Introducing G2.ai, the future of software buying.Try now
Compare Apache Karaf and GlusterFS 
At a Glance
Market Segments
Small-Business (33.3% of reviews)
Small-Business (44.4% of reviews)
Pros & Cons
Not enough data
Not enough data
Entry-Level Pricing
No pricing available
No pricing available
Apache Karaf
Star Rating
(24)4.2 out of 5
Market Segments
Small-Business (33.3% of reviews)
Pros & Cons
Not enough data
Entry-Level Pricing
No pricing available
Learn more about Apache KarafGlusterFS
Star Rating
(27)4.3 out of 5
Market Segments
Small-Business (44.4% of reviews)
Pros & Cons
Not enough data
Entry-Level Pricing
No pricing available
Learn more about GlusterFSSummary
AI Generated Summary
AI-generated. Powered by real user reviews.
- Users report that GlusterFS excels in scalability, allowing for seamless expansion of storage capacity, which is particularly beneficial for small businesses experiencing growth. In contrast, Apache Karaf is noted for its modular architecture, enabling users to easily add or remove features as needed.
- Reviewers mention that GlusterFS has a steeper learning curve, with an ease of use rating of 8.0, while Apache Karaf, despite its lower rating of 7.6, is often praised for its user-friendly interface and straightforward setup process, making it more accessible for new users.
- G2 users highlight that GlusterFS's quality of support is rated at 7.6, with some users expressing concerns about response times. Conversely, Apache Karaf users report a slightly lower support quality rating of 7.4, but they appreciate the active community forums that provide additional help and resources.
- Reviewers say that GlusterFS's product direction rating of 4.4 indicates some uncertainty about future updates, while Apache Karaf's higher rating of 7.3 suggests a more positive outlook on ongoing development and feature enhancements.
- Users on G2 mention that GlusterFS's performance in handling large volumes of data is impressive, particularly with its distributed file system capabilities. In contrast, Apache Karaf is recognized for its lightweight container capabilities, which allow for efficient deployment of Java applications.
- Users report that GlusterFS is particularly well-suited for environments requiring high availability and redundancy, while Apache Karaf shines in scenarios where rapid application development and deployment are priorities, thanks to its OSGi-based architecture.
Pricing
Entry-Level Pricing
Apache Karaf
No pricing availableGlusterFS
No pricing availableFree Trial
Apache Karaf
No trial information availableGlusterFS
No trial information availableRatings
Meets Requirements
8.9
14
8.5
22
Ease of Use
7.6
14
8.0
24
Ease of Setup
8.9
6
7.8
20
Ease of Admin
8.6
6
8.0
20
Quality of Support
7.4
12
7.6
15
Has the product been a good partner in doing business?
9.3
5
8.4
15
Product Direction (% positive)
7.3
13
4.4
23
Categories
Categories
Shared Categories
Apache Karaf and GlusterFS are categorized as Runtime
Unique Categories
Apache Karaf has no unique categories
GlusterFS has no unique categories
Reviews
Reviewers' Company Size
Apache Karaf
Small-Business(50 or fewer emp.)
Mid-Market(51-1000 emp.)
Enterprise(> 1000 emp.)
GlusterFS
Small-Business(50 or fewer emp.)
Mid-Market(51-1000 emp.)
Enterprise(> 1000 emp.)
Small-Business
(50 or fewer emp.)
Mid-Market
(51-1000 emp.)
Enterprise
(> 1000 emp.)
Reviewers' Industry
Information Technology and Services
16.7%
Computer Software
16.7%
Telecommunications
12.5%
Banking
12.5%
Sporting Goods
4.2%
Other
37.5%
Computer Software
22.2%
Information Technology and Services
7.4%
Hospitality
7.4%
Education Management
7.4%
Computer & Network Security
7.4%
Other
48.1%
Alternatives
Discussions
Apache Karaf has no discussions with answers
GlusterFS has no discussions with answers
Hunting for software insights?
With over 3 million reviews, we can provide the specific details that help you make an informed software buying decision for your business. Finding the right product is important, let us help.
