Need help?

Our experts have had an average response time of 11.7 minutes in August 2021 to fix urgent issues.

We will keep your servers stable, secure, and fast at all times for one fixed price.

GlusterFS vs Ceph performance – Let’s discuss it in detail!!

by | Mar 1, 2021

GlusterFS vs Ceph performance – Which distributed storage management package performs best?

Open-source storage platform offers many management packages including GlusterFS and Ceph. Let’s see what makes them different from each other.

As part of our Server Management Services, we help customers in choosing the right storage manager.

Today, we’ll do an analysis of GlusterFS vs Ceph performance and see what our Support Engineers suggest to our customers.


What about a deep discussion on GlusterFS vs Ceph performance?

There are multiple distributed storage management packages including GlusterFS, Ceph, RockStor, MooseFS, etc. But choosing the right among these based on their performance is really difficult.

Recently, one of our customers approached us with a request to suggest  him the best among GlusterFS and Ceph. He needs a storage where he can quickly scale up or scale down his data. He also mentioned that he is not going to store any massive data without any movement for a long period. As the client needed that kind of storage management, our Support Engineers suggested him to use Ceph.

Based on the requirements of our customers, we suggest the best as both GlusterFS and Ceph have their own positives and negatives when it comes to their performance.


What makes them different from each other?

Let’s now check on what makes GlusterFS distinct from Ceph and vice versa.


GlusterFs vs Ceph performance


GlusterFS is a block-based storage solution. It manages stored data as a file hierarchy rather than as objects. Which stores data on connected cluster devices and access data sequentially. So it suits best for storing large-scale data.

Whereas, Ceph is an object-based system. It manages data as stored objects rather than following a file hierarchy. In Ceph, data distributes over larger node-sets and many drives are able to parallelly input data from the replica copies.

Ceph distributes data in a cluster across the computers and it allows the users to access all of the data at once via the interface. Whereas Gluster keeps everything together by distributing data to computers that are connected with each other.

GlusterFS is mostly associated with Red Hat and Ceph has been widely adopted by the open-source community.


GlusterFS vs Ceph Performance – Who wins?

Gluster can handle a high number of files but when coming into performance this massive data handling slows it down. So, we do not suggest Gluster in handling data that requires high speed.

In such cases, Ceph is the best as it accesses the data rapidly.  For managing storage, Ceph uses its own tools. So, this self-managed system can reduce operating expenses when comparing with GlusterFS.

Both the Ceph and Gluster are good choices but their areas to perform well are different. They have their own areas to prove their talent. So, opting between GlusterFS vs Ceph always depends on the area and requirement.


[Having trouble when choosing best based on GlusterFS vs Ceph performance? – Our Experts are available 24/7.]


In conclusion, our Support Engineers always choose the best for our customers based on their requirements, especially when customers are in trouble to make a decision based on GlusterFS vs Ceph performance.


Never again lose customers to poor server speed! Let us help you.

Our server experts will monitor & maintain your server 24/7 so that it remains lightning fast and secure.


var google_conversion_label = "owonCMyG5nEQ0aD71QM";


Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Privacy Preference Center


Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.

PHPSESSID - Preserves user session state across page requests.

gdpr[consent_types] - Used to store user consents.

gdpr[allowed_cookies] - Used to store user allowed cookies.

PHPSESSID, gdpr[consent_types], gdpr[allowed_cookies]


Statistic cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.

_ga - Preserves user session state across page requests.

_gat - Used by Google Analytics to throttle request rate

_gid - Registers a unique ID that is used to generate statistical data on how you use the website.

smartlookCookie - Used to collect user device and location information of the site visitors to improve the websites User Experience.

_ga, _gat, _gid
_ga, _gat, _gid


Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.

IDE - Used by Google DoubleClick to register and report the website user's actions after viewing or clicking one of the advertiser's ads with the purpose of measuring the efficacy of an ad and to present targeted ads to the user.

test_cookie - Used to check if the user's browser supports cookies.

1P_JAR - Google cookie. These cookies are used to collect website statistics and track conversion rates.

NID - Registers a unique ID that identifies a returning user's device. The ID is used for serving ads that are most relevant to the user.

DV - Google ad personalisation

IDE, test_cookie, 1P_JAR, NID, DV, NID
IDE, test_cookie


These are essential site cookies, used by the google reCAPTCHA. These cookies use an unique identifier to verify if a visitor is human or a bot.