AWS Backup Reviews

I utilize AWS Backup to automate and centralize backup operations across AWS services in my AWS organization. It helps me ensure compliance with retention requirements, reduce operational overheads, and improve disaster recovery readiness. I also use it to enforce consistent backup policies across my AWS environment.

Not long ago, the development team accidentally modified data in a non-production database during testing, and because the database was protected by AWS Backup, I was able to quickly locate the appropriate recovery point and restore the database to a known good state. The recovery process was straightforward, minimizing downtime for this team and reinforcing the value of having these automated backup policies in place rather than relying on manual snapshots.

AWS Backup has positively impacted my organization by helping with compliance and reporting, which is usually a headache for any organization. It addresses governance, compliance, and disaster recovery readiness while reducing the operational manual effort. The centralized management and automation capabilities help ensure that critical resources are consistently protected across my AWS environment.

AWS Backup offers several valuable features. I think the fact that it is an AWS organization-wide service is significant. It is a centralized management system that allows me to manage AWS Backup policies, retention periods, and monitoring from a single place instead of configuring these backups for each AWS service. This helps with governance and control.

Another feature I appreciate is the integration with AWS Organization, which allows backup policies to be applied consistently across multiple accounts, which is very important for large organization environments where governance and compliance are critical. I also appreciate the automated backup plans that reduce operational overhead and ensure resources are protected without relying on manual intervention.

Additionally, cross-account and cross-region backup support improves resilience against accidental deletion, ransomware, or regional outages. The compliance and reporting features help provide visibility into backup status, recovery points, and policy adherence, making audits much easier.

AWS Backup is a great service, but I think there could be improvements on the reporting and dashboard side. More visibility into backup-related costs would be beneficial because I am very FinOps-minded. Stronger automated recovery testing capabilities and enhanced governance features for larger, multi-account, and multi-regional environments would make AWS Backup even more valuable for enterprise-scale operations.

I have been working in my current field for ten years.

When looking into using AWS Backup, my advice is that the service can be a little difficult to implement when it comes to infrastructure as code. I need to get everything tied down with my Terraform or CloudFormation templates. It should also be clear what my RPO and RTO requirements are, automate the backup process, use AWS Organizations for centralized governance, and implement cross-account or cross-region backups for critical workloads. Most importantly, test these restores regularly because backup success alone does not guarantee recovery success. I would rate this product a nine out of ten.

We are already using AWS Backup.

It is quite easy to manage AWS Backup's centralized console for multiple environments.

The product's interface is intuitive.

AWS Backup has a much higher price if you compare it with the snapshots.

I have to pay for the whole environment by AWS.

We have a backup solution with only virtual machines. The rest of it, we have a restore point.

I would need to get feedback from my colleague to see what additional features I would like to see in AWS Backup in the next release to make it closer to ten.

I have been using AWS Backup for the last three years.

There have not been any major problems.

Currently, we have a backup solution with only virtual machines. The rest of it, we have a restore point.

The support people face some challenges in coming on for remote sessions. They always prefer giving some logs. In the first interaction, I have already provided the logs, and they are asking again and again for the same logs. After a couple of iterations, then it comes to remote support.

Neutral

Earlier, we were using only the snapshots, where we create the disk and attach it to the existing servers.

I was not involved in the deployment of AWS Backup.

One of my junior colleagues is doing this kind of activity.

Currently I am using other platforms and other public clouds as well, but I am still using AWS.

I would recommend AWS Backup to others. I rate this product an 8.

As a consultant for Amazon Web Services, I manage backups of services such as EC2, RDS, and S3 using AWS Backup. These backups are done via a single platform, which simplifies the process.

The service makes it easy to manage a variety of backups under one platform, reducing complexity and avoiding the hassle of handling each backup service separately. In case of facing challenges, having everything centralized makes troubleshooting much easier.

The features of AWS Backup are very service-oriented and user-friendly. The platform is easy to manage and understand compared to other cloud platforms like Alibaba and Azure. The ability to maintain all backups via one service simplifies compliance with regulations such as NIST, PCI DSS, and HIPAA.

AWS Backup could benefit from including more services. Currently, it only includes around ten services, while AWS offers over three hundred plus services. Also, it would be helpful if AWS Backup could integrate logs more thoroughly. This would allow not only new users but also experienced users to more easily check logs directly from AWS Backup.

I have worked with AWS Backup for nearly a year in my previous company.

AWS Backup is very stable, rating nine out of ten. However, integrating logs more seamlessly would enhance it further.

AWS Backup is scalable, effectively adapting to customer needs, although it primarily eases the workload on consultants rather than directly affecting customer scalability.

The customer service is top-notch, rated ten out of ten. As a paid service, AWS provides excellent support, and I have not faced any issues with AWS Backup that required support.

Positive

AWS Backup setup rates at a seven out of ten for newcomers, and ten out of ten for experienced users. It takes about five to ten minutes to deploy.

AWS Backup has a moderate cost, rated at two or three out of ten regarding pricing. While it incurs a cost, it is not exceedingly expensive.

New users should take the time to read white papers or guides to save time and streamline the process. 

Overall, AWS Backup scores eight out of ten.

Our primary use case for AWS Backup is for taking periodic backups of our production servers. We schedule these backups to ensure we have the latest snapshots of our servers in place.

In case of an outage, we are able to restore our servers from the backup. This ensures business continuity and data availability.

The snapshots we take through AWS Backup are very effective. The periodic backups, taken every fifteen to twenty days, help us stay on the safer side in terms of data recovery.

The time it takes to complete the backups could be reduced. If the backups can be more seamless and without impacting server performance, it would be greatly appreciated.

We have been using AWS Backup for almost two years.

The solution is completely stable and we have no complaints about its stability.

AWS Backup is very scalable, but improvements can be made in the time it takes for backups to complete.

We interact with a relationship manager who coordinates with AWS support engineers. The support we have received through this channel has been helpful.

Positive

No, we have not used any other backup solutions prior to AWS Backup. However, I have heard of colleagues in different organizations using Veritas.

The initial setup of AWS Backup is easy and quick. It takes approximately ten to fifteen minutes.

Overall, AWS Backup provides value in terms of time and money through its periodic backup capabilities.

The pricing for AWS Backup is reasonable for our company. However, I do not have specific details on the licensing costs.

No, we have not evaluated any other vendors' backup solutions before working with AWS.

AWS Backup is easy to use with a good interface. I recommend using the periodic backup feature for production environments, as it is very essential. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I use AWS Backup to take the backup of multiple databases, including DynamoDB and S3. 

AWS Backup has multiple plans based on the frequency I choose for each service.

Before AWS Backup, we used the native solutions for our databases, which required significant customization and operational overhead. 

AWS Backup has helped us eliminate those tedious tasks, automate the backup process, and reduce operational overhead.

AWS Backup is secure and comes with a vault that ensures data is never deleted, offering great security. The pay-as-you-go model is beneficial for scalability, as cost scales with the amount of data backed up. 

Additionally, it offers automation capabilities, allowing backups to be configured based on custom plans and frequency. It also has built-in monitoring to notify of failures, achieving operational excellence and ease of use.

There are multiple enhancements needed in terms of compatibility with all database services, as AWS Backup is currently limited to specific ones.

I have been working with AWS Backup for over a year.

AWS Backup is highly available with a 99.99% uptime, however, I acknowledge that anything and everything can fail, hence we have set up monitoring.

AWS Backup provides infinite scalability with its pay-as-you-go model.

As of now, I have not had to escalate any issues to technical support.

Positive

I used the native backup solutions like DynamoDB's point-in-time recovery, which had a limitation of a thirty-five-day time window. AWS Backup mitigated this limitation.

The initial setup is straightforward. After referring to the documentation, it is clear even to a new user.

AWS Backup has been excellent in saving time and operational costs. It allows us to manage backups with ease.

AWS Backup operates on a pay-as-you-go model without requiring a license.

We considered third-party solutions, however, we were not allowed to use them and waited for AWS Backup to become available.

I recommend AWS Backup to others. It is an easy-to-use AWS native solution with multiple benefits, operational excellence, and ease. Analyze the data and costs before choosing AWS Backup. Use native backup solutions for less critical data. 

On a scale of one to ten, I rate AWS Backup as eight.

I am working on AWS database migration service. I deploy bots using AWS services, including S3 bucket, for multiple purposes. We use multiple services through AWS Database Migration Service.

AWS database migration service is useful for me because I am using Postgres, MongoDB, and MySQL. The uses of AWS database are related to easy backup and easy migrations, which is why we use AWS database services.

In AWS Backup, it is a default feature where they provide backup functionality. We can schedule weekly backups or set fixed dates and times for backup services.

AWS Backup is most beneficial because we can manage the service, centralize, and automate the data without missing any essential information. If we encounter any service-related issues, such as when someone accidentally deletes a table in production or testing, we can immediately restore the data from backup. Data protection and security are maintained for these reasons.

We use DynamoDB, which is easy to process and important for mentioning the integration capability of AWS Backup.

Regarding disadvantages of AWS Backup, it can be expensive and not particularly user-friendly. To perform backups, we need to follow specific steps and queries. When refreshing, if we want to do daily backups, it becomes quite costly. Weekly backups are more feasible from a cost perspective.

I have been using AWS database related services, including AWS Backup, for four years.

The lifecycle management policies are usually handled by the DevOps team. I am not aware of how these policies are implemented.

I am not the appropriate person to discuss compliance reports related to AWS Backup as those are managed by the DevOps team. While we use the service, most of the service enabling and related tasks are handled by the DevOps team.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate AWS Backup an eight based on my usage.

We use AWS Backup to protect our running workloads within AWS. We also use WAF, but my networking team handles it.

We use it regularly. Whenever there's a new workload, the RP and R team integrate backup based on our needs.

Reporting is one of the key elements that are valuable for C-suite executives. In terms of monitoring, the solution provides comprehensive details into ongoing processes, flagging issues and warnings as necessary. 

Another primary advantage is that we don't have to handle backup tools; it's a fully managed service. AWS takes care of the backup software, and we consume the service. This aspect of managed backup services is most beneficial.

While the solution is good, it is lagging in critical features. Currently, it lacks a solution for Kubernetes backup. Let's say if we have databases within our infrastructure; there is no designated mechanism for backing up applications. Although they offer app-level backups for services that use relational databases provided by them, this feature is not available if we're running our database in the AWS cloud.

I have over eight years of experience in backups.

It is a stable product. I would rate the stability a ten on ten. 

Scalability is good , but it lacks some critical features. For example, no Kubernetes backup solution and no app-specific backups unless using their related services. But for running your own database in the AWS cloud, there's no such feature yet.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

We haven't used enterprise-level support with their defined SLA. We use developer-level support, and we're fine with it.

Positive

We use the native storage provided by AWS. For block storage, they offer Elastic Block Volumes, and for object storage, it's S3.

I have experience with enterprise tools that support all applications, like Commvault, Rubrik, and more can protect anything in IT. However, AWS only supports its own services, not the entire application.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy. It's a straightforward process.

The deployment time depends on the data size. Backing up ten TBs will take longer than one TB. They have various timelines based on data volume and type.

We have a dedicated team that handles our specific requirements.

It's a myth that Cloud is cheap. Cloud is cheap initially, but the cost over time can be equal to your own infrastructure if you consume a lot. 

We don't have manpower overhead, but the cost is similar in the long run. The advantage is managed services, but Amazon includes that in the pricing, so it's okay.  But it saves a lot of headaches.

So, while there are advantages, I am not overly impressed with any significant cost advantages. I rate the pricing a six out of ten, with ten being the most expensive.

The tool is a good fit if your environment is VM-specific. However, it might not be the most suitable option if you have physical servers or an on-premise setup. Overall, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

My clients use AWS Backup to back up EC2 instances.

It's very easy to configure. Since it's a managed service, it's very straightforward to set up and use. And my customers get on with it very fast.

If AWS could also add some hybrid cloud features to AWS Backup, that would be a significant improvement.

For example, currently, AWS Backup only backs up to the S3 and Amazon Cloud, and you can only restore from the Amazon Cloud only. However, some people have hybrid environments. They have some workloads on-premises and some workloads in the cloud. 

So if AWS Backup could work in a way where we could back up on-premises to the Amazon Cloud, and then if something goes wrong on-premises, we could restore it in the cloud and make it work there, that would be a valuable feature.

So, a hybrid cloud flow feature would be beneficial.

I work with AWS Backup regularly. In fact, some of my customers ask me to consider Azure Backup for certain workloads.

It is stable. We haven't had any problems with the customers. No issues so far. 

It is easy to scale. It is suitable for all types of businesses, small, medium, and enterprise levels. 

Since we are the system integrators, we don't reach out to support. It is our customers who raise the support. They have not faced any issues with the service and support. It works well. 

There are some people who use backup solutions like Commvault, and there are some people who use backup solutions like Veeam.

The only real advantage of Commvault is that it can back up from any cloud or on-premises environment. It also has NetApp desktop backup, container backup, VM backup, physical server backup, virtual server backup, and support for AWS, Azure, and on-premises environments. Like, Amazon Backup only works with the Amazon Cloud. 

If a customer has three clouds, it would be much more efficient and cost-effective to use a solution like Commvault or Veeam that can back up all three environments.

The initial setup is very easy. 

The pricing is okay. When customers' workloads are only on Amazon, they don't typically evaluate other solutions. They simply use AWS Backup for their backup needs.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. I didn't give it a ten because it only supports Amazon Cloud.

We use AWS Backup to protect the resource data in the Amazon cloud.

The solution's most valuable features are its backup capability and tight integration with other AWS services. Since AWS Backup is a managed service, we don't need to do much to manage the solution.

There are some limitations to partial backup in AWS Backup. If we have five volumes attached to EC2 and want to take backup for only three volumes and skip two volumes, it is not feasible in AWS Backup.

I have been using AWS Backup for three years.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for stability.

Since AWS Backup is a managed service, it is scalable. We are increasing the number of users in our organization.

The solution provides very good technical support.

Positive

We previously used CPM backup. We switched to AWS Backup because it was free of cost.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup ten out of ten.

AWS Backup is free of cost, but we need to pay for the backup storage being used.

We use AWS Backup in the IT industry. Since AWS Backup is an Amazon service, it's tightly integrated with the resources. AWS Backup has the built-in capability to copy data from one data center to another. AWS Backup is a secure product from a security and compliance perspective.

I would recommend the solution to other users because it's free of cost and tightly integrated with other AWS services. Since it's a managed service, it presents no challenges regarding scalability or availability.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We deal with confidential client information and use AWS Backup for our KYC solution. We capture the identity details of the end customer and ensure they are securely backed up.

AWS is easy to use. I mean, in the sense that if we typically go for a backup solution, obviously, the advantages the cloud brings and, you know, we don't really have actually to do the installation ourselves. I don't need to look at the server and the uptime of the server. That's one. 

Second, most of these services are based on API calls. So a couple of API calls, and we are done. So we don't need to really look at scaling and the throughput aspects of it. That's something that AWS automatically takes care of.

The auto-scaling feature and the time efficiency of setting up AWS Backup are the most valuable aspects for us. It is a time-efficient solution. 

When it comes to encrypting data, it is not so convenient. When it comes to regular data backup, AWS Backup is pretty efficient. But when encryption is involved, there are two options: either encrypt the entire dataset or keep it completely unencrypted. 

However, in real-life scenarios, partial encryption is often desired. For example, I might want 80% of the data to be in plain text, while 20% needs to be masked or encrypted. So, in terms of backup and recovery, I believe there is still room for improvement in providing a solution that addresses this need in the market.

There is one particular feature I would greatly appreciate. It relates to data encryption. It would be beneficial to have specific data encryption options available for the entire dataset that we intend to encrypt.

We have been using AWS Backup for the past nine months.

I would rate the stability of this solution a nine out of ten. It has been highly stable for us.

I would rate the scalability of AWS Backup an eight out of ten. It offers good scalability.

Within our organization, there are only a few projects using AWS Backup. So the number of users should be less than ten. The users mainly consist of solution developers and technical personnel. 

It is used about once a month, so the frequency is pretty less. The backup frequency will remain once a month, but the data volume will continue to grow.

It is easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, where ten is very easy. It took us about one day to deploy AWS Backup.

I don't think any maintenance is required except for managing the data volume and its growth. So there's no need for regular maintenance tasks.

We were able to do the deployment in-house. We could do it on our own. It only requires one AWS cloud resource to handle the deployment. We don't need additional personnel.

The deployment process is straightforward. We just bring the service up, and it starts running. We make use of the API key.

I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one represents a low price and ten represents a high price. The pricing is decent.

We mainly relied on manual backup processes.

I would advise them to consider the data volume and their specific requirements, particularly if they have SLAs (Service Level Agreements) to meet. Backup is closely tied to those SLAs, so it's important to assess how much data needs to be backed up and how much should be stored in real-time databases based on the SLA's constraints.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. It's a user-friendly and scalable product, which makes it quite efficient.