Commvault Cloud Reviews

The solution is primarily used to protect against ransomware. It helps protect data and allows for data recovery and backup.

The data protection itself is very good compared to other products. 

The backup agents are helpful.

Its pricing is pretty competitive. 

The technical support is responsive. 

It is easy to set up.

I haven't had any challenges with the solution. 

The pricing could be more flexible in terms of licensing. It would help attract more customers. 

I've used the solution for three to four years. 

We have around customers using the product with 5,000 or more users.

The response in terms of support has been fine. Whenever they need help, the team can respond to the ticket. They do provide solutions to issues. That said, I don't really use customer care directly.

The vendor will offer support contracts. The customers can decide if they might need support or not. 

The initial setup is straightforward. There are basic steps to follow for the installation. That said, I do not handle the setup directly. From my team, I have not heard of any kinds of challenges. I'm not sure how long it takes to deploy the product.

We handle the implementation for clients. 

The solution's pricing is competitive. It depends on the number of users required and if any discounts are leveraged. Bigger volumes will lead to bigger discounts. 

We're provided the solution to clients. We are implementors. We are using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

The rate of duplication is great because when you do the first full backup, it duplicates 20%, but when you do more increments, depending on the mode, the duplication is 99%. It is also great at detecting ransomware. It's not an antivirus, but when you copy files, the system can send you a message such as, "Mr. Albert, have you downloaded 10,000 files in two minutes? Why are you doing this?" Again, it's not an antivirus, but it notifies you if something is wrong with your system.

The interface could be improved because it has two different consoles. The first console is Java, and it is a little complex, but you can do 100% of the operation. But now, there is an alternative console of HTML 5. It is trendy and simple, but you can only do 70% of your operation. The HTML console is perfect for a client or a partner.

You have all the information centralized with the Java console, and I believe they plan to transition to the HTML console fully.

We have been using it for three months, deploying both on-premises and cloud. The choice of on-premises or cloud depends on what the client wants.

I rate the stability an 8.5 out of ten, and there is a small room for improvement.

It is easily scalable. We have about 300 users of Commvault Complete Data Protection in our company.

We have used technical support, and you can contact them by opening a ticker and in a few minutes, they will action it. For example, we opened a ticket last week, and the issue was solved in 30 minutes.

Veeam, Veritas and Rubrik are three software comparable to Commvault Complete Data Protection. Veeam is competitive in price and demand. Their solution is not very good, but many people use it because it is not expensive. Commvault Complete Data Protection, however, is the best out of all of them.

The initial setup is simple.

I rate the pricing an eight out of ten, with ten being a good price and one a high price. Depending on the client, they have different types of licensing.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. We would like to see a single console for everything in the future.

We have the solution deployed on-premise and private cloud.

There are many valuable features of Commvault HyperScale X giving many possibilities to complete jobs, particularly with the backup and restore.

HyperScale X is not user-friendly. There are many settings that have to be done on your own. It would benefit from a better interface. 

Commvault has a command center that is easy to use, but it does not have the functionality you need, so you have to switch to the Java GUI.

I have been using Commvault HyperScale X for five years.

The product is stable if it is set up correctly. HyperScale X is sophisticated software that requires you to configure it on your own. This can be difficult to handle.

This solution is scalable. In our company, we have two users of the product.

The support offered by Commvault HyperScale X depends on the country you connect with. U.S. support is better than the support offered in India. With the language barrier, different lingo, and how quickly they speak, I often cannot understand what they are saying.

Prior to using Commvault HyperScale X, we were using Commvault with Windows Server. We switched due to the complexity and software updates with Windows. HyperScale provided a good offer that would improve our space requirements.

The initial setup of Commvault HyperScale X was not complex, however, it was not easy either. It took two days to set up the appliances, which we completed with the assistance of a consultant.

HyperScale X is expensive. 

Anyone considering to implement Commvault HyperScale X should do so based on their own needs. There are many tools you can use, but it is complex even if you are running the command center. VM is an easier tool, but it has reduced functionality. 

I would rate the product a seven out of 10 overall.

It's an enterprise backup tool. It is the competitor to Dell and IBM, TSM and Symantec NetBackup, or rather what's called Veritas NetBackup. 

It's an enterprise data protection tool. It's almost in the top three or four solutions out there.  

We have one environment with 500 servers, and another environment with 1,000 servers.

We definitely plan to continue using Commvault. We basically support the customers, their MSP. We use Dell as our own data center MSP product but we are supporting this for other customers.

It's a very good competitor database.

It's very user-friendly. It supports a wide range of workloads. It's quite easy to use, it's very powerful and it's scalable.

It's got the ability to do automation, that's another good thing about it. It's got workflow automation built-in. It enables you to automate certain tasks.

It can create backups, restore, and be used for DR testing. It's got all those features which are better than many other tools out there. It also has good reporting as well. 

It has a very easy-to-use interface that allows you to do everything within a single pane of glass — everything is right there. It's superior to many products in terms of its management interface.

We've run into some issues when attempting to restore very large numbers of files. Of course, that's more of a design issue. For example, if you have, say, 10 million small files with added encryption, and you want to restore them, it can end up taking days to restore them. That is a file-level restoring operation. One option is to go for Image Level backup and restore the entire image, which is much faster. Then you can extract whatever data you want from that image.

IntelliSnap is a storage snapshot application for storage snapshots. The tool is very good but we could not use it because we didn't have compatible storage. That would've helped us a lot because that's one of the very few tools which integrates with lots of storage products out there. It's very flexible, very easy-to-use. We had the VMware vSAN version which is not supported by Commvault IntelliSnap. 

The thing about Commvault is there are a lot of moving parts. You have to design it properly for resources, hardware and software, and licensing because you can install it on any of your Intel servers and then you can use any other storage as the destination. It just comes down to proper lower-level design in sizing.

I have been using Commvault for the past five years.

Commvault is quite stable.

The environment can scale nicely. It's got the ability to scale for multi-node clusters, but you need to ensure that you keep it updated.  

Commvault support is usually very, very responsive and they always help us quickly resolve any problems that we may have — they are excellent.

The initial setup is very easy, actually. We did it within one day.

We had a professional service engagement with Commvault and they did it in a matter of roughly one day. Implementation and configuration of the policies — it only took one day to set it up and test it.

We needed to have professional assistance from Commvault as it can be a little difficult to deploy. It can be done, but it's always handy to have professional assistance from Commvault factored into your own solution.

Capacity licensing is very good with Commvault.

I would definitely recommend using Commvault. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Commvault a rating of eight.

I am primarily using Commvault for backing up the physical and virtual servers.

This product has allowed us to recover data when we've had issues.

This product does what it says it's going to do, and generally backs up the data that you want it to back up.

It is a little more complicated than it really needs to be.

Reporting could definitely be improved.

I have been using Commvault, personally, for about three years.

It works, and there are definitely some bugs, but nothing major.

As it gets larger, it gets a lot more complex in terms of the configuration. Generally, the larger it gets, the harder it is to manage. We probably have about 1,000 servers right now that it is backing up.

In general, technical support is okay. I would rate them a seven out of ten.

Prior to Commvault, we used Tivoli Storage Manager from IBM. It is a bit lacking in terms of features, compared to Commvault.

The initial setup was relatively straightforward.

The price is a little bit high.

My advice for anybody who is looking into implementing Commvault is to do their research. It's a good product for most use cases, although it's not the best. My main complaint is that it needs better reporting.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We have used Metallic to offer a package of services to some of our clients along with Nutanix. One of our clients just started using it for Mac agents. They purchased approximately 35 licenses.

One valuable feature is unlimited backup. You can back up existing users and folders. 

You can't change Metallic's retention policies without contacting the Commvault support team. We can only change the scheduling within a certain window, like four hours. Restoration also takes a long time. The hypervisor capabilities are also limited in terms of backing up across cloud platforms. For example, if we are taking a backup in Azure and want to switch the backup to AWS, it will take some time. 

I have worked with Metallic for about a year. 

I rate Metallic seven out of 10 for stability. The backup and restoration takes some time, and you get some errors when installing a package. 

Metallic is a scalable solution. Its primary benefit is unlimited backup for endpoint users. However, not all clients purchase that. 

Deploying Metallic isn't complex. You only need to install the onboarding agent. It took approximately half an hour the first time. You have to download the agent package from the console itself and deploy it on the endpoint. You need to put in the login credentials. It will ask for the email ID and password. 

I rate Metallic eight out of 10. I recommend using the console instead of the web interface. It's much easier to use. 

We use it to back up NetApp shares, servers, and virtual servers. We also use it for Active Directory and databases. We used to use it to back up Exchange servers, but we're moving that to the cloud. It has a lot of features but we mostly use it to back up and recover stuff.

I can't really say how Commvault has improved the way our organization functions because, while I know there was use another product in use before Commvault, I came here way after the company started using Commvault. I wasn't in this role during the transition. When I've talked about this with the more senior guys, they say Commvault is supposed to be the best product available at this moment.

In general, it gives people confidence knowing that their data, on their servers and home shares on shared drives, is backed up. It gives our end-users confidence.

And the solution has helped us to optimize infrastructure usage. The deduplication in Commvault is great. We have 90-something percent savings using its deduplication technology. It's awesome. I love that aspect.

The solution provides us with a single platform to move, manage, and recover our data across on-premise locations. Some of the guys have been using it to move a virtual machine from VMware to the Microsoft solution, Hyper-V. They back it up and then they restore to the different virtual machine provider, and that works great.

We have never managed to use it to full potential because we don't have a dedicated team to take care of Commvault, so we barely keep it running. It takes a lot of our time when we have ten other systems to take care of. That's why I'm not the biggest fan of this. Just to keep it running is time-consuming. There are five people on my team. Commvault was supposed to be one of the less time-consuming solutions, but in reality it takes 60 percent of our time just to keep it running, and that's not even fine-tuning it; that's just to keep it running. It's a pain.

It constantly breaks and then we spend three or four days trying to fix the issue, working with support, going back and forth. When we finally resolve something, another issue pops up. Then we spend another three or four days trying to make it work. I'm not saying it's the product's fault. Maybe we didn't implement it correctly in the first place. I don't know, I wasn't here. But it takes a lot of time, and every issue is different so I cannot build experience. With another system, I know if I do this, this, and this then it breaks, and I know that I have to do this, this, and this to fix it. But every time Commvault breaks, it's something different, so it takes us a lot of time to fix it. It is frustrating.

Another thing I find frustrating is that when it fails and it says something like "Error code 19: etc., etc... Click here for more information," when I click I get an error page. Having the error codes documented in the Commvault Knowledge Base would help us a lot.

When I came to the role, they said, "Oh yeah, you're going to be doing this, this, and this, and maybe a little bit of Commvault. In reality, 60 to 70 percent of my day is just tinkering with Commvault.

I've been using Commvault for about two years.

It's not very stable in our environment. Every day there is something weird going on. When we solve the "weird thing of the week," the next day something different goes on.

The issue of scalability isn't applicable to us because we're not trying to just grow, grow, grow. It's not that we're going to have 200 percent growth next year. Our environment is more or less stable. We have 800 servers. Next year we might have 850, but it's not doubling.

Pretty much everything we back up is done via Commvault, except for desktops or laptops.

Their follow-up is great. If they send an email saying, "Hey, can you try this and this," if I'm busy with other stuff, the next day they follow up again and again and they harass me. But it's great because my experience with other companies' support is that you have to chase them instead of them chasing you.

Some of Commvault's people are better than others. That's normal. We're humans after all. I only had one case in which I could not agree with the guy, so I had to request another person. But most of the time they're okay or good. Once in a while, you get this really great person, someone who is really awesome. Overall, the support is good.

There were a couple of guys from Cohesity trying to get business from us. We met with them, but it never went anywhere. We heard what they had to say and it looked cool, it looked promising, but of course they are much smaller than Commvault. We didn't try Cohesity. They only did a demo for us.

It's not easy for us to make those kinds of changes. If we have a contract with Commvault, we can't just say, "Okay, let's forget about this. Let's bring in somebody new." We are government, so we can't just do that. We need to go through a bid process so it's not as easy as in other companies.

My advice is to have a dedicated team for Commvault, if possible. In our team we are dealing with DNS Exchange, antivirus, Active Directory, and Commvault. I feel I'm not successful enough in Commvault because I am always thinking about multiple things. If you really want to be successful with the product and use it to its full potential, a dedicated team just doing Commvault would be great. In reality it might not be easy to do, but if I had a magic wand, I would have two or three people just doing Commvault.

I think it's a great product that we are under-utilizing. The lesson I have learned from using it is that when I think I'm getting a handle on Commvault, when I think I'm learning it, something else happens that shows me that I know nothing about Commvault. It's a good product, but it's just it takes a lot of effort to support it. Sometimes we just don't have the time. When it works fine, it's awesome.

IT has the regular ComCell Console that looks ugly but is full of functionality. And it has another way to manage it called Command Center that is a nice-looking web interface but I find it doesn't have all the functionality, so I stick to the old interface because I can do everything there. I haven't used Command Center often. I don't find it's the best feature because there are some things that I cannot do in there. I got used to using the ComCell Console and have kept on using it.

The fact that the solution is a single platform hasn't really enabled our organization to accelerate growth or drive innovation. We're government, so we are not driven by growth or innovation. We prefer to have stability and reliability. We're not a company that is trying to quickly sell something. We don't care about that. We're not trying to grow; it's actually the opposite: The less impact that government has, the better.

In terms of the solution's breadth and depth of cloud support, we're not using cloud yet. In government, we don't want to have the latest and greatest and the shiniest thing. We have to be very careful. In a private company, somebody just says, "Okay, let's go cloud," and that's it. Next day everybody is in the cloud. But we have to be accountable to taxpayers and we usually have to justify the expense. Decisions are not made that fast, so we are not in the cloud yet.

We have not tried or simulated a disaster recovery scenario. It's something we have to test. We tried once and we killed the network and everybody complained, so we had to stop it. We have recovered the files here and there when people say, "Oops, I just deleted this file. Can you recover it?" But a whole disaster recovery is something we have never done, and I hope we never have to.

There are five administrators of it in our organization while a couple of more use it to move VMs from one place to another. There are three more on the SAP team who use it to push backups to us, and three more from the DBAs. We don't back up laptops or desktops. Our end-users don't have access to this, nor do our other IT teams such as the applications programmers. They have to come to us to restore something.

It works fine when it works. It's a good product but it takes a lot of effort to support it. I don't know if it's because we didn't implement it correctly or if it's our infrastructure or the product, but that's my general impression.

We need to take a log backup every fifteen minutes, and HyperScale X sends the data fast (even over a terabyte) and runs on time, so we're able to do the backup and discovery for customer and audit procurement.

HyperScale X's best features are Deep Look and Archiving, which really reduce the backup time, and DR solution, which allows us to replicate data from the primary data center to the backup data center and immediately activate the backup set if the primary set goes down.

I really struggled to configure HyperScale X as there was a lack of detailed documentation. In the next release, I would like to see increased capacity and automated solutions for backup.

I've been using HyperScale X for three years.

HyperScale X is really stable.

HyperScale X's scalability is okay.

Commvault's technical support is responsive and helpful. Sometimes it takes a longer period to get a solution due to the complex environment, but we're always able to get one in the end.

I would rate the ease of setting up HyperScale X as four out of five. It took around fifteen minutes to deploy.

We used an internal approximate services team.

We've seen a good ROI from HyperScaleX as it's a really useful endeavor environment. I would rate our ROI as five out of five.

We did a POC for Azure backup, but Commvault had more services available at our level.

HyperScale X is really user-friendly and has a lot of features. It's also cheaper, faster, and more stable than its competitors. I would rate HyperScale X as eight out of ten.