Veeam Data Platform Reviews

We like the alerting, reporting, and the dashboard features.

Using the reporting and dashboard features has allowed us to remain proactive with our infrastructure such as identifying datastores with high IOPS or an ESXi host with high memory utilization. Veeam ONE delivers this data in a user-friendly format that makes it easy to recognize issues before they become significant.

Veeam ONE does not easily recognize hardware issues within the infrastructure out of the box which costs some administrative overhead.

We have been using Veeam ONE for just over one year.

No issues encountered.

Stability has been perfect. Definitely no complaints in that area.

We have a fairly small infrastructure so scalability isn’t something we’ve tested.

We have not needed to contact Veeam customer service.

We have not needed to contact Veeam technical support. Any configuration issues have been solved using their knowledge base.

We used System Center Operations Manager (SCOM) prior to using Veeam ONE. We switched to Veeam ONE when the decision to use a third party solution was implemented.

Deployment was very easy and straightforward.It was mostly “Next, Next, Next, Finish” during the deployment.Connecting Veeam ONE to our vCenter and creating the SQL database on a remote host were the only details that required any focus.

We implemented Veeam ONE in-house, specifically with just one administrator; very easy to implement.

ROI is difficult to measure in a cost center since we don’t produce revenue.

Veeam ONE was procured through a promotion that coupled it with Veeam Backup and Replication. We were interested in a backup solution for our hypervisor environment however Veeam ONE quickly proved to be a solution we intend to license for the long term. As I’ve already mentioned with the ease of setup and use, costs have been minimal.

Veeam ONE is actually complimenting a different product leveraged through a third party contract. The third party is responsible for monitoring our business-critical systems, however, we prefer Veeam ONE because it recognizes issues before the third party solution does and, because no Veeam ONE agent is required, we’re comfortable using two monitoring solutions with no significant resource overhead costs.

Veeam ONE is the perfect solution for monitoring and managing your hypervisor infrastructure. However we rely on a different solution for systems that are not part of our hypervisor infrastructure such as our database servers.

We use this solution to backup documents, photographs, video tapes, and data in the cloud. It is a public cloud and implementation is easy because all you need to do is create a new user, and then you can easily load the data.

First, I like that this solution is fast. Second, I like the stability and flexibility.

If you don't have technical knowledge about these services, monitoring the virtual machines is hard. The solution is flexible if you have the correct knowledge though, so if you have knowledge about newer technical services, it's easy.

I have been using this solution for about six years.

It is a pay-as-you-go solution. There are four people using it in my company.

The technical support is so helpful because the team is in the USA and the people are fast. We get answers fast and the connectivity is fast. It's so good. I would rate the technical support as a ten out of ten.

The solution is really easy to set up.

Our licensing cost is $200 a year.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I would rate this solution as a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for database backup. We are customers of Veeam. 

We've had a bad experience using Snapshots from VMware and so we now use Storage Snapshot which is much better and very safe.

I think the backup and integration could be improved. 

I've been using this solution for five years. 

Veeam provides good stability. 

The solution is scalable. 

The technical support is very good and they are very responsive. 

The initial setup is straightforward. It took us about 10 minutes to deploy and configure, and maybe an hour in total to implement. Two people use the solution in our organization and we are currently considering whether to increase usage. 

I rate this solution nine out of 10. 

I am using Veeam Backup Replication for backups.

The backups we have been receiving from Veeam Backup Replication on-premise have been good.

The cloud backups from Veeam Backup Replication have not been good. Addiotnaally, the backups of Office 365 and the overall performance can always be improved.

I have been using Veeam Backup Replication for approximately seven years.

We have not encountered any problems with the stability of Veeam Backup Replication.

The scalability is good from Veeam Backup Replication.

The technical support from Veeam Backup Replication is good.

Veeam Backup Replication can be quite expensive for Office 365 because its license is per user and not for the space that you use. You need one license for each user. If the user only uses a few files on one hard drive, you need a license to back up these files. It was better to have a license model, such as in the Cohesity solution. Cohesity has a license for a space that you use. It's more useful in this case because the license for backup data is on-premises is for CPU. The license is based on how many CPUs you have but it does not depend on how many users use the CPU. 

I have evaluated Cohesity. I have a demo version that they gave me.

I rate Veeam Backup Replication an eight out of ten.

We use this solution to replicate the SQL server to another site.

We tried to set up the application from SQL to SQL. We did this for the department, but the process took us almost a year. After we had signed off on the solution we noticed that it was affecting the performance of the SQL.

The data backup replication has been the most useful feature. Previously, we copied the data hub to an external hard drive but now we are able to store the backup on one of the depository services.

We struggled to stabilize the application. We had an incident which resulted in a loss of data and have terminated this solution due to lack of support from the Veeam team.

I have been using this solution for three months. 

We have had issues connecting to the server, specifically connecting to the head office to be on the same network. 

We have not tried to scale this solution but it is possible. 

Support for this solution could be improved. We have been frustrated getting help via email. When dealing with the support team, they were not knowledgable on the solution and how it works. 

The initial setup was complex and required assistance from the team at Veeam. After the installation, the solution does not function as we expected. The deployment took two weeks. 

This is an expensive solution and came at a higher cost than expected. We were charged higher prices than shown on the website by partners of Veeam. We were not able to buy a few licences to begin with. We had to buy five licences from the beginning before knowing if the solution worked for us. The initial contract for the solution was not clear on which services were to be paid for and which were free. 

We first completed a POC in a test environment which worked well. However, when moving over to a production environment, we experienced some issues. 

We would have benefitted from more guidance on what options were available based on our internal systems. 

I would rate it a five out of ten. 

The solution is based on the IAF solutions that are specific for moving the data centers that we have to the cloud. This is the main tension for us right now. We are investing in some past solutions, however, we're not using them yet. There are some tests, some small tests, however, we are moving IAF solutions in order to move our data centers.

We like Veeam as it is the kind of backup that has basic snapshots. It's very useful for us as we have a lot of virtual servers. This is the most impressive thing that we see. 

There are some special features from Veeam. They have the replication and the kind of backup that we can use. We have a very strong solution in the network. Due to the fact that we have several internal DMS's, we needed to make a special design. Veeam adapted to that. That's why we choose it. With all the solutions, it was not possible to use the actual network structure that we had. Veeam made it possible.

The solution is stable and the performance is good.

The product can scale. 

For us, it's important that the products can be adapted to different network scenarios. This is the biggest problem. The issues that we had when we selected the products were due to the specifics on the network from a security point of view. Security for us is the most important feature that we need to work with. THey need to ensure that it's possible to secure the network.

The initial setup is complex. 

We use several proxies, reverse proxies, due to our needs. It's not so common. There's not too much information and it's not so useful. They could develop it more and they could market it better. Not many users have this scenario. The reverse proxy, for us, was an important piece to implement. If a user has a good view of the reverse proxying during the implementation, it's better.

The solution has been implemented in the company for about one year at this point. 

The solution is very stable. We needed to buy the biggest server to accommodate it. The requirements were very high. That's why we started late when they decided to use it. However, after we followed the recommendations and followed the certification of equipment servers and storage that we needed, it's okay. Now we find it's very stable.

The scalability is very good. Everybody uses it. In general, we have about 125,000 people using it.

We likely will increase usage in the future. 

We needed some technical support at the start. It was good. Here in Brazil, they are from Brazil and they have helped us too in the design phase. That said, the product is very good. We don't need exactly support for any issue that we found. We've only needed some help for the implementation, the start of the design.

In terms of the implementation, it's still being rolled out. It's very big and there is a very sparse structure that we have. It's global. It will take about two years for it to be completely implemented, due to the places and locations we need to implement it. We need to make and design for each place as it is not standard. That's why it takes a long time. We prefer to take it in parts to be careful with the implementation, in order to see if it's really what we want. Therefore, for us, the setup is quite complex.

The results have been good so far. People are liking it very much. That said, we still have some designs to do for other places that we have implemented.

Due to the implementation, we are doing, there are about 50 people working on the deployment. This is just an estimation. It's quite a large project.

We pay the licensing fees on a yearly basis. There may be a few additional costs, however, I cannot speak to those exactly. Our technical team might have a better idea of what is involved in terms of licensing arrangements. 

We tried the base license, however, it's my understanding that it wasn't enough and we needed a bit more. 

We are a Veeam partner.

In terms of types of deployments used, at this time it's been working more on-premises, however, we have intentions to use the cloud. We are moving several loads to the cloud. 

I would advise new users that the design is the most important piece. There are several options in the ways that you can implement it. My recommendation is to look at the strategy. Networking becomes very important. Having a good design at the outset makes things easier. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

Our primary use cases for Veeam Backup & Replication are backing up to the cloud, backing up to a couple of deduplication appliances, and backing up to local disk - compressed to disk.

Veeam Backup & Replication is far more dynamic as far as being able to generate backup jobs. We used to use a product called NetWorker, and at the time the version of NetWorker we had would not back up to the cloud. I think it does now, but we're not using it anymore. But at the time, NetWorker was fairly new and it was just a tape backing up the disc. So Veeam is far better dealing with virtual environments and the cloud as targets. The capability with Veeam is just there.

Veeam Backup & Replication works. It integrates very well with VMware, but not so well with Nutanix, but that's common, I understand. I have both VMware and Nutanix virtual environments and I'm backing up through the same Veeam services. I have proxies running on both environments. Like I said, integration with VMware is excellent with very granular recovery while with the Nutanix environment it is not as intuitive, not as readily available.

In terms of what could be improved, when creating a backup job with Veeam, you can create a daily backup, but it doesn't do it within that job. It does not give you the ability to also set the terms for monthly and/or weekly backups. It has to be a separate job. It gets clunky to manage the timeframes where you don't want a daily to run on this day and creating weeklies. And you don't want a daily to run on this day doing monthlies. That is hard to deal with. It would be really nice if you could do it through a single command line or a single interface.

It is called a father son, or grandfather, type backup structure. The retention periods are not consistent or not available for different retention periods within that job. Retention periods being daily, weekly, monthly.

As for what I would like to see in future releases, just the integration to other virtual environments. In our case, the Nutanix environment is incomplete with the enterprise manager recovery tools part of it. That's where it is incomplete on the Nutanix side as well on the ESX. On the VMware side, the ability to set your retention policy within a job over multiple periods would be really nice if that was doable.

I have been using Veeam Backup & Replication for well over a year, probably 18 months, maybe even close to two years.

The product relies fairly greatly on the implementations of the storage vendors. For example, we were using large storage in AWS and it was using Microsoft. It's the format - ReFS, the recovery, the storage, the dis format, the volume formatting. We had a serious failure and lost six 30 terabyte ReFS volumes in AWS and lost nine 15 terabyte ReFS volumes on our local storage. I was able to recover the local storage in a little over two months. To recover the AWS storage of our volumes we calculated would have taken between six months to a year and probably cost us several tens of thousands of dollars.

So our volumes are still sitting in recoverable AWS in the case where if we actually have to recover something it's doable at significant cost. But we don't use ReFS storage anymore.

I'm not big. We have 200 employees and maybe 50 or 60 or 70 VM's, something like that. We have a data domain appliance that we rent space on that is offsite. We have an extra grade appliance and I have a bunch of CADA disks on a net app for just local storage. If that's scalable, I don't know. My understanding is that I can create more, but everything is local. So I don't have to have remote backup servers. But I understand that with my license I can create remote backup servers, as well.

That sounds like it's pretty straightforward. You link it and you can move backups from one site to another and then recover them off that other site. From what I've read, it sounds amazing, but from what I've done, I've never had to go into any great remote control, remote access or remote sites. So I don't know as far as the scalability goes. It sounds like it can scale up the ying yang. The one thing that I'm aware of though, is that when you're doing the backup, when you're scaling, you wind up with tears, because you have one server backing up a set of VM's, or an environment. And you have another server backing up another environment or another set of VM's.

If you lose one backup server it is able to catalog those backups from another server. I know you can catalog those backups to another server to recover. So it's dynamic. I've had to do that. I've had to build a new server and then recover the catalogs and recover data. It is powerful, it is capable. I like it.

In terms of direct users, it is me and three others that have gotten their fingers into it a little bit by the documentation that I've written on how to do something step by step. But there is really only me managing the system.

We are using this product extensively now. 

From the time that we installed it until now, we had to switch from CPU licenses to what they call UL, Universal Licensing. Because CPU licensing was only available on a VMware infrastructure and when we entered do our Nutanix infrastructure, we had to change the licensing model. There was a small cost to doing that because of the way it's licensed. We have not had to increase our license count yet. I will be shortly implementing another version of the Veeam. I think it's a very simple license, it's the five user license. It's in the VLU, but it's not the enterprise version of it, for our computer science department. They will be managing their backups with Veeam and a technician who I will be training.

That ReFS issue was one of the things that I had with technical support. For the most part they have been very responsive. They have been helpful when it's actually a Veeam issue. With the ReFS thing, they couldn't do anything about that and they referred me to Microsoft, which was a fricking waste of time. I'm so ticked with Microsoft.

We used to use NetWorker for 10 or 12 years.

We made the switch because of the virtualization and cloud access as well as disc storage on the version of NetWorker that we were running. NetWorker requires a physical appliance and the upgrades to NetWorker were cumbersome. The next generation of NetWorker, if we had stayed, would have required a rebuild of our hardware, which we've done once and was a pain in the backside. At that point, I don't think we could have run NetWorker because it wants to go to talk directly to devices and manage devices at a hardware level. So you can't virtualize the connections. So our NetWorker product had to reside on a physical machine.

I don't know if that has changed since we haven't used NetWorker for probably three - four years. We haven't done any upgrades in four years. So the move to Veeam or Commvault, which was the two that we were looking at, was primarily because we had local vendor support for both products. The move to Veeam was well priced, Commvault was out to lunch as far as dollars and cents. We are a fairly small shop and the pricing was just outrageous for Commvault 300 virtual machines. 

Veeam natively lives in a virtual environment. NetWorker couldn't. We also used to use a Norton product. I have forgotten the name of it - it starts with an S.

Those were retired when we started using Veeam. It has been four years since any of those were active, but those were for our remote sites. They only backed up the tape. We didn't explore Backup Exec in a virtual situation. Just didn't even look at it. I don't know if that was a mistake. I don't think so. Like I said Veeam, works really well. I am very pleased.

The documentation to set it up was great. I think we were up and running in about 30 minutes. That was to set up the backup server. Then there is building other services - the proxies, the repository manager, the enterprise manager for managing backups and recoveries. But to set up the backup server itself was super easy.

We just did it in house.

My advice to anyone considering Veeam Backup & Replication, is, like anything, to build a test site - do it on a test environment. Don't mess with your live system right off the bat, play with it, get familiar with it. It took me about about four, five or six weeks before I felt reasonably comfortable and built up in our production environment and the various servers. I started backing up and playing with a couple of Veeams that were smaller, and not backed up to the NetWorker, but I was backing them up and looking at how I could do recoveries. Eventually, I could do a full Veeam recovery and I could move it to another site and recover it, and all that sort of thing. I watched over time how retention worked. During that time I was asking questions of the Veeam technical support, too. They were very responsive.

So do it in a test environment if you don't have any training. I read online documents and went through a free Veeam school online, a bunch of documents, and there were a couple of YouTube type tutorials. I did a lot of that sort of thing as well. But it was all done ad hoc from work, I didn't go and do any formal train. So build the test environment and play.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Veeam Backup & Replication an eight. It's got room for improvement.

We use this solution to back up our two VMware sites, and some physical boxes.

Mainly, it is used for our two VM sites at either campus.

It works with the client. We have it on a clustered SQL which works well.

We have local backups at either site, as well as some backups going to an external storage appliance. It gives us information about what is going on.

We are also using replication.

It has improved the way that our organizations function.

It's fairly easy to manage and set up. 

Once you get it working, it's fairly reliable and fixes itself. It's pretty good at keeping the backups running.

It works well with SharePoint.

The initial setup could be simplified. It takes a bit to find the documentation. 

It takes some time to get through the knowledge base and the changes in the versions over time.

Trying to find everything on how to configure it and set it up can get frustrating in trying to sort it out.

I have been using this solution for three to four years.

I am using version 10.

This solution is stable. Once we have all of the backups working, it never has any issues, except for the server going off, but that is a network issue or during the time that it's self-healing.

It keeps going and keeps running.

It's a scalable solution. I added one. We have a couple of proxies at either campus with one backup server with an enterprise manager on it. It works well.

I am the only person in our organization who is using this solution.

I have used technical support in three or four cases. They were able to help me. They are pretty good. I would rate them a nine out of ten.

We were using Microsoft Data Protection Manager and NetBackup. We decided to go with Veeam after testing it out, as it seemed to work better than the other products we were using.

The initial setup is okay. 

It just took a while to try to sort out what is going on with it.

Review the documentation and their knowledge base on how to set it up and configure it. 

It takes a bit to get it sorted out and to figure it out, but once you get it working it just keeps working.

I would rate Veeam Backup Replication a nine out of ten.