valuable? The latency is good. The administration and the stability are very good. What needs improvement? The software layer has to improve. The software is promising but not prominent. We have upgraded more than 21 things. We have four artists and have had to upgrade the codes. There are several upgrades required, but we are slowly catching up to them. There are not many drill-down options available. EMC is providing many reporting tools that are not available in Pure. They need better reporting. Some of the tools are missing. EMC is a step ahead in that area. The usage at the host level has some limited options. For how long have I used the solution? We have been using this solution for one year. What do I think about the stability of the solution? It's a stable solution. It's reliable, we have not been faced with any issues. Our IT operations team is the only one to use this solution. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? We have not yet scaled this solution. How are customer service and technical support? Technical support is really good. How was the initial setup? The initial setup was easy. It was straightforward. The installation was done within three hours. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? The licensing is on a yearly basis. We have a three-year subscription. I don't know about the pricing as it is not my department, but if we were not satisfied with the pricing we would not have purchased it. What other advice do I have? This is a solution that I would recommend. I would rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe an eight out of ten. Which deployment model are you using for this solution? On-premises Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2021-04-21T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Reasonably priced, scales well, and offers good stability What is our primary use case? We primarily use the solution for cluster applications and databases. We use the solution on the DBA and those that use double machines. What is most valuable? Being able to have broken files on-site on the same appliance is quite useful. The newer version of NVME has a really noticeable difference in quality versus the last generation. It's better in terms of latency. It allows for so much more input. The initial setup was extremely simple and straightforward. The stability is quite good. We've found the scalability to be excellent. The price of the product isn't too high. What needs improvement? To be able to do the welcome files simultaneously on a lower version would be helpful. I general, we don't really have any pain points when dealing with the solution. The solution should improve its logon requirements. I'd like to see the product implement active replication for vehicles such as VMware. What do I think about the stability of the solution? The stability has been very good and very reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. Its performance has been good. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? The solution can scale if you need it to. It offers good scalability. We have already expanded capacity and installed additional chokes and it works perfectly, with no downtime and no impact on production. We do have plans to increase usage in the future. We're looking forward to installing more clusters and extending the offering. While we have five main users that manage the arrays, we have many, many general users of the product. How was the initial setup? The initial setup is not overly complex or difficult. It's quite simple and very straightforward. A company shouldn't have any issues with the process. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? We pay for licensing on a yearly basis. We're pretty happy with the cost. It's reasonable and not overly expensive. Which other solutions did I evaluate? Before choosing this solution, we evaluated solutions from HP, IBM, and Dell EMC. What other advice do I have? We are partners. While I would recommend the product to others, I would also advise that they try it out first via a proof of concept if they are not so sure about the solution. It's free and they can experiment with all the features in their own environments. I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. We are very happy with the product overall. Which deployment model are you using for this solution? On-premises Disclaimer: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer:Partner
Date published: 2021-05-22T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Easy to use, intuitive, and simple to deploy What is most valuable? The overall performance is great. The single workload performance available from Pure is higher than the SolidFire can provide. It's very simple to deploy and manage. Those are probably the two biggest aspects for us. Everything has been very easy and very intuitive from a support standpoint and from a deployment standpoint. In terms of the upgrade procedure, we've gone through that in the last year and it was very smooth. It met expectations. Technical support has been helpful and responsive. What needs improvement? I've only been using it for about a year now, so I haven't run into any issues. The biggest thing for me is not so much the Array itself. It's their Pure1 manage solution, which is a centralized monitoring plane that we can register all of our arrays to and monitor from one location. However, the ability to make that more multi-tenant for customer visibility so that we, as a service provider, can monitor all arrays we give customers visibility down to their dedicated environments would be ideal. Seeing VM performance down to the array level, and things like that would be useful. It's more multi-tenant functionality in their Pure1 manage portal that is lacking. For how long have I used the solution? We've only used the solution for a year at this point. It hasn't been very long. What do I think about the stability of the solution? The solution is reliable and the performance has been great. We haven't had any issues so far. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? We haven't deployed anything too large yet. That said, just based on the design, that two-controller design, we're not going to have any of the scale problems that we had with SolidFire. They do scale it differently as it's a two-controller design. However, you can easily upgrade by upgrading your drive sizes due to the fact that it's all NVMe. The performance is top-notch, as it's all NVMe based. How are customer service and support? Technical support has been pretty responsive. In our testing in the lab, my main interaction with their support was testing some of the different features on opening tickets and going through the upgrade procedure, and it was all really smooth. I didn't really have any complaints. Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch? I'm familiar with SolidFire. How was the initial setup? The initial setup was very smooth and straightforward. We didn't have any issues with it. What other advice do I have? We are currently a customer. I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. I would definitely recommend it. If a company is looking for an All-Flash Tier and they need extreme performance for individual workloads, Pure's the way to go, over something like a SolidFire. Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2021-11-10T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from High performance, intuitive user interface, and simple setup What is our primary use case? We use Pure FlashArray X NVMe is a premium tier storage offering. It is a dedicated array option that we offer our customers. We are a service provider and deployed it in multiple data centers. What is most valuable? The most valuable features of Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its superior performance compared to other flash tiers, as well as its ease of use, with an intuitive user interface that is simple to deploy and use. What needs improvement? Our use cases require more multi-tenant capabilities and additional VLAN interfaces for separating different customers. We currently use it to provide storage, sometimes shared storage, to different customers, but it is less flexible in comparison to a dedicated solution. For how long have I used the solution? I have been using Pure FlashArray X NVMe for approximately three years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? Since we have deployed Pure FlashArray X NVMe we have not had any major issues with failures or performance on these arrays. I rate the stability of Pure FlashArray X NVMe a ten out of ten. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? The solution scales well and is easy to do. We have approximately 10 dedicated customers and another 10 or 15 in the shared use case. Our customers are our users and they may be a company that runs their own software development and this is only their storage on their cloud offerings that they purchase from us. We plan to increase our usage. I rate the scalability of Pure FlashArray X NVMe a nine out of ten. How was the initial setup? Overall the initial setup of Pure FlashArray X NVMe is not difficult. It's simple to deploy, install and get up and running. The full process of deployment which includes installation, setup, and configuration, takes approximately one day. I rate the initial setup of Pure FlashArray X NVMe an eight out of ten. What about the implementation team? A small team is typically required for the implementation, as different teams handle different responsibilities, such as networking, virtualization, and facilities. The installation process also requires a couple of people as different roles such as cable racking, networking configuration, and array configuration have to be handled. What other advice do I have? We have a dedicated support team for maintenance available 24/7 across all of our data centers. A small group of individuals is in charge of overseeing the platform, and we also have a standard support team in place. I highly suggest obtaining the implementation certification for Pure FlashArray X NVMe. It is necessary for deployment and can be a bit frustrating as it requires paying for professional services unless you have the certification. With the certification, you are able to deploy on your own. The process is straightforward and uncomplicated, but you don't have access to all the required information to do the initial setup without the certification. Obtaining the certification is a good idea. There's training material that's available and it's a normal certification test. That cost approximately $150. I rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe a nine out of ten. They could make it easier to receive information about the solution and the support has been a mix of good and poor experiences. Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2023-01-20T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Quickly overcomes network and latency issues, but many options to check performance are missing What is most valuable? Pure FlashArray X NVMe has very few features. Pure FlashArray X NVMe will quickly overcome all the hurdles you face, including network and latency issues. What needs improvement? We need to get more information about the performance fine-tuning that we are doing. Many options to check performance, like read, writes, random writes, and random reads, are missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe. It will be much better if Pure FlashArray X NVMe provides these options like other products. The latency issue does come up multiple times. We tried to fix it, but we couldn't figure it out. For how long have I used the solution? I have been using Pure FlashArray X NVMe for four years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? I rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe a seven out of ten for stability. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? Pure FlashArray X NVMe is a scalable solution, but the scalability depends on the load. You cannot increase capacity if latency is present. So scalability mainly depends upon the latencies. I rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe a six out of ten for scalability. How are customer service and support? The follow-up is missing in Pure FlashArray X NVMe. With other solutions, we'll be able to identify the issues, and engineers will be available for remote sessions to fix the issues. However, with Pure FlashArray X NVMe, we need to escalate the issue and get an account manager for its resolution. How would you rate customer service and support? Neutral How was the initial setup? Pure FlashArray X NVMe has the easiest initial setup. We can set up Pure FlashArray X NVMe within one hour because everything is preconfigured. If you know everything, you can do it. I have set up the solution within half an hour. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? Pure FlashArray X NVMe’s pricing is cheaper than other products. What other advice do I have? Pure FlashArray X NVMe is the best solution for small-scale projects. However, if you want to use it for a high-end project, you must scale it properly. You will face latency and performance issues if you don't scale the solution properly. Overall, I rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe a seven out of ten. Which deployment model are you using for this solution? On-premises Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2023-07-26T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Fast and easy to use with good pricing What is our primary use case? We use the solution for storage. We use it for localization and we use the virtualization environment for the server applications and VDI, and we leverage Horizon for the virtual desktop. What is most valuable? Everything works well, and it is very fast. The pricing is good. We're happy with the services. They are user-friendly. It offers a simple setup process. It's stable. The solution is scalable. What needs improvement? We haven't come across any major issues. They could add more support for file storage and different types of storage. For how long have I used the solution? I've used the solution for about three years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? The product offers good stability. We can upgrade live to a new version of the software with no issues. It doesn't crash or freeze. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? We've tried to add a new disc in the past. It's easy to expand, and we found the process of expansion very simple. In our company, we have 2,000 employees working on virtual desktops. If you include our customers, that number is about 4,000. How are customer service and support? While my colleague has worked with technical support, I have not, and therefore cannot speak to how they are to deal with. My understanding, based on his experience, is that they are fine. How was the initial setup? The initial setup is very simple and quite fast. The deployment only takes a few days. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? We don't have any issues with the pricing. It's not too expensive. Which other solutions did I evaluate? I haven't compared the solution to other options. What other advice do I have? I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. We're a partner and end-user. We deal with Pure quite often. Which deployment model are you using for this solution? On-premises Disclaimer: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer:Partner
Date published: 2022-11-12T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Problem free scalability, reliable, with straightforward setup How has it helped my organization? It has good, reliable, and fast storage. We really like snapshot features and how automatable and programmable it is. It is all managed with ad sport and playbooks. For how long have I used the solution? We have been using Pure FlashArray X NVMe for about a year now. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? Scalability has been great. We have run into a couple of instances recently where we are running out of space. So we have had to buy some more packs for it and they have deployed fine and it has increased smoothly. How are customer service and support? I have not had to contact technical support. How was the initial setup? The initial setup was straightforward and easy. What other advice do I have? I would absolutely recommend Pure FlashArray X NVMe to anyone and rate it an eight out of ten. Which deployment model are you using for this solution? On-premises Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2022-07-19T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Extremely stable and offers various valuable features What is our primary use case? Our clients primarily use thePure FlashArray X NVMe for their primary storage needs. What is most valuable? Pure FlashArray X NVMe offers excellent features like efficient data reduction, a reliable SafeMode, and a great support model for continuous assistance and updates. What needs improvement? There is room for improvement in the pricing of the product. For how long have I used the solution? I have been working with Pure FlashArray X NVMe for six months. What do I think about the stability of the solution? I would rate the stability as a ten out of ten. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? I would rate the scalability as an eight out of ten. It is highly scalable, but there is room for slight improvement. It is suitable for both medium-sized and enterprise businesses. How was the initial setup? The initial setup is very simple. Installing it usually takes around one hour to get it up and running. The total time depends on what you are putting on it, like your specific data and applications. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? I would rate the product as a seven out of ten in terms of costliness. What other advice do I have? Overall, I would rate Pure FlashArray X NVMe as a ten out of ten. Which deployment model are you using for this solution? On-premises Disclaimer: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer:Reseller
Date published: 2023-12-08T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from A reliable product that provides high availability and excellent performance What is our primary use case? We use the solution as storage for our vSphere environment. What is most valuable? The high availability of the product is the most valuable feature. We have two Pure Storages. They are in a high-available setup. If one fails, the other will take over. With all the virtual machines on the storage, we need a reliable solution. The product is reliable. What needs improvement? We are a little bit disappointed about the data deduplication feature. We were promised a deduplication rate of at least 2:1. At the moment, we get 1.8:1, which limits our expectations. We may run out of storage in the foreseeable future. We need better data deduplication. I read that the vendor is working on a better deduplication algorithm. It will be useful for us if it works. We mostly rely on long-term releases. We don't need the most up-to-date features, but we need a reliable environment. It's important for us. For how long have I used the solution? I have been using the solution since June 2021. How are customer service and support? When we scheduled an update, the support technician called us and made the update remotely. We also had one outage where a controller of one of the products had failed and had to be replaced on-site. It took around 24 hours to replace the controller. The technician who came on-site did not have the controller with him. The technician waited one and a half hours until a taxi driver arrived with the controllers. It could have been coordinated better. How would you rate customer service and support? Positive Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch? We used DataCore before. It was a Windows-based solution. We had to restart the servers every month because of Windows updates. Every month, we had to restart the servers manually. It was not very pleasant. Pure Storage is a Linux-based system, and there are not many security issues. We only have two updates about every six months. It is much more reliable. How was the initial setup? The initial setup was straightforward. The deployment took about three days. The first day, we just put it in our racks and put the network cables and fiber channel cables on it. On the second day, we made the initial setup with high availability and created the first volumes. We migrated the data from our current storage to Pure Storage on the third day. What about the implementation team? We deployed the solution with the help of certified partners. They were experienced professionals. They knew what they were doing. What was our ROI? Our performance has increased. We were using DataCore before. It wasn’t so performant. Pure Storage has flash drives. We have better IOPS. What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? The product is expensive. We bought it because we want to be able to use it for about ten years. The vendor offers maintenance contracts where we are guaranteed to be able to upgrade the system, change controllers, and do other things. We hope that in ten years, the solution will be worth the money. What other advice do I have? Overall, I rate the tool a nine out of ten. Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2023-12-15T00:00:00-05:00

This page was printed on 4/23/2024 1:37:36 PM.