Introducing G2.ai, the future of software buying.Try now
Compare GlusterFS and IBM Storage Ceph 
At a Glance
Market Segments
Small-Business (44.4% of reviews)
Mid-Market (35.0% of reviews)
Pros & Cons
Not enough data
Not enough data
Entry-Level Pricing
No pricing available
No pricing available
GlusterFS
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 GlusterFSIBM Storage Ceph
Star Rating
(21)4.2 out of 5
Market Segments
Mid-Market (35.0% of reviews)
Pros & Cons
Not enough data
Entry-Level Pricing
No pricing available
Learn more about IBM Storage CephSummary
AI Generated Summary
AI-generated. Powered by real user reviews.
- Users report that IBM Storage Ceph excels in its scalability, allowing for seamless expansion as data needs grow, while GlusterFS is noted for its flexibility in deployment options, making it suitable for various environments.
- Reviewers mention that IBM Storage Ceph has a robust set of features, particularly its data replication and erasure coding capabilities, which enhance data durability, whereas GlusterFS is praised for its ease of use and straightforward setup process.
- G2 users highlight that the quality of support for IBM Storage Ceph is generally rated higher, with a score of 8.2, compared to GlusterFS's 7.6, indicating that users feel more supported when issues arise with Ceph.
- Users on G2 report that IBM Storage Ceph has a strong product direction, with a perfect score of 10.0, suggesting a clear roadmap for future enhancements, while GlusterFS's product direction score of 4.4 indicates some uncertainty about its future development.
- Reviewers say that the ease of administration is better with GlusterFS, scoring 8.0 compared to IBM Storage Ceph's 7.3, which suggests that users find GlusterFS more manageable in day-to-day operations.
- Users mention that while both products have similar star ratings, IBM Storage Ceph's focus on mid-market solutions (35.0% of reviews) contrasts with GlusterFS's appeal to small businesses (44.4% of reviews), indicating different target audiences and use cases.
Pricing
Entry-Level Pricing
GlusterFS
No pricing availableIBM Storage Ceph
No pricing availableFree Trial
GlusterFS
No trial information availableIBM Storage Ceph
No trial information availableRatings
Meets Requirements
8.5
22
8.8
16
Ease of Use
8.0
24
7.9
16
Ease of Setup
7.8
20
6.8
11
Ease of Admin
8.0
20
7.3
11
Quality of Support
7.6
15
8.2
13
Has the product been a good partner in doing business?
8.4
15
8.0
9
Product Direction (% positive)
4.4
23
10.0
15
Categories
Categories
Shared Categories
GlusterFS and IBM Storage Ceph are categorized as Runtime
Unique Categories
GlusterFS has no unique categories
IBM Storage Ceph has no unique categories
Reviews
Reviewers' Company Size
GlusterFS
Small-Business(50 or fewer emp.)
Mid-Market(51-1000 emp.)
Enterprise(> 1000 emp.)
IBM Storage Ceph
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
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%
Information Technology and Services
30.0%
Telecommunications
20.0%
Computer Software
10.0%
Computer & Network Security
10.0%
Retail
5.0%
Other
25.0%
Discussions
GlusterFS has no discussions with answers
Send me E-Magazines related to Supporting and Troubleshooting ..eg. FAQ
1 Comment
ZM
YesRead more
what is the best way to implement Ceph with kubernetes?
1 Comment
AJ
Kubernetes service is easy to use & scale at transparent pricesRead more
IBM Storage Ceph has no more 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.
