Veeam Agent for Linux [EOL] Reviews

I like the backup features of this solution and the integration is very useful. 

In the next version, I would like to see inclusion for functionality and an improved operating system. 

The technical support is good.

The initial setup was easy and straightforward. The deployment was done by myself and it was not difficult at all.

The solution is rather expensive and I think the price is too high. There are also additional costs that are not included in the standard licensing. 

On a scale of one to ten, I will rate this solution an eight. Something that needs to improve is compatibility with all the operating systems so that they operate smoothly. That will improve the backup function. 

We primarily use the solution for disaster recovery purposes. We replicate from one site to another from our environment.

The solution is very user-friendly and has an easy to use interface. We can manage it easily. It allows for a simple backup. 

The speed that you get backing up huge amounts of data from virtual machines is impressive. 

I would like to be able to take care of more than just the virtual environment with this solution. 

In terms of the physical environment, I'd like them to integrate it with other kinds of solutions. We don't just work with Microsoft or Linux, but other kinds of infrastructure data as well.

The stability of the solution is good. I've been satisfied with it so far.

If you are in a hybrid environment and have only one solution, which is Veeam, then you may have a problem with the integration of other kinds of preparatory solutions. 

The scalability in a virtualization environment is very easy and it's quick to implement. However, when you have a lot of other solutions, then you have to redesign this solution to integrate with them. The scalability, if you talk about virtualization environments, is very nice. 

At the end of the day, it's pretty scalable. In our environment, we provide a host environment for a lot of companies that belong to the government. 

Technical support is very good. They're very interactive and you can tell they care. When we need them, it's very easy to communicate with them and they make sure to solve the problem.

Previously, we were using Oracle Security Backup. We switched because Oracle Security Backup does not allow you to make a backup of a virtual machine at all. 

The initial setup was not so complex, but not so straight forward either. We had to design specifically for it because our infrastructure is quite complex. To be able to integrate Veeam with our infrastructure was pretty straightforward. We are also providing some services for hosting and co-location.

At the end of the day, Veeam was mostly straightforward and easy to implement. 

Deployment took about 21 days. After deployment, you need about two to three people to take care of the environment.

70% of the implementation we did by ourselves. The rest we had the help of a partner service provider.

I don't have exact numbers, but you get an ROI very quickly with this solution due to your ability to get to market very fast. 

We tried NetBackup, among other solutions prior to implementing this current product.

We are using the on-premises deployment model.

I would advise others to go ahead and implement it. This is a good solution for disaster recovery. It's easy to implement and easy to operate. Veeam is a good solution for the second phase of a disaster which is basically recovering all of the environment. It's also very fast.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

Agent is installed to our VMs virtualized with Oracle VM virtual machines and backup them to our NAS storage over the LAN.

This is managed by VBR which was installed for our VMware VMs

Now we are able to include other virtual servers which are virtualized with Oracle VM to our backup plan, and other standalone servers

Disk, File or entire server restore is the best as you can choose from these restore options depending on your recovery requirement

I would appreciate if Veeam Agent for particular platforms, like Linux, Windows or iOS, is integrated on the same Veeam B&R console. 

For example, if someone wants to use the agent to backup the physical server or standalone server, the option should be there on the Veeam B&R installation software and available on the Veeam Availability Console as well, for simple and easy Agent installation

Also during the Agent Backup, the progress status not displayed on VBR console until job is finished, we should be able to monitor the progress on the console rather than on standalone server only

The solution is very stable.

It's scalable, but it's not scalable on every platform.

I would rate technical support 9 out of 10.

Veritas Backup Exec, we changed to VBR because of compression capability and simple backup and restore procedures

The initial setup was straightforward. It's not complicated. It takes around half an hour to implement, but it depends on the performance of the server that you are installing the backup software on.

We have implemented on our own in house

We have not calculated yet as we just added to our existing licenses for Veeam B&R

The pricing model makes it so that it's not too expensive. You only need to license the machines that use it. You don't need to license the calls, the processor, or the physical server. 

Symantec Backup Exec (Veritas)

We are using the on-premises deployment model.

I would recommend that anyone who needs to run a backup platform should use this solution.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

The solution is primarily used to backup data.

If you compare the Veeam Backup Solution with EMC NetWorker, EMC NetWorker is very complex to manage and deploy. With Veeam you can deploy it in one hour or as little as thirty minutes. For EMC NetWorker, you need days or even weeks. In 2012 I led a project for an EMC Networker deployment. It took around two months at my previous company. In comparison, in January we deployed Veeam and it took around one hour, and it was quick and easy. The solution saved time and money.

Also, management is very simple. It's most compatible with VMware. It can restore single files instead of having to restore the whole machine, once again leading to savings for the company.

Generally, Veeam is very robust. It's completely compatible with Linux. The most valuable feature in Veeam is its compatibility with VMware. The solution provides a lot of features, including backing up of images. You can restore VM itself. You can also restore a single file. There's a feature called instant recovery. You can run VMware in the background without restoring it. It's a very valuable backup solution.

In the future, the solution should make sure it's compatible with Unix versions like HP/UX and AIX.

The solution is very stable.

The solution is very scalable. I do intend to expand usage in the future.

I've never needed to contact technical support.

The initial setup was very straightforward. It takes under an hour.

Veeam is very inexpensive. We have a bi-monthly licensing plan.

I'm using the hybrid deployment model.

The backup for Veeam is very fast, especially in comparison to EMC Network.

Scalability, if you are talking about scaling on Linux, is good. However, if you need to backup more types of solutions or Unix systems, like HP/UX, AIX, etc., it's not compatible. In this case, EMC NetWorker is more compatible with different types of Unix operating systems. That's something a new user should keep in mind if they are considering implementing Veeam.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

The primary use for the solution is to protect production servers, as well as endpoint and desktop protection.

The solution is very simple. Management of the platform is so simple that we don't need to have any training to deploy this solution.

Right now, the solution has responded to our needs, and there are also lots of new functionalities that we are not even yet, so I can't speak to features that may be missing. For us, it works very well.

The solution is extremely stable.

The platform is so stable, we haven't had any reason to reach out to technical support. In general, our own IT has been able to troubleshoot the solution without needing the help of support.

The initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment took about 30 minutes.

My colleague deployed the solution.

We use the on-premises version of the solution.

I would rate the solution at 8.5 out of ten.

We use the latest version of this solution that's on-prem. Our primary use case of this solution is to back up our system. It's our main backup.

This solution has improved my organization because if someone accidentally deletes or corrupts something, we have multiple sources to restore them. If we lose a whole server, we can restore that server. It's quick and easy. If a site blows up, I get to rebuild that site. 

They update quickly. 

The ease of use for the graphical interface and the ease of installation are the most valuable features of this solution. 

It could use deduplication features.

It's incredibly stable. I've never had any issues or a corruption of the software itself. 

It's absolutely scalable. From one local site to multiple hundreds of sites around the world. Mostly local IT interact with this solution. The infrastructure staff also looks after it. Anywhere between ten to thirty people use it. 

We use it as our primary backup resource and we use basic copy backups. It's fully utilized across our whole system. 

Their technical support could be better. I will often find a solution to a problem before they get back to me. If it's marked as an emergency it won't take as long. It really depends on who you get. If it's an experienced technician or someone who's on their fourth day and doesn't have his act together. 

We used Symantec as a backup application and we used a Windows backup. From a commercial and scalability point of view, the system just needs it. The fact that we have backups there that are actually off the main system even if there is a corruption or hack it won't affect the backup.

The initial setup is very simple. It's a standard part of our process. We build a site, we install backup servers, and we install drives in remote backup locations. Then we continue clicking the "next" button until we're finished. It's easy. 

The deployment is instantaneous but you have to run your own job input into the servers and decide what time you want them to run. It's easy to do an entire site. It takes a couple of hours. 

I did the integration myself. 

The licensing model depends on the usage, size, and features that you use. We are at an enterprise level but there are higher levels that you can get to. The standard level and essentials can give you what you need. 

We looked at quite a few different options. At the end with all of the usability, scalability, and information, I used to get most of that from Symantec. It's going to integrate seamlessly into the system. 

If you have the money to buy this solution, you should because it makes life a lot easier. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. Not a ten because sometimes the reporting is lacking. Sometimes you can get an error. Something will go wrong but you can't clearly see what. 

We use this solution for our Linux backup.

This solution provides us with an RPO within fifteen minutes, which is unlike any other product. I would estimate this as a fifty percent improvement.

The ASM backup features are the most valuable. Some other backup solutions take ASM, and when you restore it, sometimes there are some missing files.

The solution has to line up with Red Hat so that they can improve their agents as well. If they are not tied up with the RHCE, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, they will not be able to identify what the new features of Red Hat are.

In new releases, I hope they can support Oracle cloud. Right now they support Azure and Amazon Web Services.

This solution is pretty stable.

The scalability is great, it's perfect.

Currently, it's maximized one hundred percent. So, we are planning to grow.

We haven't opened a case with Veeam. We are trained, all of us. So, we don't open cases, but if we're going to upgrade, we will open a case. But there is no instance that we have opened a case based on the usage so far.

I have a team of five that are trained. So, that's more than enough for me. I haven't called technical support for the past, probably two years.

We have used EMC NetWorker before, but there were a lot of complexities. We had to be trained on EMC NetWorker and Avamar.

Then the Veeam Agent for Linux came. I had the Veeam Availability Suite, so I added it to my solution. We added several of our Red Hat mail servers, and it worked. In one balanced solution, one single management pane, I can take care of everything, even my cloud infrastructure.

The initial setup was very straightforward. The Veeam Backup and Replication Suite is very user-friendly. It's not like EMC NetWorker, where you have to go to the console and then do a lot of things. For Veeam, I have one single thing. There's a single management console and I can do everything from there. 

I handle the maintenance of this solution myself. With the Veeam one-monitoring solution, if my load balancer fails, my repositories have problems, the storage space is getting low, or there is a warning on the backup, then the Veeam monitor will send me an email. These types of issues can be resolved by a single system administrator.

We implemented the solution ourselves, with the help of Veeam in Cameroon.

The solution isn't expensive, not really. It's manageable.

There are some roadblocks with the licensing. Right now we are dealing with an issue because we cannot merge licenses. We can no longer install the license file. We have to merge all the license files in one file, and then install it in the license management server. This is the only issue that we having a problem with right now.

Veeam is trying to resolve it by upgrading some of our licenses. Previously, we had an agent called physical Linux. We had a Windows agent for physical workloads. You can apply the licenses for VMware, for the Linux agent, the Windows agent, etc., but no longer. All of the physical workloads have to be converted to VAS. 

Licensing costs are $300,000 USD yearly, and we pay for three years at a time. I think if you want to extend your support, you have to pay twenty-five percent of the license cost per year. We have to pay this because if there is an upgrade of the software, we cannot take advantage of that. So, you have to pay for that too.

We did not evaluate any other options.

In HMG Hospitals, for example, we have seven data centers here. We have a main and a DR. In our backup strategy, we start by backing up our main site, and then the DR, and then the other branches. We have Veeam backup and replication on all sites, but we are managing all of them from one single place. That is our backup strategy, and everything has been taken care of. We have a primary, we have a base of the domain, our secondary back up, and then our third copy backup will be on tape.

You can implement the Veeam agent for Linux if you have the Veeam Availability Suite. Otherwise, you are just wasting money. You have to understand the concept of the solution, not only the agent. There are multiple explorers which are free on the backup licenses. You have Oracle explorer, you have Exchange, you have Active Directory Explorer, you have SharePoint, etc. Not all is done by the agent. The agent doesn't matter so much. Veeam will work across the cloud environment.

Currently, ninety-five percent of my data has been backed up using this solution.

I would rate this solution a nine and a half out of ten.