We performed a comparison between OpenText Data Protector 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 file system backup (by far, the most used) is the most valuable feature."
"It's a good product that's pretty easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the capability to back up our SQL server."
"This solution is quite stable because we have only three users."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The feature that was most valuable was that we could restore one mailbox and we could do different backups for different databases."
"The initial setup is straightforward if you understand Data Protector."
"Deduplication implementation with CAPA is very good."
"The solution can scale as needed."
"One of the most valuable features is real-time replication. The version we're using is reliable and easy to deploy."
"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."
"With Data Guard, Oracle guarantees zero data loss, providing peace of mind for organizations relying on their data for critical operations."
"The most valuable feature is the flashback standby, which allows us to test without scrapping the database."
"The solution is quite stable. We haven't experienced any bugs, glitches, or crashes. We find it to be quite reliable."
"Oracle Data Guard has a nice feature called the DataGuard snapshot to open the solution in the read-write mode and make some changes to the database."
"You can see how the logs are applied, check the apply time, and how far behind the standby is at any given time."
"It's very expensive compared to Veeam and other similar solutions."
"We faced some certification issues after we upgraded to version 10.2."
"They should design the solution so that it is much easier for deployment and make the UI easy to use."
"Many of our users complain about the GUI. You still need to rely on the command line interface. Because it originated as a Unix system, Data Protector is still a command line-driven solution, which makes it seem rather dated compared to systems that are built around a GUI from day one. It doesn't affect the functionality, but some people don't find it user-friendly."
"We face challenges with its stability."
"The scheduler setup could be better. We are facing some issues scheduling the job based on our requirements."
"The product can be developed by including functionalities like DR, CDP, and SureBackup, which are currently unavailable in the solution."
"The technical support was very slow."
"Overall, there are some operational issues that need to be dealt with."
"The only difficult part is the cost factor, licensing. Another area of improvement is support."
"Oracle could be improved by the ability to manage it on the cloud. This on-premises version is secure and reliable, but I'm sure that they will soon provide a cloud solution that will be even better. In one to two years, we will probably move to the cloud—we have already moved to the cloud with Microsoft Exchange, but our databases are still on-premises. I would prefer managing a cloud version of Oracle."
"The implementation is complex for anyone who's jumping into it without any experience. It's all command-line driven implementations. For some, that's a turn-off."
"A significant improvement for Oracle Data Guard would be enabling the disaster recovery site to handle read and write operations, not just data storage."
"The initial setup is complex."
"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 pricing of the solution is quite high. They should do what they can to bring it down so that it is more reasonable for customers like us."
OpenText Data Protector is ranked 23rd in Backup and Recovery with 99 reviews while Oracle Data Guard is ranked 11th in Backup and Recovery with 31 reviews. OpenText Data Protector is rated 7.6, while Oracle Data Guard is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OpenText Data Protector writes "User-friendly, competitive, agent-based, and easy to manage". 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". OpenText Data Protector is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault Cloud, Veritas NetBackup and HPE StoreOnce, whereas Oracle Data Guard is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Zerto, Veritas NetBackup, Commvault Cloud and Carbonite Server. See our OpenText Data Protector 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.
