We use CTERA in almost every site we use. It is the platform for every commercial site that we have in the world. We have around 198 of their devices locally, and we also have CTERA devices in our central locations for each region.

Even though we have added additional devices throughout the four years, we have been able to do that and cover it 24/7 throughout the world with four resources. CTERA can make it easier on your staff in that respect. When it is deployed and connected with proper Active Directory and bandwidth, and things are moving properly, you do not need to touch it. You do not need to do a lot. That is the nice part of CTERA.

The features I find most valuable are in the gateways themselves. They have done a great job over the years of providing insight into what is happening with our products, with the batches that come through that are scanned. I enjoy that part of it, and it is fairly easy to use from our standpoint once we get to know the product.

For the technical side, they have done a very good job over the last couple of years. Joe, Mukesh, and Shannon have done a great job teaching our staff. Joe Scott comes across as almost like a professor when he is teaching. He is very good at it. Once you learn how the system works, it is fairly easy, but there are a lot of little things that can go wrong. There are a lot of moving parts within it, so a lot of things can happen. You can do all the right steps and follow the runbook that is provided by CTERA, but you still need CTERA to help you dig down deep when you find an issue because new ones happen all the time.

One of the bigger things that I would like to see is additional logging. There are logs in there. They provide us with the initial logs on what is happening on our CTERA device. I appreciate that, but they do not give us any further information. I would like to have more information on the logs themselves. For example, if we do identify an issue, where could we use those logs? We have to download a specific log that only goes to them for them to review. We have no insight into it even if it is something that is on our side or our issue. I would like to have more visibility into that.

File replication-wise, they do a good job, but I would like to see a little bit more on folders. If somebody has touched a folder and moved it, I would like a little bit more details on that. We have certain folders for specific sites. Some people have access to them, and suddenly, a folder disappears. It could be because operations deleted it or moved it, maybe accidentally within another folder. There should be logs that we could go back to and see when those file folders were moved or touched and have an idea. Right now, we do not have this information. It is a big search if we lose a file or the operations team deletes a folder with scanned images in it. We do not get a log that says that so and so in operations touched this and hit the delete button. Such information is essential for doing RCAs when we have issues like that.

It does a very good job with data protection, but I would like some additional logs. I would like some additional ability to see who touched the folders. We have to let operations be able to touch certain folders because of the way our system is developed. Unfortunately, within CTERA, we do not have those logs. I would love to have those logs. If we turned on additional logging, it would fill it up so quickly that we would not be able to maintain and have enough storage. That is our issue. I would like to see additional logging available that did not occupy so much of our storage space so that we could see when somebody touched a folder and moved it. That would give us the last little piece to ensure that our data security is optimal.

It would be nice if there was an intermediary between HC400s and going bigger, something that would allow additional storage or even add storage to the HC400s, which recurrently cannot do. We have smaller scanning sites that use a physical device. These physical devices have very limited storage, so we end up running out of storage at times. There is no real alternative without going to a larger scale in three-node Nutanix and blowing up the site, and it may not be ready for it. It would be nice if there was an intermediary between the HC400s and going bigger. We should be able to have additional storage or even add storage to the HC400s when we get to that point where we are low and we do not have much storage on that HC400. It is not a large device. There are only three and a half terabytes. Once that storage is gone, you cannot add any more unless you club another HC400 with it or go to a bigger device. Clubbing an HC400 is a lot more hassle than it is worth.

I have been using the solution for over four years.

Stability-wise, we just went through one issue that they addressed. We were having cloud sync issues. We had things deployed for years, and we were suddenly getting cloud sync issues that were crashing our sites. When it took the site down, we had to physically rebuild the actual disk and then download the data. It caused us a lot of pain from the standpoint of working through it. It required a lot of copying of images. It was a lot of work for us on our end. They worked through it. Shannon did a good job of keeping us abreast of what was going on and the steps they were taking to resolve. It took a little bit longer than what we wanted, and we had several more cloud sync issues, but, eventually, they came out with a new version to deploy. That seems to have taken care of the issue.

They do a very good job with scalability. CTERA is a very scalable product, allowing us to grow. The smaller HC400 devices do not scale well if placed in a site on the cusp of needing a larger setup, but everything else that CTERA has product-wise does very well.

We use the ticketing system regularly, and it works well. It has gotten better over time. When I first started, we would contact them a lot by phone for P1s or severity ones. I found that to be very cumbersome and less reliable, but since then, we have been able to work through those issues. By having Joe, Mukesh, and Shannon, we have been able to resolve some of those issues. If we supply a ticket, they are able to find a way to help us. We sometimes do call. We can now also get on the calendar and schedule time. That is a nice feature. When we first started out, everything was on call, and those people we were calling did not have a clue of what they were doing. That has changed a lot over the last four years.

They have also done a good job recently from the training aspect. Joe, Mukesh, and Shannon have done a good job with the relationship and the relationship building. They have been able to work with us even when we look at licensing and the amount of licenses that we have to purchase for all these devices. They have worked with us even on that.

This is my first opportunity to use and work in this environment. I came from a different technology before, so this is my first introduction.

It is easy to deploy. We have a team that helps set up the system before it goes live, and they have really got it down to an art at this point.

For one site, we can probably get it stood up with servers and other things that are needed within about two weeks. It is fairly simple. It also depends on the download it takes and how much data that you want to use. There are a lot of variables in there, but it would take about two weeks.

They are always looking to upgrade their versions, which is great. Most recently, they upgraded their version to help with an issue that we were having in CTERA. That was good. However, when I first got here, we were on so many different versions of CTERA that we committed ourselves to only upgrading once a year. They may have several versions or two other versions coming out throughout the year, but we only upgrade once. We have so many sites and so many places that we have to touch. We can only do it during downtime, which makes it very difficult for us, so we deploy the version at the beginning of the year and do not touch it for the rest of the year.

We did not use any third-party integrator or consultant. We worked directly with Joe and the team.

Its benefits can be seen immediately. It is an edge filer that does well when it is operating at its most efficient. You can see its benefits immediately when the storage is correct, the latency is lower, and there is proper bandwidth and a good connection with Active Directory. You can go from a site that has no CTERA device and that was just sending over the wire because it was a smaller scanning site to begin with. After deploying a CTERA device, you can immediately get benefits from it.

There are so many moving parts of CTERA because you are connected not only to Active Directory; you have the network connections, routers, switches, etc. There are many things that it goes through to get to your central environment, including your overall bandwidth from the ISP. If everything is working and operating as it should, it is a good service. You do not need to touch it a lot. You need to have everything working, and that is no fault of CTERA. There are a lot of moving parts when you look at everything that goes into it.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. We have many third-party products that are not edge filers like CTERA. From a product standpoint, they compare well, but the support really lifts CTERA higher. The support aspect is very significant.

I primarily use the CTERA Enterprise File Services Platform for SMB shares and object storage. To accommodate my growing needs, I plan to migrate the Hitachi Content Platform for archival purposes and expand to a broader platform.

CTERA's instantaneous and redundant file replication, available across multiple geographical locations, ensures easy and user-friendly recovery. Even end users can effortlessly restore files to previous versions.

Our disaster recovery solution utilizes the CTERA Enterprise File Services Platform in an active-active configuration with a primary gateway at one location and a secondary gateway at another, working as a potentially remote site and our primary data center, respectively. This setup ensures continuous access to data, as users can seamlessly connect to the secondary gateway if the primary location experiences an outage. The active-active configuration provides instantaneous failover, eliminating the need for manual intervention.

Our Recovery Time Objective has been improved compared to previous solutions, eliminating the need for multiple configuration changes. By updating the Domain Name System to include both the primary and secondary systems in the Failover System, we ensure continuous service even if the primary system fails, eliminating the need for manual intervention or Disaster Recovery procedures.

Our Recovery Point Objective, compared to previous solutions, is optimal with minimal outages or impacts.

The CTERA Enterprise File Services Platform offers immediate benefits due to its unique approach, distinguishing it from legacy solutions.

It helps free up some IT resources for other projects or tasks.

CTERA enhances data protection with ransom protection, which tags unusual activity and restricts unauthorized access. This helps identify malicious activity within the environment. Additionally, CTERA offers basic protections, including database server-level replication, ideally restricted in a DMZ-like scenario.

The CTERA Enterprise File Services Platform is a hybrid solution that supports both on-premises and cloud environments. This means we can use cloud storage, such as GCP or Azure buckets, as the backend while deploying services on-premises or in the cloud. Additionally, caching gateways can be placed at different remote locations to improve performance. A vital advantage of this platform is its instantaneous recovery capability, allowing seamless access to a secondary gateway if the primary one fails, a feature lacking in the previous solution.

One suggested improvement for the CTERA Enterprise File Services Platform is the ability to distribute data across multiple active backend storage nodes rather than the current limitation of a single active node. This enhancement would allow for data segregation, enabling administrators to define which data is stored on specific nodes and optimize allocation across geographically diverse gateways.

I have been using the CTERA Enterprise File Services Platform for four-plus years.

I haven't encountered major issues with stability. There are minor issues now and then, but nothing major.

Scalability is straightforward and simple. It's easy to upgrade, increase capacity, and add multiple gateways as needed.

Initially, I sought support often, but in recent years, I've been managing on my own. I have not needed to contact technical support as frequently as before.

I previously used Hitachi Content Platform and NetApp for my data storage needs, but I have since transitioned to CTERA as it better aligns with my requirements. Due to its superior suitability, I am migrating my other platforms to the CTERA Enterprise File Services Platform.

The initial deployment was straightforward. CTERA assisted with deployment initially, but now I handle it by taking the latest image for new installations. Installation in the cloud only takes a couple of minutes.

Initially, CTERA was involved in the deployment, but now it's completely done by me.

So far, pricing seems to be fine. Unlike other solutions that require hardware purchases, CTERA offers software licensing with flexibility across multiple infrastructure providers. I can use their software licensing with my own infrastructure setup.

I would rate the CTERA Enterprise File Services Platform nine out of ten.

The latest version of the CTERA Enterprise File Services Platform offers enhanced NFS support and object archival capabilities, including more flexible retention settings. Previous limitations have been addressed, resulting in significant improvements.

The stop file did not apply to on-prem NetApp or the other solutions. Users might need to adjust how they interact with data.

We use CTERA as a global file share for several divisions within our organization.

We immediately realized the benefits of the CTERA platform. When we rolled this out, we had around five sites and noticed a significant drop in requests for restoration or storage space increases. On the backup side, we no longer had to back up Windows Servers.

Using CTERA has freed up our IT resources from monitoring the old Windows file servers, adding space, cleaning up stuff, etc.

Having backups has reduced the tasks administrators used to do, and now they can concentrate on other things.

We use CTERA for disaster recovery at sites in hurricane zones. Our DR nodes are located in the central US, and it has worked well for those disasters. We've also had appliances crash and recovered them faster than using a regular Windows file server.

We've reduced our recovery point objectives to varying degrees. It depends on the site. We can typically have a system back up and serving users for small to medium sites in eight hours.

I like that the glass is always half full with CTERA file services. It keeps the data hot for users on location and then tiers off older data. If you need it, the stub is still there. You can click on it, and it's back on the device.

The replication and versioning work great. Users can self-serve basic restorations of one or two gigabytes, but administrators need to handle bigger restores of several gigabytes. CTERA has out-of-the-box data protection capabilities. It sends the data to the cloud.

As soon as something is written to the device, CTERA copies it to the cloud, where it's versioned with snapshots so we can recover it. We haven't used Ransom Protect, but we'll roll that out with the next firmware upgrade.

It would help to have a global single-pane-of-glass view of all my CTERA devices. We have different regions, and we must log in to each portal to see what's happening with those. It would be nice to have a single portal to see the health of the devices, versions, and firmware upgrades. Sometimes, we want to dive into something more complex, like investigating why CTERA storage usage grew from 2 terabytes to 4 terabytes in a week. That's a little challenging. It's something we would like to see on the road map.

It has a learning curve. They could make it easier for administrators to troubleshoot problems. We get alerts, and sometimes, those are false positives. Compared to where we started, they've made significant improvements in the last five years.

I have been using CTERA for five years.

I rate CTERA nine out of 10 for stability. It has been reliable for our needs.

I rate CTERA eight out of 10 for scalability with a qualification. It's scalable, but their licensing model is different on their devices. If we're running the system on our on-premise kit, the licensing should be per terabyte and not a limitation on CPU and memory.

If we need to upgrade CPU and memory, we should be able to do that without a license upgrade. I get that we need to upgrade our storage space if we run out, but we should be able to scale up processing and memory based on the system's needs.

I rate CTERA support eight out of 10. High-priority issues are handled promptly, while lower-priority concerns take longer to address.

When we implemented the solution, CTERA didn't have any training, so we had to work with their engineers to learn the solution and get the portal set up. It was a little challenging, but they were there to answer questions and show us best practices for deployment.

It took us around a month to set up the portal and work through the pieces to deploy the edge services. Once you deploy the edge device, you need to copy the old systems' data. That takes a little bit longer. It took about two months to get it to a place where we were comfortable. The deployment team consisted of one CTERA engineer, me, and another system administrator.

After deployment, CTERA requires some maintenance, primarily firmware upgrades. CTERA coordinates with us when new versions come out, and we work with their engineers to deploy them. A technical account manager manages those software versions to ensure we're not on the bleeding edge and causing more problems in our environment.

They do ESS upgrades on the hardware they deploy from and other care and feeding underneath the hood that we can't access. They have access to their gateways, which are locked down only for their admin use. We open tickets and work with them hand in hand to get things upgraded, tweaked, or troubleshooted.

We did not use any third parties; the deployment was handled by one CTERA engineer, myself, and another administrator.

We reduced our total ownership cost using CTERA. Adding SSD storage to Windows file servers is expensive, and we no longer need to back up those devices. The ability to store things in a back-end S3 bucket significantly reduces the cost. It's much cheaper per gig.

CTERA's pricing seems to be on par with some of the other players, such as Nasuni and Azure. They all have benefits, but CTERA is competitive for its features.

I rate CTERA Enterprise File Services nine out of 10.

Before implementing CTERA, you must analyze the workload you're trying to put on the platform and test it. We're a big manufacturer doing a lot of automated testing where we're writing thousands of files. At a point, it doesn't stop you from writing files, but the directory lookups become a little slower. It's critical to understand your workload before you put it there. The regular stuff works great, like Excel, Word, etc., but you want to check if it will be appropriate for your purposes if you are doing automated manufacturing or engineering.

It is our main production file share. Our main reason for going for this solution was the uncontrollable growth of file data. It was unsustainable on our previous platform or technology. We needed something scalable like CTERA, so it was the scalability that we required.

File replication and versioning seem to work very well. We did have some challenges at the beginning, but all of that has been resolved now. It works very well. It does what our users require. Replication is excellent. We needed that, and the versioning is also pretty important.

One of the reasons we chose CTERA Enterprise File Services Platform was the requirements we had to have ransomware protection. Our existing solution at the time would not have met those requirements of being able to restore from a ransomware incident. What we wanted from a platform was the ability to restore a snapshot or restore a file system or data back to a previous point in time, and CTERA Enterprise File Services Platform offered us that. Availability was a very key feature of why we liked the solution. It is effectively like the disaster recovery feature, and that also lends itself to replication. It works very well for our ransomware recovery objectives.

There is business growth due to being able to offer greater storage capacity for them. Before, we were running into storage limitations, and now that we have enabled CTERA, we can accommodate more data and users.

When it comes to reduction in recovery time objectives, we have not used it in that way. However, we are anticipating that our recovery time objectives will come down from over a month to hours or days. Recovery point objectives will also effectively be down to hours.

It is hard to say how much it has freed up IT resources for other projects or tasks. Now that it is fully implemented and fully working, we are spending a lot less time looking after it.

It has drastically reduced the amount of time we used to spend on backups. It is hard to provide the metrics, but six hours a month or something like that would be fair.

The ransomware recoverability feature has definitely helped with our data protection mandates. It has reassured our security teams that we are in a good place with regard to securing the data and being able to recover the data.

A few features are valuable. The first one would be scalability. It is effectively unlimited in scale. The pricing is very fair.

The availability of it is also valuable, and by that, I mean resilience. The architecture of how it is designed means that it is very easy to scale out and we can make it available to users wherever we need it.

More monitoring from the platform would be good. There is some monitoring, but it is paid. It is a chargeable service. It would be good for that to be included in the base. Monitoring would be a good one.

We have been using this solution for at least two years.

We initially ran into a number of bugs. However, as of the last three months, they have largely been ironed out. We did run into some problems in the early days, but its stability is good now. I would rate it an eight out of ten for stability.

I would rate it a nine out of ten for scalability. It is used by the entire business, and it is a global organization. It is used globally. We have around 850 users on it.

It is very good. I would rate them an eight out of ten.

We came from EMC. We switched because of scalability and recoverability. We wanted ransomware data recovery and data protection.

There was also a lack of innovation from EMC. We like the modern features of CTERA. EMC was not innovating, and it was sort of a dying product.

It is deployed on-prem. Its deployment was fairly straightforward. It was simple to deploy CTERA Enterprise File Services Platform into our organization’s firewall.

It took us weeks to deploy it initially. It took us about three months to get to grips with it. We are kind of learning every day, but it was not particularly difficult. We were able to make good use of it after a few months.

Its maintenance requires usual system upgrades every three months. It is a one-man job, and we work with CTERA support on that.

We had two people working on it.

We have not measured it, but there is probably a 10% to 15% time-saving. That will grow because we have been spending a lot of time migrating and setting things up, but that has put us in a better position to take advantage of the platform.

I would rate it a six out of ten for pricing. It is fairly priced.

I am not too involved in the pricing of what we used to pay, but it would have reduced the cost of ownership. I cannot give a figure, but the EMC solution was very expensive compared to CTERA. It has definitely saved us money based on our previous EMC system, but I am not responsible for billing.

I would recommend CTERA Enterprise File Services Platform for ease of use, scalability, and price.

We do have disaster recovery enabled, and it is our plan to use it when needed. We have tested it, and it works well.

We are not using CTERA’s Ransom Protect feature. I know there is a new feature for that, but I do not believe we are using a specific feature yet. It is something that we are probably looking to implement, so I cannot say if it has reduced downtime. Even if we had it, it would be hard to say because luckily, we have not been compromised.

I would rate CTERA Enterprise File Services Platform an eight out of ten.