IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

AWS Server Migration Service OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

AWS Server Migration Service is #5 ranked solution in top Cloud Migration tools. PeerSpot users give AWS Server Migration Service an average rating of 10 out of 10. AWS Server Migration Service is most commonly compared to CloudEndure Live Migration: AWS Server Migration Service vs CloudEndure Live Migration. AWS Server Migration Service is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 77% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a media company, accounting for 31% of all views.
Buyer's Guide

Download the Cloud Migration Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: June 2022

What is AWS Server Migration Service?

AWS Server Migration Service (SMS) is an agentless service which makes it easier and faster for you to migrate thousands of on-premises workloads to AWS. AWS SMS allows you to automate, schedule, and track incremental replications of live server volumes, making it easier for you to coordinate large-scale server migrations.

AWS Server Migration Service Customers
Expedia, Intuit, Royal Dutch Shell, Brooks Brothers
AWS Server Migration Service Video

AWS Server Migration Service Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Filter Unavailable
Filter Unavailable
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Senior Software Consultant at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Seamless and resilient solution for database and server migration, with rock-solid stability and scalability
Pros and Cons
  • "Mature, resilient, and seamless database and server migration solution that's stable and scalable."
  • "The database schema conversion could be made more seamless for this solution. Widening the scope of features for database migration will also help."

What is our primary use case?

We used AWS Server Migration Service for database and server migrations. We used the solution for migration to cloud, as the primary business objective of the customer was reducing their data center footprint and moving to cloud, to wind up their data center.

How has it helped my organization?

The customer was interested in winding up their data center completely, and we ended up doing that. They wanted to reduce their physical footprint and didn't want to invest in having their own IT and facilities, in terms of managing the data center. They also wanted to switch to more of an OpEx model, rather than the CapEx model. A lot of their hardware infrastructure were legacy, so they had a choice of either going and refreshing their infrastructure and doing a large CapEx, or moving to cloud and incurring a migration project cost, then switching to OpEx. They chose OpEx rather than the physical data center footprint, so they ended up winding up their in-house IT to a large extent. They only had people in a service manager capacity and an application manager capacity, and they winded up their infrastructure in-house IT teams, data center facilities, electricity requirements, etc.

What is most valuable?

What we leveraged to their fullest capacity were the database migration and server migration features of AWS Server Migration Service. I also like that this solution is mature, seamless, and resilient.

What needs improvement?

There were some hiccups during the database migration in terms of schema migrations, in particular, there were some technical limitations, though I'm not able to fully recall. Apart from that, AWS Server Migration Service was okay. Because of the technical limitations, we had to change our migration strategy and had to do some convergence before we can do the migrations. We had to look into work-arounds, and that resulted into delays, but for 90% of the databases, we were able to do the migrations using the native methods. If the database schema conversion could be made more seamless for AWS Server Migration Service, it would help. There were also some elements that were not built-in for database migration, so if they can widen the scope of those features, that could make this solution better.
Buyer's Guide
Cloud Migration
June 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon, Nutanix, OpenText and others in Cloud Migration. Updated: June 2022.
609,272 professionals have used our research since 2012.

For how long have I used the solution?

We used AWS Server Migration Service for almost a year, and my last usage of it was six months ago in a past project.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of AWS Server Migration Service is rock-solid.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability of AWS Server Migration Service is fantastic.

How are customer service and support?

We had to engage with the AWS Server Migration Service technical support team multiple times. Most of the time, I like their response time and how they solve issues, but on rare occasions, it was hard to get hold of someone who can actively and closely work with you, and really give you a scheduled time for one-to-one interactions. In most of the cases, they prefer interacting over emails, but there are rare occasions when we needed them to sit with us, figure out where the issue is, and have troubleshooting sessions. That was the challenging part with their support, but in a broad sense, they were okay.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup for AWS Server Migration Service was complex in terms of designing the landing zone and figuring it out. It became easier because we had third-party consultants who helped us with the onboarding, e.g. just for figuring out the best landing zone technological requirements, but it's complex. The initial deployment of AWS Server Migration Service after the landing zone design took a very small amount of time, e.g. within weeks. Once the design was finalized, the landing zone implementation only took a few weeks. It took one to two weeks, but our migration objectives were spread with many dependencies and milestones. We were very slow with onboarding workloads into the cloud, because the customer was being cautious. They wanted to do it slowly, rather than taking the big bang approach, only to result in something going wrong. Their targets were slow, and not because AWS was not allowing us to go with the big bang approach.

What about the implementation team?

We had third-party consultants who helped us with the deployment of this solution, particularly in figuring out the landing zone requirements.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

From what I know, we had our own AWS Server Migration Service licenses, e.g. we used to bring our own licensing model into AWS, and we had a corporate tie-up for both the RQLs and SQLs. We leverage the same licensing models, and they are annual.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We were able to evaluate Azure.

What other advice do I have?

We used the native AWS cloud migration tools in my previous engagement, so all AWS native capabilities in terms of database and server migrations. My current project does not have a good cloud footprint, e.g. it's all on-premises, but in my previous project, we did some cloud migrations on the server and database side, and that was six months ago. We used AWS Server Migration Service. We used its latest version. What we did was to integrate AWS Server Migration Service with the on-premises environment, then we migrated to AWS. We established a direct connection with AWS, then we started migrating the on-premises workloads into the cloud. We only used a few of the services in server and database migration, so we used the native tools AWS was offering. We found the RDS (relational database service) and computing capabilities of AWS really interesting. It's very hard to estimate how many users we have for AWS Server Migration Service, because I belong to a company with 200,000 employees all over the globe, so I can't give a rough number. We have a small team of 10 to 15 people who handle the maintenance of this solution. How AWS Server Migration Service works is that once you've set up the database migration and server migration, it constantly syncs with your on-premises environment, e.g. it keeps talking to your on-premises environment and does Delta sync continuously, at a scheduled frequency. When we need to do a cutover and when we migrate, it happens within minutes up to a few hours, depending on how the Delta is. AWS Server Migration Service from a migration cutover point of view, requires only minutes and hours, but the setup has to be continuously syncing with your on-premises environment. I'll certainly recommend this solution, and we have been advising this to our clients. They have a roadmap of moving to cloud towards the end of this year, so they will start doing it, and I imagine that AWS is the vendor of choice, because of the nature of the workloads they have. AWS Server Migration Service is seamless and mature. The choice of the customer could depending on the cost comparisons between AWS and Azure. For Microsoft workloads, Azure scores well, e.g. from a costing point of view, but for resiliency, stability, and for Linux workloads, we found AWS Server Migration Service to be rock-solid, and Azure couldn't compare to it. I'm giving AWS Server Migration Service a score of ten out of ten. We are partners with AWS, Azure, and GCP.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Flag as inappropriate