Commvault Cloud Reviews

We use the deception piece of Commvault, not the backup solution.

We use deception decoys across our corporate networks and across our OT networks to emulate vulnerable systems so that if a threat actor were to get inside and start scanning the network, the hope is they would bump into one of these, and we would get the alert, and we would be able to react and know some of these inside. Most of what we deploy in terms of decoys have some level of vulnerabilities that threat actors would be interested in, such as an old version of an operating system.

Building and deploying a decoy is fairly straightforward. If there is any work involved, it is just tuning the noise in terms of what happens inside your network. Most people probably do not realize how many times they are scanning their own network internally, and that decoy is going to feel like it is getting scanned, but that scan is being done by a dedicated device that you want to scan. You then build your exception rules in to not trigger on that and trigger on other devices when it is scanning. We have built the alerts back into our automation platform, so if we get alerts, our automation platform will do some runbook evaluation that is automated and then hand it off to an analyst if they think it is a real event.

They do a good job of building the decoys and deploying them, and then giving you good insights. When something happens, you can look at how the decoy was connected or attached to a scan and figure out if that is a real threat or not.

I like the coverage. We have 250 locations across the US, and we deploy decoys across every one of those networks.

We saw its benefits immediately. The first time we got it and deployed it into one of our operating plant environments, the plant engineer noticed right away that there was a foreign device on his network that he did not really realize was out there. It was a support vendor coming in, and that vendor was scanning parts of his network that he did not realize. They were not necessarily doing it maliciously, but it gave him great insight, so he was sold on the product right away as we were. Shortly after implementation, we did our regular PAN and Red Team testing. I can say with 100% confidence that every time we do one of those, those teams come in and they tip over one of the decoys, and we see them fairly quickly.

The decoy side protects my data because I get early insight into if there is a threat actor in my environment and it is moving laterally because they typically will hit one of these decoys, so it gives me quick access. If a ransomware threat actor was in my environment, they would be moving laterally trying to get to a vulnerable system, so before they ever get to the point of deploying the ransomware payload, they are going to hit a decoy. I am going to get early insight, and hopefully, I can get them out of there.

In terms of its effect on the total cost of ownership (TCO), as with almost any security product, we are mitigating risk and protecting revenue. The total cost of ownership is an overhead when it comes to security. You want to spend as much as you think is necessary to mitigate high-risk areas. Otherwise, it is just money out the door. You are protecting revenue, but I would not put a TCO on it.

It has helped our organization reduce or avoid downtime a great deal. It has avoided a potential downtime because the decoy typically gets the threat actor. My threat actors are PAN Test and Red Team people. They are identified before they can get too far and cause a scenario where I have downtime because of whatever they are doing in the environment.

The expanse of the decoys that they have is valuable. They cover everything on the corporate side that you would think of, such as Windows, Linux, and even applications like SAP. They also go into the OT environment and emulate OT devices as well.

If I were to ask them to work on something, it would be the fidelity of the alerts that occur. They should tell me if it is a real event or not. It is easy for it to identify that something hit it but give me more information. They can build AI into the engine so that I get better output from an alert to tell me if I should really be interested in that or not.

We bought TrapX before Commvault acquired them, so we have been a customer of the deception technology, and a specific one, for over seven years.

It is very stable. We do not have a problem with availability or uptime on the product.

It is very scalable. We started with hundreds, and now, we have got thousands of decoys. The only thing that you have to be careful about is the more decoys, the more alerts. Can you handle them, tune them, and get them cleaned up so that you are effectively looking at real alerts when they come in?

I am the CISO here. I do not contact them, but my team certainly has used their support organization before.

We have not used any other solution. We have been a TrapX customer from early on when they were just coming out.

It was originally on-premises. They have since come out with the cloud version, and we are migrating to it right now. It should be done by the fifteenth of March, which will make it a lot easier because before, I had to buy hardware and deploy assets across my environment. Having a cloud solution is a much better model for me.

The deployment for the cloud one has been good so far. It has been going fairly well. We are on-prem, and we are moving to the cloud. I do not know if it would be different if I was deploying the cloud only and I had never deployed it before. I would imagine it would be easier than what I did in the past with on-premise equipment. I was building servers and VMs and allocating those types of resources to run this environment.

When we started, we did get help. We had professional services included. They were early to the market, so it kind of made sense. For this deployment in the cloud, we are just doing it ourselves.

I have one person doing the migration, and that one person does other things too. The lab time is going to be about 15 days, but he is not working a hundred percent on that. He has got other responsibilities. It is not difficult.

All the time, we have only had one engineer dedicated to this platform. Our SOC uses the output, but the person who manages it day to day takes upgrades, performs the upgrades, and does those types of things. There is just one person, and that is a part-time person, not a full-time person.

The maintenance is largely around what decoys you have deployed and the tuning of those decoys. Some of the maintenance is just internal processes, such as when the decoy gets tipped over, what exactly did that? Did somebody start up a new engine or a new scan internally that we did not know about? We have to manage that change process to make sure that we put an exception on the decoy so that it does not get alerted when it is not necessary.

Originally, it was really attractive when we were deployed on-prem. They have since built and moved it to the cloud, which I am a big fan of. I have all my security tools in the cloud, but it came with a significant increase in pricing. We ended up negotiating a better price because we have been a long-term customer, and I have also spoken on their behalf quite a few times, but if I have to buy it at its current rate, I am not sure if I would be a customer. It is expensive.

We did look at a couple, but I cannot say what they were because it was a while ago.

To those evaluating this solution, I would advise looking at the maturity of their security organization. Do they have a SOC and are they going to be able to address the alerts that they are going to get on the decoys? If it is just more noise on top of the noise they are already dealing with, they probably should not put this type of technology in until they clean up their environment and have a good handle on the alerts they are getting. That is because you cannot put it in and ignore it. It is a decoy. Something is hitting it, and that something might be real, and you need to take action on it.

I would recommend Commvault to others. They have been an easy organization to work with. They have good technical support, and I still like their technology.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for auto backup and tape library.

The product is used for backup purposes. Data backup is important for us. The product helps us secure our data.

The product is user-friendly. We can restore it very quickly. The browse option is also good for browsing files. We can also index files.

The product is expensive.

I have been working with the solution for the last two to three years. I am using the latest version of the solution.

The tool’s stability is good. I rate the stability an eight or nine out of ten.

The tool is perfect. I rate the scalability an eight and a half out of ten. It is scalable according to our needs. We have more than 100 users in our organization. We use the solution 24/7. We use it to its maximum potential.

The technical support is good. We have a team on site 24/7.

Positive

I rate the ease of setup a seven out of ten. New users may find the initial setup difficult.

We have a dedicated user for maintaining the solution.

I rate the pricing an eight out of ten.

We are still exploring the features since we are new users. We were using a different solution before Commvault. I joined the organization after we started using Commvault. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

I recently deployed Metallic for backup storage on Azure for a customer who lost all their data. Metallic helped me to restore the data within an hour, which is much faster than restoring from Microsoft services with a ticket on support services, which took four to five days.

I have a customer who uses it, but I am not a direct user, and I work with customers who use Metallic.

The functional integration could be better. For example, the replication function is not there in the Metallic products and can be complex. We were licensing the functionality in a different tool but not in Metallic's key. So it should be enhanced.

In future releases, I would like to see better VM replication because it's not available today. But there should also be provisions to have more integration.

Metallic is perfect for a customer because it is very easy to use. However, I find it difficult to find some use cases on my own and need to contact Metallic support. Moreover, in a SaaS project, I cannot open or function agents alone and require the support of Metallic.

I have been using this solution for two years. We are using the latest update of the Metallic SaaS solution.

It is a stable solution. I would rate it a nine out of ten. I have had no errors since the installation.

When I put it into the production model, it was very stable, and we had no time to do the next production review after a very simple test.

I would rate scalability a nine out of ten. It is very scalable.

The customer support team is responsive and very helpful. There were no problems, and their response time was very short.

Positive

The initial setup is very easy. It's quick and simple, and Metallic is already ready for use after two hours. It integrates well with Office 365 backup for Exchange roles, Teams, or SharePoint.

Our internal team deployed the solution.

The pricing depends on the functionality you require. For example, Office 365 is priced correctly because you have everything in one package, including the license for backup and storage. It is very attractive for the middle market, so I would rate it a seven out of ten, where one is the cheapest and ten is very expensive.

But for some projects, we may need to buy additional backup and storage for the retention period, making it more expensive. However, seven is good for me. Also, we could consider integrating with other cloud providers for secondary backup and storage to store backups. We only have Azure, OCI, or RWAIS, but exploring other options that offer better prices would be interesting.

I have experience using different products in the same category as Metallic, including CommVault and Rubrik. CommVault is the same product, but the trends are converted. It's an on-premise product. And Metallic is the first product of the merger of the company. It's the same product. I also saw Impacket, but I find it very old-school. We are missing old school.

I also see Hybrid. It's a very good product, but quite more known. There is still a lot to fix in Rubrik. I also find CommVault and Metallic with more experience and integrated with all our products. We have all products, like your old servers, the unique server. And it's quite more difficult with Rubrik. So, I prefer Metallic for this.

I would recommend using the product. Metallic is a very interesting product. My company also integrates Acronis and VM in some of our projects, but Metallic is one of the best products for cloud and SaaS. It has many functionalities and is simple to integrate.

For me, it's a ten. I haven't found any other product with so many functionalities that is also easy to integrate. It's not just good for my business, but it also gives me peace of mind and allows me to sleep soundly at night.

We are using Commvault Cloud to back up a VM. We mainly use VM backup. We have kept our storage backups so that in case of a disaster or test environment, we should be able to recover within fifteen to twenty minutes. This is our benchmark.

Commvault Cloud has helped in reducing the cost for hardware as we are just using standard storage to store the backup instead of requiring special hardware equipment. It allows for server-level hardware backup, which helps in managing storage backups efficiently.

The most valuable features of Commvault Cloud include deduplication and compression. Deduplication and compression are critical for us because they provide good compression, which is essential in data management. The time to recover from the disk is a critical requirement. The ransomware protection feature was one of the key considerations for choosing Commvault Cloud.

In terms of improvement, the cost factor is a significant area for enhancement, especially during the annual renewal. Competitive products have emerged with less cost, making the pricing a challenging factor. The implementation of field-level restore where you can restore a particular table or field without having to restore the entire backup is something I would like to have.

I have been using Commvault Cloud for almost three years.

So far, we are all right with the stability of Commvault Cloud.

We have some questions regarding scalability with the current storage setup, particularly with the Synology basic storage we are using, which causes continuous issues. We are evaluating backup storage solutions due to underlying hardware issues.

I do not have any negative feedback regarding Commvault's technical support. They have been clear and helpful in addressing our concerns.

Positive

We previously used Aksel backup, but we faced challenges with VM level backups and required protection against ransomware, which Commvault Cloud provided. The ArcServe backup software did not have these features, and as a result, we switched to Commvault Cloud.

I was not involved technically in the initial setup. I was involved in the evaluation process, and subsequently, my team handled the implementation and deployment with our partners. The setup took approximately three to four months and involved minor implementation challenges.

The deployment involved our team and partners. From our side, we had two people handling it, and from the partner's side, one or two guys were involved, making it a team of around four to five people.

The major ROI was using simple storage instead of expensive high-end storage for backup. It is more compliance-related, and we utilize cloud backups for redundancy and compliance purposes. We have not seen significant ROI from the backup solution as a whole.

Pricing is a significant factor for our company as the annual renewal is challenging. There are competitive products in the market that have lower costs, which adds to the challenge of the pricing factor.

We evaluated Veeam backup as an alternative. Commvault Cloud provided better pricing at the time, along with ransomware protection and deduplication. Additionally, at our time of evaluation, Veeam did not support mixed backups, which was a consideration for us.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We provide backup services to our customers and we implement Commvault for most of our backups. This includes cloud with VMware, cloud with IBM, cloud with Azure, SAP applications like HANA or traditional SAP, for databases including Oracle and DB2, and across several operating systems including AIX, Solaris, Windows, and Linux.

We have a separate, private backup network. It has its own appliances from different vendors and the information on it is not visible to our main network. This is to help protect against ransomware and other threats.

Commvault provides us with a single platform to move, manage, and recover data across our on-premises and cloud locations, which is something that is very important for us. We have data centers in Mexico, Panama, Guatemala, and the Dominican Republic, and we need to administer all of the environments from a single location in Mexico.

The administrators connect to all of the environments on-premises. We have two flavors; the multitenant environment and the dedicated environment. We manage all of these from Mexico.

Commvault is very good in terms of coverage for applications and databases. This is important because we don't only administrate backups. We have managed services that include the database, application, operating system, and storage. We talk with the administrators for the database and operating system to create a policy that ensures all of the data that we need to recover the environment is complete.

The recovery process is consistent across platforms and this is important to us because clients give us the information, and we need to back it up and to ensure that we can recover it if they have a problem.

The recovery options are good because we offer our clients a complete recovery of their information, as well as an option for partial recovery, based on their needs. For example, we can offer the recovery of a single table in a database, depending on what the scenario is.

The most valuable feature is the compatibility with our entire environment.

The embedded deduplication engine is really good because we use a Near Line SAS disk as a repository for our backups, and we don't need to pay for another appliance such as a Data Domain or Quantum so that we can have hardware-based deduplication.

One of the benefits of using Commvault over the years has been that all of our administrators have the ability to perform admin functions. They haven't had any complaints about the interface.

Commvault has support for multiple storage platforms, which is helpful for us. We use block storage for some backups, and we use appliances that have duplication capabilities for other backups. The method in which Commvault fits in depends on how much money the client spends. For example, if they have a higher budget then we use PCI-compliant appliances, or snapshots in the backups to ensure that we don't have ransomware. Other clients pay only for the amount of storage that they use. In some cases, we use replication at the host level, whereas in other cases, it is at the hardware level. The console that we have with Commvault can manage all of the environments and hardware that we have.

I would like to have a manager-level dashboard to review the backups. This is not from an administrative perspective where you can see the details of the execution. Rather, it would only show the percentage of completeness for each one.

I have been working with Commvault for more than eight years.

We have not had any problems with stability. 

We have more than 10 implementations in all of our data centers.

Using Commvault helps to minimize the amount of time that we spend on backups. I am not exactly sure how long it would take otherwise, but we back up approximately four petabytes of information each day.

Scaling is not a problem for us. If we need to, we can install more servers and install a new console.

We use Commvault support on a daily basis. People from the database teams need help restoring data, so they contact Commault for assistance.

I would rate their support a nine out of ten.

Prior to Commvault, we used Veritas NetBackup for five years.

A lot of our environment is currently backed up using Commvault but we are planning to use Veeam and Commvault together. Veeam is priced better than Commvault and right now, we use Veeam to back up our virtual machines. As we split more of the information between the two different applications, we may use Veeam for cloud environments, and for traditional environments, Commvault.

There are some applications like SAP HANA that are not compatible with the Veeam software. In cases like this, we use Commvault.

This product is very easy to set up. The reason is that we do everything. We implement, we operate, and we migrate. One of the reasons that we continue with Commvault is that we have spent a lot of time training people. This means that the people in the company can do everything without the need for third-party persons.

It takes between two and three hours to install a new console.

Over the years that we have had this same software, people on the admin team have become certified by Commvault. This ensures that they are doing things properly and doing them well.

We charge our customers on a per-gigabyte basis.

Using Commvault has helped us to reduce storage costs because, in some cases, we changed to block storage. Using block storage and software-based deduplication is cheaper than the appliances that have deduplication embedded in them. In some cases, we have reduced our hardware cost by 50%, whereas in other cases, it has been reduced by more than 75%. It depends on the technology that we compare. For example, the Data Domain appliance is perhaps four times the cost of the Near Line SAS disk in traditional block storage.

Reducing the hardware that we have in the data center, also reduces our costs in terms of energy and space. I do not have an estimate as to how much we save.

Commvault is more expensive than Veeam, which is the reason that we are changing to Veeam for cloud environments.

We had been running Veritas NetBackup and did an RFP to change the backup software. We tested Veritas, Commvault, TSM from IBM, and Dell NetWorker. The finalists were Veritas and Commvault. We found that there were more advantages to using Commvault. For example, it has deduplication embedded into the software and if we wanted this with Veritas, we needed to pay an additional fee. This is why we changed and we have maintained it for several years.

In comparing solutions, I think that generally, today, all software solutions are the same. We have the same compatibility using Veritas, TSM, NetWorker, and Commvault. The main reason for us to maintain Commvault is the expertise that we have with the tool. All of them have deduplication capabilities and can use different repositories, so I don't have a problem with the other brands.

Commvault has the capability to discover unprotected workloads, although we don't use this because we only work with policies. Our clients tell us the policy that they want to apply to their environment, and we don't analyze their environment beyond the scope that they specify.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Our current use case is for storage backup of large Veritas Clusters. We have around 350 TB of storage backup and we use Commvault's HyperScale X with unlimited data backup.

With Commvault, our backup performance is way better, compared to what we had, because we have a disk-to-disk backup.

It also helps to ensure broad coverage with the discovery of unprotected workloads. That is always helpful for us. Our environment is very dynamic. We often have high data-demand spikes.

In terms of time saved, because the backups are automated, our team generally spends 30 to 45 minutes reviewing the logs and any errors, and it saves us two to three hours per week.

The deduplication and compression have helped to reduce my backup costs. This year, I haven't had to purchase any expansion for my backup storage, thanks to Commvault. Otherwise, I would likely have had to spend around $150,000. And next year, I can add one more node to HyperScale X before expanding it. So it has saved 20 percent of my backup budget.

The main solution from Commvault is the HyperScale X backup. Instead of a dedicated appliance, we have a three-node HPE Apollo cluster for backing up. That gives us the best value regarding speed.

Another valuable feature is that, in general, recovery is faster than any other solution we have reviewed. That is especially the case for small, micro files, 2 or 3 KB research files.

The Commvault user interface is very nice and intuitive. It's perfect compared with other products I have used. It's in a completely different world. When running a backup, the display is very clear about the estimated time.

And using Command Center, we know exactly how many backups are running and it gives us clarity on our backup state. It gives us a report and can just send a screenshot of it to the team.

In addition, Commvault gives us a single platform to manage and recover our data. Since we are a research organization, backup is one of the most critical parts of our IT operations and services. Internally, we run it as a managed service, and there is a single console that makes it easy for management to see the performance.

The majority of our file servers are backed up by Commvault. They provide protection against ransomware with their intelligent methods. We haven't experienced a ransomware attack, but I know they have good coverage. They will make sure they recover a backup at any cost.

They need to improve when it comes to large, video file archiving. They're good, but they have not met my expectations as a customer in this area.

Also, HyperScale X does not back up NDMP, or they only use a native file share backup.

I have been using Commvault for three years.

The stability means our team can relax. On average, we used to get six backup failure errors a week, and that has been reduced to two.

The scalability is good and we plan to increase our usage of Commvault in the future.

From the time that our deployment was successfully completed, we have hardly reported any errors.

During deployment we had a couple of issues. Commvault provided us with excellent support to make sure all the issues were fixed. Customer satisfaction is a priority. The local sales and consulting team also extended support to us. They made sure we had a clean installation and a clean operation. Initially, when we had problems, I thought things were not good, but my impression of them changed. I see the real value that they bring, and I appreciate them. I'm a very tough customer, but Commvault's support made sure that I achieved my goals and I respect them. They are patient.

Often, once the sale of a product is done, the salespeople run away. But here, the entire team was involved to make sure they delivered and deployed. After that, they extended support for anything that might require it. They said if anything happens, if there are any issues, here is a number to call to make sure that it is resolved.

After the deployment, both the sales guys and a technical guy came to meet with us to understand our future plans. They listened patiently and they did not try to sell me anything. They just added value. That is the reason they are number one.

They do a quarterly review and explain the latest improvements with Commvault's technical experts. There is also training and certification to help us use the latest features to our benefit.

Positive

Initially, our Commvault was configured for a particular use case. After that, we had a detailed discussion in which they listened to our complete concerns and architecture. From that point, the deployment of HyperScale X was very fast and clean. So when they know the environment, the setup is very good.

For our 350 TB deployment, it took seven days to complete, including networking, installation, updating, and getting a full backup to run. QoS took another few days, making the total time about 10 to 12 days.

Commvault support helped us to deploy the solution. I would especially recommend their professional services.

We look at return of value because as a backup solution, we cannot say it gives us ROI. We have a clear ROV due to the reduced efforts for our team, as well as manpower reductions and fewer failures. And technically, we have a faster backup. We have seen a high return of value, and management is also happy.

The pricing is very competitive. When Commvault knows you are comparing it with the other leading providers, they are ready to compromise on pricing. But you have to make sure you get a long-term commitment on the pricing. Otherwise, when you have a future expansion, they will take advantage of it.

Our company evaluated other solutions, but that process was done by another team. But I read a document that reviewed the evaluation, and they evaluated Veeam as well as Micro Focus Data Protector and NetBackup. They looked at industry reviews and at our specific use case for archiving and backup, and Commvault had the best score.

Pricing is the one area where you have to focus. You need to have a clear plan. HyperScale X is one option and it's nice to use when you have third-party hardware, if you want to have disk-to-disk. 

Make sure you convey your use cases to Commvault's professional services. They will listen to you and they will advise on the options. Also, have an assessment done by Commvault professional services to make sure you have a long-term plan in place. 

Other than the large file archiving that needs improvement, VM is good, cloud backup is good, file server is amazing, and they do a good job when it comes to physical server backup. SQL backup is also good, and Linux back is also amazing.

We are using it for large data center backups, remote office backups, and cloud backups and restorations across all our environments.

We have implemented Threat Scan, and we have had several catches with it. The activity was not malicious, but it did allow us to know that somebody would do something.

It provides us with whatever we define. We have used some of their other tools in the past to tell us how old our data is and the things that we should be able to archive. It gives us a clear picture of our data when we need it.

Commvault has a platform that offers recovery across cloud, on-prem, and SaaS workloads. For it to have all those features is very important because it completely supports our environment.

We are very satisfied with how it protects our data from the endpoint and to its final resting destination, whatever that may be. It could be local storage. It could be cloud storage. We are very satisfied with what it does for us.

There are some features that have significantly reduced our RTOs. It has helped reduce RPOs too. The reduction in RTOs and RPOs has been wonderful.

Commvault has helped our organization reduce its threat detection time. It has helped us identify some possibilities of threats. We have a full scope of different tools for threats across our enterprise, but it has helped isolate a possible threat.

Commvault has helped our organization reduce or avoid downtime. There were several cases where we were able to have a short downtime as compared to having a multi-hour downtime. It could turn a multi-hour downtime into less than 15 minutes.

The VM backups and the recovery from cloud infrastructure are valuable.

It is very easy to use for administrators for monitoring, analyzing, and managing our organization’s data environment. The instructions are pretty straightforward. It is very easy to monitor.

They can improve the VMware recovery and VMware backup. There is an improvement area on the VMware infrastructure. They can make available what they call a VSA proxy. They can have an appliance-type setup to deploy VSA backups and help recover quicker. They can have an appliance ready. Instead of having to have a server dedicated to that and installing software on a server, they can just provide an actual appliance for that.

Personally, I have been using it for over 15 years.

I would rate it an eight out of ten in terms of stability. We have had a few incidents over the years due to certain revisions of the software. We were hit by some of the known bugs, so we had to go back and patch.

It can probably improve on scalability. We have the typical Windows Server deployment. There can be easier automation when deploying new clients and agents.

I love their tech support. As compared to other products we have used, Commvault's tech support is 100% one of the best. They let you know everything, and there is no mystery. They let you know what is happening in the background. I would rate their support a nine out of ten.

Positive

In the past, we have had an IBM solution. We have also used Micro Focus Data Protector. I personally also used NetBackup. It was called something else earlier, but it is NetBackup now.

Our deployment model is hybrid. We have a small cloud, but it is largely on-prem. I have been involved in its deployment multiple times in both scenarios. It is straightforward.

In terms of maintenance, it requires standard patching updates or application updates. It does require that periodically.

We do it all in-house. We have a team for deployment. For deployments, we have four people. We also have a dedicated recovery team due to the size of our organization.

It has helped us with our total cost of ownership with some of the newest features such as live recovery. It has caused our RTOs and RTOs to drop, so it has helped with our total cost of ownership.

It is a little too high. I would like to get more of a consumption model or more of a periodic true-up type of model that is more friendly to the ups and downs that you may have in your data instead of locking into multi-year agreements.

To those evaluating this solution, I would advise understanding the infrastructure that is needed to support the product. Understand what you need and dig into the details of what you have to purchase. That would be my recommendation.

We have not enabled Commvault’s automated policies. We have also not utilized the risk analysis tool.

Overall, I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The solution has the fastest backup and better licensing.

Compared to Rubrik, MongoDB Data Protector, and NetBackup, Commvault is better. The licensing team was quite tricky recently because they stopped the unlimited files for that license. Commvault made a bank of 500GB only, a node-based license can take it, which is disappointing. Reporting needs to be more granular. Also, there should be a showback of data being backed up, and the backup cost to share the cost internally with the department.

I have been using Commvault HyperScale X as a customer. I have almost nine HyperScale nodes and expect four more nodes this year.

The product is scalable. To scale, we need to buy more agents. We’re using HP hardware for HyperScale. We’ve three backup administrators working with the solution.

The customer support is interesting, but they need to work on their competency. My team is happy.

Positive

I work with a couple of other solutions, such as HP Store, Veeam, NetBackup, MongoDB Data Protector, and Rubrik. Commvault is the most competitive in the market because local support is easy and faster.

The solution is easy to implement if you have a proper infrastructure and require two people to set up.

The solution is bundled with hardware licensing. If I want to increase the hardware, I have to buy exactly the same because it's based on the core hardware license. We cannot tell discount because we have an NDA signed with Commvault because of my academic license. The solution is more expensive than NetBackup and Veeam but cheaper than Rubrik.

The solution is easy to use after four months of training. Before implementing, make sure you negotiate well and agree to the terms and conditions in advance. Once you implement it, you will use it for at least the next five to six years. So, you must negotiate and file a contract, the best way to know the cost of ownership in the beginning itself. Overall, I rate the solution an eight-point five out of ten.