Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with HPE Primera.
What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?
We haven't come across any issues with the solution. I don't recall missing any features. They could work to make scalability easier. It's quite expensive to upgrade right now maybe just now as its a new model. Their latency is good, however, if they can continue to push their capabilities, that would be ideal.
We cannot use this storage for critical applications and data.
One of the drawbacks of the model we purchased is that it is not running NVMe drives. Even though they say that it is NVMe-ready, it is still on the SSD drives. The model that we purchased has only eight hard drives, and only the ones on the top could work on NVMe. The rest of them are still on the SSD. Its competitors, such as EMC and Pure Storage, are moving or have already moved to NVMe. HPE should improve this solution for NVMe. HPE should also improve IOs in this solution. IOs in HPE are weaker than Hitachi and Pure Storage.
There really isn't any aspect of the solution that needs improvement for the customer other than its price. It is a very good solution, but the Georgia Republic is a very small country and customers in both the government public sector and in the private sector do not have money to purchase enterprise or high performance solutions. They are looking at mid-range or mid-class solutions. I can say that they need to simplify the solution. In SimpliVity, they need a lot of integration with virtualization technologies. For example, putting some add-ons or plugins in vCenter. vCenter is a management software of VMware virtualization. Secondly, it would be better if they cold simplify the deployment of Primera. Thirdly, if you have already purchased Primera and you need to scale your infrastructure and you are thinking of buying more hardware disks, you will need to purchase the Rebalance Service from HP Enterprise. They need to improve that methodology. The customers need solutions that do not require a lot of administrative tasks.
On the software end, in regards to the integration, everything gets aligned with the software-defined data center concept. Which means that everything needs to be done for software and programmatically. This is an area that needs improvement as well as on the hardware end, the ability to expand capacity to larger numbers. In the next release, I would like the ability to do direct file services. This is a block-based solution, if you need to do file servers, you have to put servers around it. On the controller side, I would like to see NAS capabilities. That would be helpful.
On the software side, in terms of integration, everything gets aligned with the software-defined data center concept, which means that everything needs to be done programmatically. There is room for improvement in this regard. On the hardware side, you should have the ability to expand capacity to larger numbers. I would like to have the ability to do direct file services. This is a block-based solution, so if you need to do file services with it, you need to put servers around it. From the controller side, if we could have NAS capabilities then that would be great.
The interface needs to be more user-friendly in that sense that installation and management are still a bit on the high end. It needs to be simpler.
This solution would be expensive for small business and it could be priced more competitively for that market.
Which is better and why?