Your question is quite muddled. The word ideal implies a complete match with desirable requirements, while success implies the achievement of some sort of goal. Ideal refers therefore more to a passive set of attributes, while success implies positive change as a consequence of directed action.
Your second sentence starts with a false-premise, follows with a non-sequitur and ends with an irrelevant quote.
When you say almost nothing is ideal, you are overlooking a very common use of the word, which means that a thing or situation is adequately suited to a set of requirements. A spanner, for example, might be considered the 'ideal' tool for the loosening of a nut.
When you say success is the 'greater virtue', you are assuming that success is a virtue and that virtues can be ranked in an objective way, which is entirely questionable. I might successfully evade the payment of taxes, but that is unlikely to be considered virtuous by the taxman.
When you suggest that success must be the greater virtue because the ideal is in limited supply, you are simply wrong. I can cite many examples of rare behaviour that would be considered more virtuous than other less rare behaviours.
As for the question about what philosophers have to say about the difference between success and ideal, my answer is that whatever they have to say is almost certainly no more useful than what lexicographers have to say.