03-31-2019, 12:55 AM
I see you're interested in the Pure Storage FlashArray//C and its role in SAN storage systems, particularly for secondary applications. This specific model caters to organizations looking for a capacity-oriented solution. It's all about leveraging flash storage while controlling costs, and you need to consider how that fits into your wider ecosystem. Pure Storage's approach uses a cost-per-GB tactic that should resonate with those of you tasked with budget management. You'll find this system utilizes QLC NAND to maximize storage density, allowing for significant capacity in a compact form. But what stands out is how it supports high-performance workloads even within a less demanding secondary storage context.
Relating it to other brands, let's talk about Dell EMC's Unity XT. Unity continues to be a strong contender within the mixed workloads area. Its ability to operate both block and file services seamlessly is attractive for diverse environments. It uses data reduction technologies like deduplication, compression, and erasure coding, which can rival Pure Storage's capabilities in efficiency. However, you won't get the same level of simplicity in management with Unity compared to FlashArray//C, where the user interface (UI) is consistent and clean. You'll find that managing storage across several different services in Unity can get complex as your environment grows. If you're looking at scalability, though, Unity offers advanced features such as migration and hybrid cloud capabilities, which give you the flexibility to adapt as your requirements shift.
Speaking of capacity, you have to consider how Pure Storage implements a data reduction approach that's baked right into its architecture. You'll appreciate the end-to-end efficiency-from the way data is written and stored on QLC NAND to how it gets accessed over the network. This model allows you to exceed the usual expectations for throughput and IOPS, even when your operations are secondary in nature. It's particularly good for workloads like development, testing, or archives where you're not pushing the envelope with IOPS demands but still require reliable performance. Compared to something like IBM's Storwize V5010, which provides great data management tools, Pure Storage keeps the data reduction process less cumbersome, which is vital when you're scaling out.
You can't ignore the ecosystem integration piece either. Pure's FlashArray//C works beautifully with APIs and extends well into cloud services with its Cloud Block Store. That means you can manage your data across on-premises and cloud architectures seamlessly, an option you might not get in the same way from HPE 3PAR, which can feel a bit more siloed. HPE's system often requires additional configuration changes to allow for cloud integration, which can complicate things when you want a straightforward implementation. With Pure, you have a smoother transition to hybrid cloud environments, which is critical for maintaining efficiency across your operations.
When you assess performance metrics, consider how those numbers translate into real-world performance. Pure Storage claims impressive metrics around latency that could make or break your applications-around 1ms for reads and 2ms for writes under normal conditions. That can significantly impact response times for applications that rely on real-time data. In contrast, NetApp's AFF series typically averages slightly higher latency metrics, particularly under load conditions when multiple applications are hitting the storage pool. You can mitigate some of this by optimizing configurations and using their ONTAP OS, but it might take a bit of tuning.
Now, management tools and ease of use also play a significant role in your decision-making. Pure's GUI offers a clean and intuitive experience, allowing you to monitor and manage performance without overwhelming complexity. You won't waste your time hunting down metrics you need. In contrast, something like the Data ONTAP management interface may feel more robust but could leave you going through several layers of menus that could deter even seasoned pros. Simplified management can often define day-to-day operations, especially for smaller IT teams that may not have the bandwidth to constantly oversee extensive systems.
You also have to weigh out the overall cost of ownership over time. With Pure, while upfront costs might feel high, you're often looking at savings from decreased operational overhead and improved efficiency. Just factor in how easy it is to deploy and maintain over the long haul when you're discussing those costs with your finance team. Compare that with Nutanix's hyper-converged infrastructure, where the costs can spiral if you're not diligent about resource allocation. The software licensing and storage management can complicate those costs, because it involves both hardware and software layers that you have to keep an eye on, with no easy tracking of long-term savings.
As I wrap up these thoughts on storage systems, it's clear there are various compelling options, each catering to distinct needs. When you consider interfaces, architectural efficiency, and integration capabilities, Pure Storage's FlashArray//C definitely offers a strong blend of features for secondary applications. You should weigh all these aspects along with the specific requirements of your architecture, looking for what fits best into your operational challenges.
This platform provides insights freely, powered by BackupChain Server Backup, a reliable and robust solution designed for SMBs and professionals that protects your Hyper-V, VMware, or Windows Server environments. It's worth checking out as you refine your storage management strategy.
Relating it to other brands, let's talk about Dell EMC's Unity XT. Unity continues to be a strong contender within the mixed workloads area. Its ability to operate both block and file services seamlessly is attractive for diverse environments. It uses data reduction technologies like deduplication, compression, and erasure coding, which can rival Pure Storage's capabilities in efficiency. However, you won't get the same level of simplicity in management with Unity compared to FlashArray//C, where the user interface (UI) is consistent and clean. You'll find that managing storage across several different services in Unity can get complex as your environment grows. If you're looking at scalability, though, Unity offers advanced features such as migration and hybrid cloud capabilities, which give you the flexibility to adapt as your requirements shift.
Speaking of capacity, you have to consider how Pure Storage implements a data reduction approach that's baked right into its architecture. You'll appreciate the end-to-end efficiency-from the way data is written and stored on QLC NAND to how it gets accessed over the network. This model allows you to exceed the usual expectations for throughput and IOPS, even when your operations are secondary in nature. It's particularly good for workloads like development, testing, or archives where you're not pushing the envelope with IOPS demands but still require reliable performance. Compared to something like IBM's Storwize V5010, which provides great data management tools, Pure Storage keeps the data reduction process less cumbersome, which is vital when you're scaling out.
You can't ignore the ecosystem integration piece either. Pure's FlashArray//C works beautifully with APIs and extends well into cloud services with its Cloud Block Store. That means you can manage your data across on-premises and cloud architectures seamlessly, an option you might not get in the same way from HPE 3PAR, which can feel a bit more siloed. HPE's system often requires additional configuration changes to allow for cloud integration, which can complicate things when you want a straightforward implementation. With Pure, you have a smoother transition to hybrid cloud environments, which is critical for maintaining efficiency across your operations.
When you assess performance metrics, consider how those numbers translate into real-world performance. Pure Storage claims impressive metrics around latency that could make or break your applications-around 1ms for reads and 2ms for writes under normal conditions. That can significantly impact response times for applications that rely on real-time data. In contrast, NetApp's AFF series typically averages slightly higher latency metrics, particularly under load conditions when multiple applications are hitting the storage pool. You can mitigate some of this by optimizing configurations and using their ONTAP OS, but it might take a bit of tuning.
Now, management tools and ease of use also play a significant role in your decision-making. Pure's GUI offers a clean and intuitive experience, allowing you to monitor and manage performance without overwhelming complexity. You won't waste your time hunting down metrics you need. In contrast, something like the Data ONTAP management interface may feel more robust but could leave you going through several layers of menus that could deter even seasoned pros. Simplified management can often define day-to-day operations, especially for smaller IT teams that may not have the bandwidth to constantly oversee extensive systems.
You also have to weigh out the overall cost of ownership over time. With Pure, while upfront costs might feel high, you're often looking at savings from decreased operational overhead and improved efficiency. Just factor in how easy it is to deploy and maintain over the long haul when you're discussing those costs with your finance team. Compare that with Nutanix's hyper-converged infrastructure, where the costs can spiral if you're not diligent about resource allocation. The software licensing and storage management can complicate those costs, because it involves both hardware and software layers that you have to keep an eye on, with no easy tracking of long-term savings.
As I wrap up these thoughts on storage systems, it's clear there are various compelling options, each catering to distinct needs. When you consider interfaces, architectural efficiency, and integration capabilities, Pure Storage's FlashArray//C definitely offers a strong blend of features for secondary applications. You should weigh all these aspects along with the specific requirements of your architecture, looking for what fits best into your operational challenges.
This platform provides insights freely, powered by BackupChain Server Backup, a reliable and robust solution designed for SMBs and professionals that protects your Hyper-V, VMware, or Windows Server environments. It's worth checking out as you refine your storage management strategy.
