NetVault Plus Reviews

We are using NetVault for client backups and for some virtual machines solutions, such as Hyper-V.

We have two servers. One of them has the latest version, and the other one is on version 12.0.4.16.

Its dashboard is quite well done. When you log into the GUI, you can basically see everything you need to know. There is also the possibility to edit the view as you like, which is great.

It is working fine, and we are able to protect our customer's applications and data across their company with this single solution from Quest.

There are command-line limitations. There is not a very strong possibility to work with the command line. The commands that are there are not that powerful, and you need to be very good at scripting, for example, in PowerShell or in Bash in case it is running on Linux systems. You need to combine a lot of commands together, and still, you will not get a great output that is presentable to others. You cannot work with it as easily.

Sometimes, I find it confusing, but that could be my personal problem because I am really used to working with a command line. Currently, I'm working with the GUI, and I don't like clicking. There are a lot of windows that I need to check to make sure everything is connected. For example, to check if we have data available for the restore, I need to check three windows. I cannot do it very quickly. It is not very convenient for me.

Its reporting can also be improved. It has some predefined reports that you can edit and export in PDF format. They seem nice and are usable for people in managerial roles, but as a technician, I would like to have the option to create my own report. I would also like to have an option to export a report to an Excel format so that I can work with this data afterward. I can't do much with the PDF format. I know that there is a possibility to export a report to a CSV file that you can open with Microsoft Excel, but the options are very limited. For example, if I go to Manage Job Definitions, I have the option to export to CSV, but I have no option to, for example, filter. I would like to filter and choose certain things before exporting. So, there should be an option to export the reports in different formats so that they are usable and easy to work with afterward for us as technicians.

Its scheduling options can be improved to support conditions. I am used to working with TSM where you have the option to work with conditions, and these conditions could be really complex. At this moment, with NetVault, you can schedule a backup and set the date, time, or a specific day, but you can't specify any dependency. For example, I can't specify conditions where the backup should be run or triggered only if there is nothing running on the client, or all drives are free. I cannot set how many drives will be used for one backup in particular. There is just one drive for the backup for one client. Such options would be great, but these raise the question about the target audience. I know this tool is not for bigger and more complex environments, but it would be great to have such options.

I have been using NetVault for three months.

I am fine with its stability. The main complication that we have on our side is that we do not have, for example, enough tape drives. We are doing backups on the tapes, and because there are hardware limitations, of course, its performance is not that great. So far, I have never seen this tool running at its full potential or at full speed. If everything was ideal, which usually is not the case, I would be very satisfied with this solution. I haven't seen any kind of unusual errors that are not fixable within a few minutes and so on. 

Its scalability might not be that easy, but I cannot say it right away because I am still learning this solution. I would be able to talk about scalability after a half year.

We are currently using it for the backup of very small environments with up to 500 clients in total.

In terms of the number of users, I have one colleague who is mainly focusing on the tool. He is also a backup technician like me. The plan is that I will take over, but there won't be more than two of us working on this solution. 

I have used their support. When there is something that we are not able to solve, we have the option to go to the Quest site and open a ticket, and we get the response. 

I was very satisfied with their support. I was much more satisfied with their support than with the support of other tools, such as Spectrum Protect. It was quick and straightforward. They were easy to understand, and in the end, the problem was solved. I have nothing bad to say about their support.

We are, of course, using more than one solution, and this is just one small part of our backup business. We are also using NetWorker. If I'm not wrong, we have only one customer of Quest NetVault. If it was up to me, I wouldn't choose this one, but I am working with what I have at the moment, and it's working fine.

We have several tools that we are able to manage. We offer a solution that meets the needs of our customers. It depends on what they need to back up. The licenses for plugins for backups for Hyper-V, VMware, SAP DB, etc are usually paid by the customers, and it depends on what they need. If a customer requires a backup of SAP databases or SAP applications, we can offer that, and there are licenses for that. Rather than having a simple or basic file backup, it is better to have the backup done in this way. Otherwise, you will have inconsistency, etc. I am glad that these features and licenses are there, and we can at least offer these, but the choice doesn't depend on me.

I was not involved in its initial setup. I came to this company when everything was already installed and implemented.

It works fine for small businesses, and it can do its job. If it was up to me, I would maybe choose a different solution. I have worked with TSM and IBM Spectrum Protect, and as compared to those, it has the basic features, but it is one of the easiest tools I have worked with. 

When implementing a backup solution, I would definitely advise others to really think about the naming convention. Even though it is a simple tool, it can get complicated when things get quite big where you have hundreds of systems. You can get lost if you really do not know about and follow naming conventions. One of the things that I'm planning to do in our environment is to rename everything to have consistency in the naming convention because at the current state it is really making things much more complicated than they should be.

I would rate Quest NetVault a seven out of ten. 

We are a solution provider and this is one of the products that I provide technical support for.

Our customers use it for application and database backup and recovery.

The user interface is good.

The granularity of file restoration needs to be improved.

I would like to see the option of cloud-based management.

I have been working with Quest NetVault for almost three years.

Every product has known issues when it comes to stability. However, with NetVault, we have not had any serious problems.

We have not had any trouble with scalability.

The technical support from the vendor is good and we don't have any issue with it.

I have worked with several backup and recovery solutions such as Commvault and Veeam.

NetVault does not have the feature set that Commvault has.

If the steps are followed properly then the initial setup will be straightforward.

We implement and deploy NetVault for our customers. If we have any trouble then we eventually resolve it. We don't simply tell the customer that it isn't possible. Ultimately, our customers have been happy with the solution.

Every product has advantages and disadvantages. The suitability of NetVault depends on the customer's environment and the requirements. Customers do not have the same kind of environment, which means that what works fine with one customer may leave another with issues.

This is a good solution, but some products have better features such as archiving and deduplication. In my opinion, Commvault is the best choice for backup and recovery.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for security logs and for end-customer security.

The solution allows us to block off our network and only give access to whatever we want.

I don't have complete hands-on knowledge, so I can't speak to what is missing on the solution.

The interface can be improved. It should be more clear what features are available and make them easy to find.

The pricing could be adjusted. Right now, it's quite high.

I've been using the solution for six months.

I've heard from our L3 team that there have been a few hiccups on the stability side. Occasionally when we implement a policy change, for example, it doesn't deflect much. I'm not sure if it's a fault in the system or the configuration.

Technical support has been good. When we log a case, we'll get a call within 24-48 hours. They help get issues resolved if there are any hiccups. If an engineer cannot resolve the issue they will also move it up to another level. That may mean we have to wait a few more hours for them to get back to us in order to resolve the issues. 

We've been satisfied with the level of service we've received so far.

I'm not sure if there were other solutions evaluated before choosing this one. Management makes these types of decisions.

The solution's initial setup is straightforward so long as you take the time to study the solution beforehand. We were able to implement the solution within a week. We needed four people for deployment.

We had a vendor on the Dell side that assisted with the implementation.

The solution is a bit costly.

We're partners with Dell. We don't have complete access to the solution; we only have limited access. We use the on-premises deployment model.

We have two customers on the solution and we are also using it in our company.

If the solution fits the user's requirements and budgets, they should consider implementing it.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for backup in retail machines for VMware.

I do like that we are able to create backup jobs on the solution.

The restore functionality needs improvement. The biggest downgrade from Veea  Backup & Replications is the number of docs that can run at the same time. I also find that because it's a web-based solution it runs slow. You have to wait a while until it refreshes. The refresh needs to be much faster, and the restore has to be more accurate.

The stability of the solution is poor.

Scalability is not so good. We don't have plans to expand. In fact, we have plans to switch to VM.

We have contacted technical support and they've been very good.

We used to use Veeam Backup, but only for testing purposes.

The initial setup is straightforward. It's not that complicated. Deployment took maybe about 15 minutes. The solution takes a lot of maintenance because every day we have to check to see which jobs have failed and then go in and re-edit those jobs. We have two people that work to maintain the system.

We are using the on-premises version of the solution.

I'm not a big fan of it. I much prefer Veeam Backup & Replication.

In terms of advice I could give, If your company is using it for a small business or a small data center of maybe one hundred machines, then the solution would be okay. For us, we are worldwide and we have 10,000 machines. It's much more suited to smaller organizations.

I would rate the solution as five out of ten.

The features that help us to search tables/databases available in the backup list are most valuable to us.

Sometimes tables/databases are dropped accidentally by clients. They ask us whether the backup of a particular table/database is available for a particular date. Instead of searching from each backup, we can search from all the backups and the search results shows all the available backups along with backup date and expiration. This feature saves a lot of time and help us to restore things quickly.

The netvault solution was installed on really big scale, we used to manage database and files system backup.
The software was installed on 30 Bar Servers of Europe’s 8 Big Telecom Operators.
Due to official reasons I cannot disclose the name of the telecom companies.
The BAR solution was installed on really big scale.
With the help of this tool we were able to meet the adhoc backup and restore requests from 8 countries in timely manners.
The catalogue databases of netvalut was very efficient and it helped us to search tables/views/dbs from different backup sets in quickway .
Built in reports were very helpful to conduct the analysis of the media utilization and capacity planning.

This tool was very useful to plan for the really large data backup. We have utilized this tool to backup 150 TB data on a weekly basis.

This product should have a web interface.

I have been using this product for three years.

The license expired without any warning and that caused us some problems. There should be a warning in advance.

We never had any scalability issues.

We never had any technical issues, so we never had the opportunity to contact them either.

We never used any other prior solution on that project.

The initial setup was done by another team, so I cannot give any insight on this.

I was not part of the team that made this decision.

This product is very useful and cost effective.