Oracle Data Guard Reviews

Provides an active data guard.

I would like to see better failover.

We have been using this solution for five years.

There were no scalability issues.

I would give customer service a rating of 7/10.

I would give technical support a rating of 7/10.

We did not evaluate another solution.

We did not implement through a vendor team.

We did not evaluate other options.

We use Data Guard for online replication from data center to data center for high availability. This is the most important feature.

I'm not really sure about what needs improvement because we use all Data Guard's features successfully.

Pricing is expensive and can use improvement. 

I have been using Oracle Data Guard for about eight years. 

Over the course of eight years, I do think this solution is very stable. 

It is scalable. 

We also use Active Data Guard. We use it to clone the production environment. We constantly use it. 

I have contacted their support. We have been using their support more. We open cases one to five times a month. We use a lot of Oracle databases and because of that, we contact their support a lot. 

The quality of support will depend on the support engineer. If we speak to an agent from the Asian department, it could be a little difficult to understand the terminology. If it's with somebody from the US, Canada, or Europe, they're easier to understand.  

We also use a real application cluster rack database. I have experience with IBM. 

The initial setup was not complex. At first, many years back it was complex, but it's getting easier to set up in the last couple of years. It's been easier in the last few years and has been easier than past versions. 

We had somebody help us with the deployment. 

It is a very useful administrative IT tool. It saves on costs.

I strongly recommend Data Guard. I've been using it for eight years and I would strongly recommend it. 

I'd rate Oracle Data Guard a seven out of ten. To make it a ten, the core base license could be cheaper. The cloud environment would also make it cheaper. 

We implemented Oracle Data Guard for disaster recovery, even though one can't implement disaster recovery across multiple sites using stretch clusters, and implement a server pool at both sites. You have to build a dedicated server pool on each of the locations. 

We only use this solution from a functionality point of view to provide software coverage, so I haven't seen any special functionalities yet. It just really provides recovery in case of a disaster. It also provides a really good product forecast, like what will happen after 2023.

It is a rather complex solution, so it could be more user-friendly.

The solution has been stable so far. I would like to know what the performance impact will be when we go to the really big database of a customer. Because you have to synchronize everything to that effective location, with no data loss extracted, which means you have to go for a really hot interface. So you have to look at the experience for big databases. But so far there have been no problems with big databases.

So far we've only had to open one ticket regarding a failure with the encryption manager of defected fault and it was handled well. We've dealt with Oracle's customer service for eight years, and their service is astonishingly good. 

Oracle has a team that can help you with the setup. We have tested the solution for more than 2 months because moving our labeled, especially our big databases, because it's always an issue. With Data Guard, the main thing was for the application to switch the default recovery site in case of a disaster, and finding out how to score this site afterwards. 

It's a master of making money! If you want to have everything automated and done smoothly, you have to add additional licenses. They should have more standard licenses without us having to go for additional licenses to get full support. 

Regarding infrastructure, most of the time the additional costs for uploading systems, alarming the operations, patching the operating system, caring about the shadow data, all of this needs to be maintained as well. So we end up having additional costs and that's why I would advise others to avoid it, if possible.

I don't really have any advice for other users, because we only use the solution's basic functionality for disaster recovery. Personally, I would advise others to avoid it due to its complexity. On a scale from one to ten, I rate this solution a seven. From a functionality point of view, I can't complain about Data Guard. But I would avoid it as it adds more complexity to a configuration, which is not necessary. From a setup point of view, Oracle has experienced people that will help you with it. 

This is one of the most stable products to support critical DR sites.

It provides us with online replication.

I would like to see replication/fail-over sites.

We have been using this for over five years.

There were not many deployment issues.

There were not many stability issues.

We sometimes had scalability issues with read only.

I would give customer service a rating of 8/10.

I would give technical support a rating of 7/10.

There were no previous solutions.

It was a self-driven setup. It was not too much trouble.

We implemented in-house.

We are under ULA.

We did not evaluate many other solutions.

It simply works.

I use Oracle Data Guard as a DR (disaster recovery) solution. Usually, I use the free license Data Guard, which is called the physical Data Guard.

Oracle Data Guard has a nice feature called the DataGuard snapshot to open the solution in the read-write mode and make some changes to the database. When you finish your work, you can do a rollback to the point that you started the snapshot and continue working.

Sometimes, the technical support team takes time to respond.

I have been using Oracle Data Guard for ten years.

I rate Oracle Data Guard a nine out of ten for stability.

I rate Oracle Data Guard a nine out of ten for scalability.

Sometimes, the technical support team responds quickly; other times, they take time to respond. Usually, the first response or action from the Oracle site on my service request is rapid.

The solution’s initial setup is straightforward.

The solution's deployment time may vary according to factors like the database, storage, size, network facilities, and security. On average, the deployment takes three days.

Oracle Data Guard provides DR and acts as a high-availability solution in case of a crisis in the primary database.

Overall, I rate Oracle Data Guard a nine out of ten.

The Active Data Guard and Fast-Start Failover features are excellent. The Active Data Guard helps in providing read only data for reporting purposes. The Fast-Start Failover is an automatic feature that allows failover from primary database instance/server to the preferred standby instance/server.

I've implemented these features in several projects.

Oracle Data Guard is part of the Oracle Database Enterprise Edition. Oracle Corporation has provided features in Data Guard for its new Database version Oracle 12c.

I've used Oracle Data Guard for over eight years.

Yes, If the underlying Network is not stable, then the Data Guard and Standby Databases will disconnect and not be operational.

No.

Oracle Support is rated an eight out of 10.

If the Database SLA is much higher than Oracle RAC, it is a better product than Data Guard.

The initial setup was simple, but there were problems setting up the connectivity between the different servers. Once these problems are resolved, then the Data Guard was operational.

The Oracle Data Guard is part of the Oracle Database Enterprise Edition, there is no extra licensing cost for the software. However, there is a hardware cost for the number of Standby Databases for each server and storage.

The only other product is Oracle RAC which is very expensive for small businesses as it involves software for clustering, hardware for networking and larger SAN environments.

It's a simple replication solution for small businesses.

We have a primary database and a secondary database. Both databases are on different sites, which are geographically distant. One site is used as the primary site, and the other one is used as the secondary site. We have configured Oracle Data Guard to instantly replicate the data from one database to the other database on a different site. That's what we do with the Oracle Data Guard at this point. It's about business continuity.

We have found the replication feature the most useful. We use this feature the most. 

The ability to recover a database with less effort and the use of Oracle Data Guard Broker to administer the complete environment are also very useful features.

One thing that can be improved is the GUI. It would be good to have a very nice GUI to easily configure and administer, providing different presentations to the database administrator. 

The feature that can be included is the integration with third-party monitoring systems, that is, monitoring systems from other vendors, not only from Oracle.

We have been using Oracle Data Guard since 2010. Currently, we are using the latest version. 

We didn't have any incidents that caused any major problems with this implementation. There aren't any concerns regarding the stability of this solution. 

Once implemented, we can administer the whole environment with no downtime. We can switch over between sites and keep on using Oracle Data Guard like this. Until now, there aren't many things to do. It has been very good. That's why we keep on using this solution.

It was a good experience when we had to replicate it to more than one database and use it for new database creations and all such things. It was very simple, and until now, there are not many problems or gaps in the usability of this solution. It works very well.

We didn't have many problems and much experience with technical support. 

Once implemented, we only have to monitor and take care of the gaps in the solution. Most of them happen because of the connectivity, either bandwidth or something else, or because of the growth of the database or the data being migrated from one database to another.

The initial setup was quite complex, but it was because of a different implementation approach. It's not so complex as such. 

When it was the manual version 9, we migrated it to version 11, and now we migrated again to version 19, which is a different approach for implementing it. In the beginning, it was new and quite complex, but not so much to be done later.

It's mandatory in order to be ready for any incident when someone has a similar environment. 

When we talk about Oracle, we are talking about the venue database, translation of database, online translation of database, and atomic translations. When we need to guarantee the stability of the database, we have to be careful. 

In financial enterprises that use Oracle as a secure relational database management system, the data that you have is very important, and it is the asset that brings the most value to the company. I would recommend that every implementation that goes to the production environment must be done together with Oracle Data Guard. Even small databases can be powered by this solution. 

I would rate Oracle Data Guard a nine out of ten. During all these times and all these years, if I can count the number of times that we had to intervene or we had to do something by ourselves, I can't count more than three times.

We primarily use the solution for disaster recovery.

Once you get used to it, you get to know what to do when certain things happen. However, for a person who's just jumping into it, the management of it and how to implement it probably would be something that could be improved upon. The GUI could be better.

The solution is really very stable. One good thing about it, compared to other products, is that you can just run it and forget about it. Unless you come across some interruptions in the network, it works like a charm.

When you are using an Oracle product you get Oracle support. The support that we received has been good. There were no issues on that front.

We previously used an SQL server.

The implementation is complex for anyone who's jumping into it without any experience. It's all command-line driven implementations. For some, that's a turn-off.

Most of the time taken during deployment was for the restoration of the backup. We chose the backup methods because our DR was across the VPN and the speed for which to make the online backup was too small. Instead, we took the backup from the source and just copied over to the target and then stored it there. That particular process took time. Other than that, the deployment docs for Data Guard made everything pretty quick. It took maybe an hour, or an hour and a half.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten. I'd rate it higher if the GUI was better, but it's a very stable solution.

For disaster recovery, I think this is one of the best native Oracle products that you could use, provided you have the Enterprise edition.