VMware Live Recovery Reviews

Our initial deployment of VMware's Site Recovery Manager in conjunction with PostgreSQL for automotive sales, and also involved integrating SRM with HP's triple storage systems. It leverages background storage replication to ensure stable and reliable business continuity.

Stability and ease of installation, along with straightforward maintenance through the graphical user interface, make this solution a practical choice. It eliminates the need for complex compliance requirements, making it a highly effective solution.

The primary site lacks adequate equipment, such as power backup and cooling, which can lead to downtime during issues like power outages or overheating.

We have been working with it for six years now.

It is a highly reliable solution.

It's important to note that the scalability of the solution should align with the customer's needs. If they anticipate increased workloads and data, they can easily scale up their storage systems. Site Recovery Manager simplifies this process, as it doesn't necessitate extensive reconfiguration, instead, it involves adding or extending data links in the replication groups, making it a straightforward and manageable process. It is well-suited for mid-sized and small companies that don't have extensive data replication needs. It's a practical choice for businesses in need of a reliable and scalable disaster recovery solution that matches their specific requirements.

VMware offers excellent support for its products, and we haven't encountered any noteworthy issues or negative experiences in our interactions with their support team.

Positive

In addition to our existing setup, we use backup software, Veeam, for replication on the disaster recovery side. With Veeam, we replicate virtual machines from the primary site to the secondary site. It is particularly advantageous because it doesn't require the same storage type on both the primary and secondary sides, which gives us flexibility and allows us to mix and match storage types if needed. One of the key benefits of Veeam is its ease of management, making it a valuable resource for replication. I believe it has a promising future, especially for handling data replication in various sectors. We also employ Veeam in the banking system to replicate data from different strategies across multiple departments. Its performance in replicating virtual machines is superior to SRM. The choice between SRM and Veeam largely depends on your storage environment and replication needs.

The initial setup was easy and straightforward.

The implementation process typically involves setting up VMware, configuring virtual machines, creating storage blocks, and installing the necessary components. For VMware to work seamlessly with the storage, a connector from the storage vendor is installed within the VMware environment, and once this is in place, replication can begin. In cases where there's a substantial amount of data to replicate, and the customer lacks a robust network link between sites, a physical transfer of data is undertaken. This involves physically moving storage devices from the primary site to the DR site, initiating the replication process, and then returning the storage to its original location once replication is completed. The replication process usually takes around two weeks, which is considered suitable for customers with relatively uncomplicated needs. For smaller customers with ten machines or so, replication is organized into groups based on different data sources on the storage system. Implementation requires the involvement of one or two technical experts who are well-versed in the equipment and storage systems. Monitoring the system is primarily the responsibility of the customer, with one or two IT personnel overseeing the process. Email notifications are often set up to keep track of system performance and any issues that may arise.

It is reasonably priced, and its cost hasn't been a significant factor in our implementation. We utilize various licensing options, but we typically purchase licenses upfront, avoiding monthly or yearly payment structures. We often opt for multi-year agreements, and if technical support isn't required, it allows us to maintain the same number of virtual machines and central traffic capacity.

If you're dealing with a more stable and homogeneous storage environment and have technical reasons to favor SAN, then SRM, which is tightly integrated with the storage vendor, may have some advantages. Veeam is a better solution when you have a mix of heterogeneous storage types, multiple sites, and diverse data replication requirements, as it operates independently of the storage application. For larger customers, such as those in the banking sector with diverse storage systems and extensive data replication needs, Veeam might be preferred. While it might have a slightly higher price point compared to SRM, it offers more flexibility and scalability. SRM, on the other hand, is well-suited for smaller customers with simpler storage environments and a smaller number of servers. It's more straightforward to configure and manage in such scenarios. Overall, I would rate VMware SRM ten out of ten.

The primary use case is for disaster recovery. We use the solution for two different sites, as well as our virtual machine backup. In a situation where one of our data centers goes down, our servers can go up on the other site.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the automatic recovery of the virtual machine if it goes down. In the event the VM goes down, we can either power it up automatically or manually depending on how we have the solution configured. When configured to power up automatically, the copy in the VM will power up.

The solution currently has a five-minute RPO, meaning if the VM goes down we can lose up to five minutes of data which is a big deal when it relates to database replication. The solution can be improved by reducing the RPO time to zero.

I have been using the solution for five years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. We only need to add a host whenever we want to expand our cluster.

The initial setup is straightforward and user-friendly. Depending if everything in the network layer is okay, we can configure VMware SRM for both sites in less than an hour or less. The replication process will depend on the size of the VM, so if the VM is large enough, the replication process will take some time. However, the configuration of SRM is straightforward.

The implementation was completed in-house.

We have a standard enterprise license for the solution.

The cost may be based on the number of simultaneous replication which is the limitation of the standard.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

The deployment and maintenance can be done by one engineer.

I am the consultant solution architect, and sometimes I am the deployment engineer.

I seldom ask for support from VMware because most of the problems are caused by bugs, which we can usually fix ourselves by consulting the knowledge base on the VMware website. However, there are times when the problem is at the hardware level and VMware is not at fault - for example when there is a bug in the VMware version used by the hardware vendor. In these cases, we need to ask for support from the hardware vendor.

VMware SRM is a great solution. I always recommend the solution because it is a native replication solution for VMware. Although there are other solutions such as Zerto, they may deliver a lower RPO in certain cases. I believe Zerto is a better solution than VMware SRM, but when it comes to functionality, and for regular customers, VMware SRM is enough.

It was working very well with VMware since it's a VMware product. We didn't have any issues. It was quite smooth when doing drills, when we were trying to recover VMs from other sites.

There's an option where you can test VM, when you can test the drill. That option was very valuable.

It's easy to set up. 

The solution is scalable. 

It is stable. 

Technical support can take some time to respond. We'd like a faster response. 

In the previous year, we were using SRM, and then we shifted to another software called CR2. We're replacing SRM. However, we used SRM for a few years. It's been about four years. 

The solution is stable. Its performance is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

The product can scale well. It's not an issue. 

We have three or four people on the solution right now.  They are mostly infrastructure engineers. 

We don't have plans to increase usage. 

Support is good, although we would like them to be faster. 

Positive

We had a simple vertical setup. We have VMware engineers at our disposal, and their expertise made it easy.

The deployment took one to two days. It was not complicated. We only needed one or two people to handle the deployment and maintenance tasks. They are engineers and junior staff. 

We pay a yearly licensing fee. 

We have some nodes which are still running VMware. We currently do have some nodes still running VMware like ESXi 7.0, however, not for production. It's right for testing purposes.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

I'd recommend the solution as it is very stable and does the job. 

I mainly use VMware SRM for automation, creation of VMs, and monitoring.

VMware SRM's most valuable features are its convenience and its use of stretched clusters.

SRM has to be installed on two separate data centers, so both have to be coordinated very well, which becomes complicated when configuring the software for disaster recovery. It would be much simpler if there was just one centralized, cloud-based place to manage both sites.  

I've been using VMware SRM for five years.

VMware SRM is stable.

VMware SRM is quite scalable.

The initial setup is complex and took almost a week to deploy. I would rate the installation experience as two-and-a-half out of five.

We used an in-house team.

VMware SRM is quite expensive.

If you're able to overcome the initial hump of setting up VMware SRM, it works very well. I'd give VMware SRM a rating of seven out of ten.

We are using this solution to serve our customers in different sectors.

We are using VMware SRM as a disaster recovery solution for our customers. We are working with vSphere, vSAN, and other infrastructure VMware solutions. VMware SRM is completing the solution.

VMware SRM is very effective between two sites with identical twin storage, you can have synchronization between the two sites. 

We have had an issue when some customers have traditional designs and sites. For example, on one another site, they are using hyper-converged, using VMware, or Nutanix. We have a problem with the synchronization between the storage for site to site. This is the main issue. We are adding some other tools to support the synchronization to allow the movement of the workload from site to site easily.

Not all customers have VMware in all workloads. Some customers have a difference, VMware environments, such as Red Hat or Nutanix. VMware SRM is very effective for VMware customers. However, when you have other workflows with other vendors, you can not always use this solution.

I have been using VMware SRM for approximately 12 years.

VMware SRM we mainly use for our mid-size business customers. For small business-sized customers, we have different solutions we can deliver, such as Veeam. If they are a small customer that does not have a professional DR site we have a variety of solutions we can deliver depending on the customer's needs.

Enterprise businesses have many VM and the amount depends on the design of the data centers, which storage is being used, or is it hyper-converged or converged. We are choosing the best solution depending on the customer's need.

When comparing the difference between VMware SRM and Dell EMC RecoverPoint there are many differences between them both. VMware SRM is an automated tool for disaster recovery, RecoverPoint can do a similar job but it has better protection more than an automated tool for moving VMs. 

With our customers, we are delivering both solutions, Recovery Point and SRM, because they already had the Dell EMC storage and owned Dell Recovery Point, we only added the VMware SRM tool for moving the VMs and storing them from site to site, as an automated tool.

Dell RecoverPoint has the edge over VMware SRM in one area because they can work with other vendors, not only Dell EMC. Some customers have workloads on the cloud, Dell RecoverPoint is very effective for them.

I have used Veeam and other solutions.

The price of VMware SRM depends on how many VMs the customer has to move. There is a difference between the standard and enterprise license. I'm presenting the standard license to my customers because the total of VMs is not more than 50. The customer needs only the standard license and the cost is very effective for him.

I rate VMware SRM an eight out of ten.

We used VMware SRM mainly for the DC-DR configuration.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the integration part, along with the subsequent hardware.

It would be better if we could get more reporting features in VMware SRM.

Wherever we have deployed the solution, we haven't faced any issues with stability.

I rate the solution an eight to nine out of ten for stability.

I have four to five customers for VMware SRM.

The solution’s initial setup is not very complex.

I don't see a challenge concerning the solution's deployment process. The deployment can be done once the design is finished. Two engineers are more than enough to deploy the solution.

VMware SRM is an expensive solution, and users need to pay extra costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

The implementation of VMware SRM helps with the overall business resiliency perspective. We are still using the virtualization layer for the application, which becomes closely integrated with the solution provided. So, that's a benefit to any organization. Moreover, the solution gives you a single dashboard through which you can look at everything.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven to eight out of ten.

I use the solution for disaster recovery.

The solution is consistent. It is an automated DR solution. It has test features. We can test DR in advance. We are using the tool for disaster recovery. The product has improved automation. The automation of failover and failback has improved our operational efficiency significantly. It is quite easy to integrate the solution with other VMware products.

The solution must provide better integration with third-party vendors.

I have been using the solution for two years.

I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a seven out of ten. We have 10 to 20 users in our organization. We use the solution twice a month.

I rate the ease of setup a seven out of ten. The deployment takes a few months.

We deployed the product with a few in-house team members. The tool requires continuous maintenance. We need two or three people to maintain it.

I will recommend the solution to others. It is a nice product. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case for VMware SRM is automatization.

The features I have found most valuable are the ability to script test failover and the ability to re-IP.

In my opinion, the integration with Peer Persistent Storage could be improved.

I have been using this solution for about five years.

I would rate the stability of this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

I would rate the scalability of this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

As a vendor, I did not have contact with technical support.

My impression is that the initial setup process is relatively straightforward.

The deployment model of this solution that we are using is on-premises.

If you are buying this solution in an EOA bundle, then the pricing doesn't really matter that much. However, if you're buying a one-off license, the solution is pretty expensive.

I would rate pricing a three, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

Overall, I would rate this solution a seven, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.