We performed a comparison between AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery and Oracle Data Guard based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Backup and Recovery solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup is really straightforward."
"The most valuable aspect of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is its instant block replication feature. This allows us to perform live block verification and eliminates the need to concern ourselves with recovery point objectives. This capability is particularly advantageous for critical workloads."
"Technical support has been very good. They usually respond quickly to our requests."
"For regular backup and restore solutions, this product is fine."
"It provides our disaster recovery solution. It works fine in our tests."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, it's not complex."
"The solution is dependent on the network bandwidth. For example, if they have a bandwidth of 10Mbps the solution will run a little heavier. If the bandwidth is good the solution runs well."
"The setup is pretty straightforward."
"It's a very good solution if you want to protect your data across two data centers, or you have a middle man or many administrators who use these solutions for protecting their data. It's very reliable compared to other solutions that are most often not storage-based."
"We chose this solution for the availability of the databases. We can't afford Oracle Grid, this is the best solution if you want something similar that's less expensive."
"The most valuable features are the backup and restore. With this in place along with the clustering, the database is safe from hacking, hardware failure, power failures, and system crashes."
"Technical support is very good. If at any time we write a ticket, we get the appropriate answer on time."
"Backup and application continuity are most valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the application or promotional code used in the production protocol to transfer data to the secondary database, situated on the DR site."
"Data Guard also improved because customers with an active Data Guard license want to reduce the I/O in a production environment. Some application complaints to it for Oracle reporting purposes. It has a production environment that needs to be enhanced."
"Another valuable feature is the possibility of backing up the database from the standby database instead of the primary database, to avoid backup process overhead in the primary system."
"I would like to see better support for creating and working with archives."
"The UI could be a little sleeker."
"The bandwidth is a constant upload communication to the AWS DR environment, so if you do not have the proper bandwidth, it will definitely eat up your internet line."
"The solution's network setup and a lot of the control tower setup could be improved."
"The failback could be improved. It should be more intuitive."
"I have not seen any areas that need improvement at this time."
"Definitely there should be better logging. From a customer perspective I would like to see more logs on what is happening. If there is an issue, I would like to know what the problem is. Right now, we have to depend on the support of the vendor to check and let us know, because we don't have access to a lot of logging information."
"The only thing I would like to see is, they don't have a formal ticketing system. There is no way I can go back and see what questions we had six months back, what issues we had, and how they were resolved."
"The product could improve its pricing."
"There is an issue with their application on ODG. There were a lot of edits in the logs. Sometimes, we only get a little cue from the Data Guard Broker logs if there's an issue."
"For Italian medium-sized companies, the main challenge lies in the cost associated with licenses."
"It is a very useful administrative IT tool. It saves on costs."
"The IP implementation and maintenance are a little bit hard to manage across Oracle solutions, including Oracle Data Guard."
"The predominant issue lies in the communication link between the secondary and primary databases."
"The usage of block storage devices in the cloud or migration of a type of storage from one site to another site can be improved. Currently, we have to use multi-node to single node because of the lack of storage support on the Azure side. It did not really work. Our DBA had to spend a lot of time tweaking the Data Guard tools, or the underlying Oracle VMs, to make sure that Data Guard would run on top of different types of storage. So, if it can support transporting or getting from one type of storage to another type of storage in a different site or a different technology, it would be very helpful."
"The initial setup is complex."
More AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is ranked 33rd in Backup and Recovery with 11 reviews while Oracle Data Guard is ranked 11th in Backup and Recovery with 31 reviews. AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is rated 7.4, while Oracle Data Guard is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery writes "Free, easy to use, and offers good support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Data Guard writes "Ensures our databases stay in sync between the main and disaster recovery sites". AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is most compared with Azure Site Recovery, AWS Backup, VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery, Zerto and Veeam Backup & Replication, whereas Oracle Data Guard is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Zerto, Veritas NetBackup, Commvault Cloud and Rubrik. See our AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs. Oracle Data Guard report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
