Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more

Precisely Assure MIMIX OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Precisely Assure MIMIX is #12 ranked solution in top Disaster Recovery Software. PeerSpot users give Precisely Assure MIMIX an average rating of 8.0 out of 10. Precisely Assure MIMIX is most commonly compared to Precisely Assure QuickEDD: Precisely Assure MIMIX vs Precisely Assure QuickEDD. Precisely Assure MIMIX is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 67% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 20% of all views.
Buyer's Guide

Download the Disaster Recovery (DR) Software Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: September 2022

What is Precisely Assure MIMIX?

Assure MIMIX DR protects your business from lost data and extended downtime by maintaining a real-time replica of your production server on a recovery server located on-site, off-site, or in the cloud.

Precisely Assure MIMIX was previously known as MIMIX Availability, Syncsort MIMIX Availability, Syncsort Assure MIMIX .

Precisely Assure MIMIX Customers

Toyota Material Handling Australia, Westpac Pacific Banking, Symphony Health, Wimbledon, OCBC Bank

Precisely Assure MIMIX Video

Precisely Assure MIMIX Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Precisely Assure MIMIX pricing:
"The licensing provides the access to support. I do know that there's an annual charge for being able to call into their support line and get a technical team from Precisely to assist with any issues we may have. I don't think there are any additional costs other than what we incur internally in terms of the infrastructure that we need to run and operate the product."

Precisely Assure MIMIX Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Database Administrator at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
MSP
Top 20
Supports different database types and provides a very quick and easy availability of data
Pros and Cons
  • "Database replication is most valuable. It is multi-platform, so it can replicate from a variety of different database types to a variety of different database types."
  • "It does data manipulation language (DML) replication, but it does not do data definition language (DDL) replication. In my opinion, it is a disadvantage. It would be nicer if it was able to do both DML and DDL. I'm not 100% certain of this, but it seems Oracle Golden Gate does both DML and DDL. MIMIX only does DML, and it would be very nice if they included DDL replication. This is one feature that would be very helpful to have."

What is our primary use case?

It is a database replication tool. It replicates one database to another database.

How has it helped my organization?

That's debatable. There are pros and cons to it. On the one side, it provides a very quick and easy availability of data where it is needed. On the other side, it can just end up making copies of the data at places, which makes the data difficult to manage.

It creates secondary copies of source data anywhere needed in the organization. For instance, you may have a Microsoft SQL Server database that needs some data from an Oracle database. It will make a copy of the Oracle data in the Microsoft SQL Server database. So, it can be used there, and that's the advantage. The downside to this is that it basically propagates multiple copies of the same set of data across your organization. So, you have two copies of the data instead of one copy of the data. There is also an incremental storage requirement. You need additional disk storage. There may also be business rules that are applied to multiple copies of the same data that are inconsistent with each other. 

What is most valuable?

Database replication is most valuable. It is multi-platform, so it can replicate from a variety of different database types to a variety of different database types.

It is a relatively stable database replication product.

What needs improvement?

It does data manipulation language (DML) replication, but it does not do data definition language (DDL) replication. In my opinion, it is a disadvantage. It would be nicer if it was able to do both DML and DDL. I'm not 100% certain of this, but it seems Oracle Golden Gate does both DML and DDL. MIMIX only does DML, and it would be very nice if they included DDL replication. This is one feature that would be very helpful to have. 

The other feature that would be helpful to have is the feature that I know they're already working on. Currently, the monitoring control of the product is done from a single pane interface that does not provide a holistic view of the entire enterprise. It would be useful to be able to have a monitoring and control console or dashboard that allows you to see the entire set of replication of everything that's happening in your company in one place. It currently doesn't do that, but I do know that the development team for Precisely is working to add that in an upcoming release of the product.

Buyer's Guide
Disaster Recovery (DR) Software
September 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about Precisely, IBM, Nakivo and others in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software. Updated: September 2022.
633,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.

For how long have I used the solution?

We set it up 15 years ago.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is generally very stable. There are certain cases when it can become unstable, but that's usually due to the impacts that are outside its area of control. For instance, if the network that it is running on becomes unstable, that can create problems with the product itself. Similarly, if one of the databases that are being replicated has DDL type changes made to it, I don't get replicas. This can create problems with replicating to the secondary databases because the secondary databases can go out of sync with the source database.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It handles targeted, focused areas of database replication very well, but when I consider the source database that we're replicating from and I look at the size of that database and the number of objects in that database, I'm not at all sure if it would be able to handle the entire thing. In other words, if we try to use the product to replicate the entire source database to an entire copy created elsewhere, it might become a little bit unwieldy and difficult, and the performance wouldn't be great. I don't know that for sure because we've never tried to use it in more than a very focused manner. 

The source database from which we're replicating has over 4,000 table objects in it that could be replicated, but we're only using the product to replicate less than a hundred of those. It is a narrow-focused slice of the data that we're replicating. If I was asked to replicate all 4,000 tables, I'm not sure if the product would scale up to that.

There are many users who are using it, but I don't have an exact count. What we are doing in the organization right now is that we are replicating a focused slice of our monster source database. We're replicating 10 copies of that data throughout the organization. Each of the recipients of that replicated data in the organization is using it for a very specific business function. For instance, we provide data for the data warehouse to report against. We provide data for product information management to process. We provide data for our eCommerce site to be able to transact orders online and so forth. It is pervasive in the organization. There are basically 10 copies of the same set of data throughout the organization. Each of those copies is used for a very specific business function. So, it impacts a very large swath of the organization, including our sales force, which has at least hundreds of people. In terms of the users, people who are impacted by this in their jobs are probably between 500 and 1,000.

It is being used very extensively throughout the organization. I personally don't have any plans and I'm not aware of any plans to expand or increase its usage. It is at a state right now where if a new business requirement comes along or there's a new project somewhere in the business that needs additional data propagated to one of the current recipients of the data or a new recipient of the data, we would do that on a one-by-one basis. Currently, there is no project in place to increase or expand the overall usage of the product. There is certainly a strong lobby in the company that feels that by having so many copies of the same set of data throughout the organization, we are going in the wrong direction. There are people in the organization who would like to see its usage reduced and have a different architecture to get access to the same data without necessarily having to copy that data to multiple places. So, there are no current plans to expand the usage of the product. There is probably a desire among at least some individuals to reduce the usage of the product.

How are customer service and support?

It is okay. I would rate them a little bit above average. Some of the support resources they have are very good, and some of them are maybe not as experienced as they need to be. It seems to be hit or miss when we create a support case. Sometimes, we get somebody who's on the ball and knows exactly how to handle the issue and when it needs to be escalated for resolution. Other times, we've got support people who aren't necessarily as savvy or technically able to assist. Overall, their support is better than average. It is not the best I've ever seen, but it's not bad.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

The different solution that was in use before this product was a product called DataMirror, and it was a different third-party vendor. The transition from DataMirror to MIMIX took place when I joined the company. The project was in progress when I joined the company, and I was immediately assigned to the team to assist with that. My understanding of the reason why they chose to discontinue using DataMirror and to replace it with MIMIX was a dramatic increase in the licensing cost of DataMirror. My understanding at the time was that DataMirror had become prohibitively expensive for licensing and support. The company was looking for a more economical solution, and that's how they landed on the MIMIX Share product.

How was the initial setup?

On the Windows platform, it is very straightforward. It is just like an installation wizard. It is also pretty straightforward on other platforms. We're using it on AIX as well, and it's not complicated, but it's a little bit more involved to install it there than it is on Microsoft Windows.

It was basically deployed as part of a much larger project. The larger project was basically a three-year development and deployment process. It took multiple years to get the larger project deployed. 

Our implementation strategy was to simply provide the replication capability through all the phases of development. We started with what's called a configuration development environment, and when we were ready to move it into user acceptance testing and quality assurance testing, we moved the replication into the next environment. After we were ready to go live, we moved it into the production environment.

What about the implementation team?

We set it up 15 years ago, and we haven't really used professional services or a consulting party since then. There have been cases where we had to engage product support for certain issues that we encountered. As with any software product, there have been bugs in the software that needed to be corrected. So, we had to engage their product support team and give them cases of things where we felt the product wasn't doing as it should. They would examine it and reproduce the issues. If they determined that it was a bug in the software, they issued patches to fix the issues over the years. There hasn't been a professional services engagement with them since the implementation 15 years ago.

For its deployment and maintenance, we have a staff of about half a dozen people. Four of those people are conversant in the product. It takes less than a dozen people to deploy, support, and maintain the product.

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

I have lost track of that over the years because I don't handle that piece of it. I believe the licensing model has changed as the company has been acquired by Precisely. Its licensing has changed over the 15 year period we've been using the product, and I don't handle that anymore. I don't receive or approve payment of those invoices.

The licensing provides the access to support. I do know that there's an annual charge for being able to call into their support line and get a technical team from Precisely to assist with any issues we may have. I don't think there are any additional costs other than what we incur internally in terms of the infrastructure that we need to run and operate the product.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

At the time we went with MIMIX, there weren't a lot of other competitors out there. 15 years ago, one of the requirements that we had was that our source database was iSeries DB2400. There weren't a lot of database replication products that were playing in that area. The choice to go with MIMIX from DataMirror was made before I joined the company, and then I was thrust into that project as soon as I joined the company. So, I don't know if any other products were evaluated when that decision was first made, but I do know that there weren't very many companies that were doing the replication of iSeries DB2400 data.

As we're using it right now, we are no longer replicating DB2400 data. We are replicating Oracle data. There are more competitors that are working in that space. We had evaluated other solutions when we transitioned from DB2400 to Oracle. We did evaluations of Golden Gate and another third-party product called Quest SharePlex, and for whatever reason at levels of management above me, the decision was made to stay with MIMIX rather than to transition to one of those other competitors.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate it an eight out of 10. It has certain deficiencies, but generally, it is quite stable if environmental factors outside of its area don't change in an adverse way that has a negative impact on it. When it is running without outside factors impacting it negatively, it is quite stable. It is a set-it-and-forget-it type of implementation, which is a plus. It is nice to be able to just put something in and not have to worry about it, but in the real world, when things happen that do have an adverse or negative impact on it, then it does require maintenance, support, care, and feeding. So, in the real world, we do have to support it, but overall, it is relatively stable, and for that reason, I'd give it an above-average evaluation. I wouldn't give it a perfect evaluation because there are certain deficiencies in the product, and there are certain bugs that have to be corrected and that have been corrected over time. It is not perfect, but it is reasonably stable.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user