We performed a comparison between Quest Rapid Recovery and Zerto based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Backup and Recovery Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Definitely, the mount and recovery points are the most valuable, because if someone deletes a file or something, or if something gets corrupted, we can always revert back to an old change because our repository goes about a month back. The ability to roll back files and the ability to roll back servers is really important."
"Built-in encryption helps to secure our data as it travels from our on-site server to our off-site backup server."
"Just knowing that the data is easily recoverable is our ROI. It definitely lowers risk."
"One feature I found that's the most valuable in Quest Rapid Recovery is the VM standby feature which is very useful for my current customer. The solution also has a great replication feature. The third most valuable feature in Quest Rapid Recovery is the five-minute RPO and the fifteen-minute RTO. The solution is also very user-friendly."
"Probably the point-in-time recovery is most valuable. The other piece that is really nice is that you can mount a whole server at any point in time. So, you can mount the server with all the drives to a Z drive or something like that. It will just mount it all up, and your data is accessible right there on one drive, which is nice."
"It is very easy to use and very easy to manage. The fact that I can easily recover data is valuable. I don't use it much. The only way I have been using it is that sometimes, people ask to recover the data, which is a very easy process. It takes only a few minutes to get in and get the data from the server."
"The compression and deduplication features have helped to save on storage costs."
"The local mount utility is most valuable. I do restores fairly regularly. Thankfully, I have not ever lost an entire server that I've had to resurrect, but I certainly have people who erroneously saved over a file or have deleted a file. So, we've done that quite a bit. We still have the DL4000 appliance, and we had, kind of, extrapolated that out over a five-year period. Now, we're in year six, so we had to add storage, which we did as a SAN next to DL4000, but prior to adding in that extra storage, we, here and there, would run into situations where for whatever reason, it would want to be pulling a new base image, and then we would run out of storage. So, we would utilize the archive feature and archive the old data that we want to hang on to, but we don't necessarily need it taking up current data storage. Being able to export out really old data is most valuable to us. Then, we just store that on a NAS that we keep in another building."
"The way we can use checkpoints from each VM to restore them is an excellent feature, and the replication is great."
"The feature I've found most valuable so far has been the ability to migrate the VMs from Hyper-V and Citrix Hypervisor. It's made our migration seamless. In the beginning, we were looking at freeware tools, and it was just a massive headache. Zerto solved a lot of the roadblocks that we'd run into in the past."
"Zerto gives us peace of mind knowing that if we were attacked by ransomware, we would be able to recover data from the time before the ransomware to get us back to being fully functional."
"We have seen ROI. It reduced the time for failover and failback by 90%."
"The replication piece with the built-in WAN compression is important because the network circuit that we send our replication traffic across isn't actually behind our normal WAN accelerators. We were able to use Zerto's built-in WAN acceleration to help those workloads compress."
"I found the very easy VPG setup, the easy recovery, and failover testing to be the most valuable features."
"If we lost our data center and had to recover it, Zerto would save us a great deal of time. In our testing, we have found that recovering the entire data center would be completed within a day."
"The most valuable feature is how simple it is to implement and how quickly you can get up and running at the second site. The solution is also extremely easy to use, for example, You just log onto the console and you can do a test failover with a few clicks."
"It is quite surprising to me that the configuration cannot be backed up automatically, and I think that Rapid Recovery should have an option for scheduled configuration backup."
"I think the self-paced learning and knowledge base can always be improved so that users can self-service without having to contact either a reseller or Quest. I know there are things that I would have been looking for to try and solve. And the only way I could get there was to actually open a ticket rather than go through self-service through the portal."
"The terminology didn't seem easily available. When I go to the website, it is hard to search for things. You get all the articles, then you finally get the search button. They need the search at the top of the knowledge base. Then, on occasion, if you get an error message in the system, which is very important, it says, "Click here for more information," but I never get more information. The search engine doesn't find it or it is some weird error. It has never worked for me."
"In terms of what needs improvement in Quest Rapid Recovery, though the solution is seamless, right now, they are just giving the software which means we'll need to arrange the hardware. If they can combine the appliance and software, that would be a great approach. In the next release of Quest Rapid Recovery, it would be great if they'd add a folder backup feature because only a snapshot backup feature is available at the moment."
"When you do a full backup, all of the memory resources on the server are used, which is something that should be improved."
"For the most part, it is really good in terms of flexibility and choice of recovery methods. What we found lacking was being able to back up virtual volumes that are clustered. We ran out of luck there. There should be an option for backing up clustered virtual volumes."
"I don't really think that there is a whole lot that needs to be changed. It would be nice if you could deploy the agent without having to reboot. When I upgraded my core to the latest version, I also wanted to update all of my servers, but I had to put that off because I can't just shoot it out there. I have to make sure it is at a time when I can do a reboot right away."
"There could be better space management for incremental data. When you use incremental data, the space in the appliance keeps on going up. There should be a better way to manage the space. You have to manage the incremental data to reduce the time."
"Right now, our production environment runs on-premises, and we have a DR copy of everything that we run in production. However, our development runs on that hardware. In the case of a DR event, we would need to shut down development and bring up our secondary copy of production. We're hoping that Zerto is going to be the tool to help us do that."
"It would be nice if Zerto offered OVFs, which are custom-built VMs that you can install on your virtualized environment. At the moment, I have the Zerto sitting on two custom-built Windows servers, which creates a lot of overhead. I'm waiting for them to create an OVF file, which is a built and hardened version of their Zerto server that I can just install wherever with a couple of mouse clicks."
"I would like to see a separate product offer for performing backups, although I think that this is something that they are expecting to release in the next version."
"More user support would be best for me because I'm not in the product all the time. So, having strong support is probably the most important decision on any products that we buy."
"They could improve their online documentation."
"One issue we've been having with Zerto lately is the ability to go into maintenance mode during vSphere upgrades. It doesn't have the hook into the lifecycle manager of the bump. During vCenter or ESXi upgrades, it causes VCF to fail its pre-checks because the machine doesn't power off and go into maintenance mode. It's been an issue since version 7.5 and it's impacting a basic automation function in vSphere."
"The onset of configuring an environment in the cloud is difficult and could be easier to do."
"I haven't been a super big fan of the support area. The support could really be better in terms of responsiveness. I've had some issues that took two or three days to get resolved. Once I got to the right person, they were resolved quickly, but it took a while to get to that person."
Quest Rapid Recovery is ranked 12th in Backup and Recovery Software with 9 reviews while Zerto is ranked 2nd in Backup and Recovery Software with 101 reviews. Quest Rapid Recovery is rated 9.6, while Zerto is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Quest Rapid Recovery writes "Reduced our admin time by approximately 95%, paid for itself over and over, and doesn't require a whole lot of administration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zerto writes "Gives us business continuity capabilities during hurricane season and in case of ransomware". Quest Rapid Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Rubrik, Acronis Backup, Quest NetVault and Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows, whereas Zerto is most compared with VMware SRM, Veeam Backup & Replication, Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines, Rubrik and Azure Site Recovery. See our Quest Rapid Recovery vs. Zerto report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery Software vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery Software 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.
So does that mean you want to have a Disaster Recovery solution where data is not on site your bunker site? but yet allows for a fast recovery in case your primary site is down?
- What virtualization solution do you use?
- What is the link between the 2 (?) sites?
- What RPO and RTO are you aiming for?
- How much data do you need to recover?
If you don't have live backup? Well as per my understanding backup is always a happened at local site (DC) on VTL and or on Tape and they were offloaded to out of DC, but as mentioned correctly it can take 24hours or more depend on the Recovery site location, accessibility & final is data size. Now the correct terminology is Online Replication or Archive/log base replication, and it is completely depend on the RPO & RTO define by business. So, answare to your 1st query : No way you can do a site recovery if you don't have DR site. Many says to take a back on tape, on disk or on storage but if all these product are installed at production site i.e. DC, will not make any sense as your DC is down and not accessible. So, "must to have live back or rather Replication to DR site.
2nd question" fast recovery without VM in passive or standby mode at DR site. VMware has SRM which does the site recovery in case of disaster. Only condition is that you have to have a Storage with replication between the site. Other option as mentioned by Mr. Smith, is DR as a service model (DRaaS) from any cloud providers. Some of the Cloud service providers also offers CDP solution while not charging for DR site but conditions is DC must be hosted with them.
Tested used my own little setup for hyper V machines have an offsite server using altaro backup offsite server backup software with windows server
restored (anywhere) the Virtual machine was up and running within a 10min entire server
I would also recommend to use Vision DoubleTake at VM level dat has an CDP , continous data protection feature for filesystem replication and SQL integration also. It can be a choice of synchronous replication over DWDM lines if latency it not excceding 0,5 ms round trip, otherwise it will impact disk write ops.
If zero downtime is a must I would recommend using VPLEX,ViPER from EMC or HDS Global Active Device that will present disk LUN from SAN as a single device to more processing nodes, but thus means app is aware of SW clustering (can run in multiple nodes sharing the same filesystem ir SAN LUN).
In such approach in VMware ESXi you will present a datastore spread over DWDM like a strech cluster so you won't have to keep in mind where the app node is really running, the hypervisor will see the strech cluster as only one storage device, thus means you can move app with vMotion very fast to a second or DR site, or recover it to a DR site. More if app is SW cluster enabled then the app nodes will run seamlessly over strech cluster.
The 2 nd option I can see is to go for Hyperconverged infrastructure and application containerization just like Docker tehcnology. How to do it: for ex. Make use of technologies like VxRail appliances and OpenStack + app transformation in Docker (for Windows VM is not so complicate). Such technolgies will apply private Cloud technology for DR.
Hi there, we are talking about Recovery from DR site, now few suggestions from my side 1) what is the defined RTO & RTO. 2) Visibility of the RPO. 3) connectivity between two or three site to meet replication requirements. 4) DR for physical & virtual, both the environment. 5) how many time in a year do the DR Drill. These point need to think and perform to achieve desire & accurate recovery from DR site.
Hi you could try Arcserve UDP -> Instant VM.-
IfI understand correctly the guy needs a fast recovery solution for the production environment to a remote site, for Windows VM under VMware ESXi (or Hyper-V).
In my understanding a DR site means an alternate location with hot or cold standby systems, the recovery plan for business continuity is depending on their RTO and RPO.Unless an RPO and RTO are defined for IT services noboby could picture o solution for such cases. In general solutions are dependent of TB of data to be assured on remote site, basically there are many practices for assuring storage space in DR in case you would need to recover:- cold backup with ESXi that sustain test and development environment physically placed in DR, in case fast recover is mandatory, they could destroy the test/develop environment and restore data from scratch with VTL replicated in DR (backup and restore with 4TB/hour or more). The single point to be assured is correct IP addressing (test/develop could be treated as untrust zone and separated with VLAN and/or firewalls). You can use data protect and snapshots for VM, backup to tape, replicate virtual tapes and restore in case of a disaster (full recovery)- hot backup means CPU and storage for backup DR purposes but can be more faster, but cost a lot of money $$$$$$- rent some storage space and CPU from Cloud vendors, use as they need, maybee the DR location can be in the Cloud provider Data Center but data confidentiality can be a showstopper.
My proposal is to investigate the 1st option with fast backup of data snapshots (space efficiency if dedupe or data compression are available at production site at storage level) and sent them to a restore solution at remote site (virtual backups), restore ops must be tested from time to time to validate business data (not only apps).For fast backups you can try VTL or NFS appliances that include replication services, the bandwidth between sites must accommodate fast delivery to remote site (to assure that RPO and RTO, including restore times are met). I would not recommend a SW solution to replicate VM because if no storage is existing in DR dedicated for this purpose it make no sense to think on such solutions.The 2nd option if to address disk space and CPU needed with Cloud providers, otherwise disk space for VM and user data must be assured always in DR.
Hello,
I suggest taking a look at VMware - Actifio, It might be an option for the
environment you are working at. The minimum data backup for Actifio is
10TB. If your environment smaller than 10TB it will not work.
Regards,
http://www.actifio.com/technology/integrations/vmware/