VMware Live Recovery Reviews

We have implemented SRM to replicate around the 800 virtual machines to the data recovery files. Due to the fact that we implemented to data centers as well as the primary and secondary data center, we use SRM to replicate around most of the virtual machines in order to be the secondary site.

If you can plan and create a recovery plan correctly, it will do and replicate virtual machines and when a disaster occurs, you can easily replicate off the secondary site. If you create a proper primary recovery plan, you have good protection.

The most important features that we're using are the replication of VMs as well as the integration with the EMC recovery platform. The replication solutions to replicate the LAN and data storage to the secondary external storage.

The solution is quite stable. We haven't had an issue with the performance.

The solution is very flexible. 

VMware introduced the two next versions of the solution. They are SRM 6.5 and 6.7. I don't have any experience with these two products. However, if I was to talk about version 6, which we are using, at that time we faced a problem specifically when we create recovery plans. After the creation of the recovery plan, sometimes an issue happened in the GUI, in the Center. I'm not sure if that has since been resolved.

We've faced issues with the licensing. If you don't choose a specific license, you can only cover around five or ten virtual machines.

The biggest issue for us is that this product does not have any demo for customers. They should offer demos so that clients can try it out before they commit to buying a license.

At this point, I have been using the solution for about two or three years.

The stability of the solution is very good. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable.

In terms of scalability, you can integrate the POC and you can distribute SRM on three sites. At our project, we use VPLEX architecture to distribute storage between two data centers and therefore we could publish an important file related to SRM virtual machines and the active LANs, which is distributed between two data centers. In terms of scalability and holding of data storage, we can put a doc online whenever we need to.

Our team has around six members for virtual support and maintenance of the VMware infrastructure. In terms of the customers that are related to using the VMware services, there are around 800 people.

Due to the sanctions in my country, in Iran, we can not use direct support from VMware and there is not a partner in my country. Therefore, we need to study, we need to design, we need to support everything directly and focus on providing maintenance service to our customers ourselves.

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's not too complex. 

Deployments can typically take two months.

In the first month, I dedicate focus on learning and conducting POC sessions. For around two or three weeks, I also spend some time implementing SRM at the site.

I am responsible directly for installations.

I work with a specific team that includes three members. I'm responsible as a team lead and VMware engineer. I have two other team members, one member has a specific focus on its storage concept and another is working on the networking.

We are always looking for solutions that are more affordable. SRM is more expensive than, for example, VirtualBox.

I have looked into Zerto. I attended a seminar two years ago. If we ever moved off of this solution, we may switch to that. It is quite affordable and is very hands-on. It may even be easier in terms of deployment. They are very similar solutions overall.

We are using two product versions. We are using product versions 6.0 and 6.5.

We need to use only on-premises deployment models. This due to the fact that there are sanctions in my country. We cannot use the cloud services directly as there is no support.

For customers who are using VMware infrastructure, I recommend using VMware SRM due to the fact that it has the ability to integrate with other products like HP, SRA, or even CSRA. It has good features that integrate well with a storage concept.

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

VMware SRM is used for our disaster recovery site, which is an on-premises colo (Colocation) facility. The general use case is for disaster recovery for three of our applications those being imaging, payroll, and real estate.  

I would say SRM's ability to recover my virtual machines in a timely manner and to perform bi-annual testing are the two things it has provided that are really valuable.  

I would say VMware has room for improvement with this product. I am sure it is probably better in their 7.0 version, but there are still some bugs in the 6.O version that relates to using it with different browsers. I think a lot of what I run into is related to the 6.0 version. I believe a lot of those bugs have been fixed in the UI once you upgrade to 7.0.  

We have been using the VMware SRM solution for about six years.  

The stability of SRM has been excellent. I would give it a nine-out-of-ten. It is a pretty solid solution.  

I believe it would probably scale just fine. I only protect 25 VMs based on our licensing and I do it that way even though I actually have about 200 virtual servers. I can not really say I have done a lot to test scalability. In the six years that I have been dealing with SRM, I have just been protecting those 25 VMs. I do not have hands-on experience as to how well it would scale out.  

I have dealt with the technical support at times in the last year. I would give VMware's tech support a nine-out-of-ten. They are responsive and get you a useful reply.  

Disaster recovery was completely done with physical servers prior to when we started using VMware. When we went to VMware, we started using SRM. So the first time we went with the virtual environment we deployed SRM. We just went straight with SRM just because it is a VMware product. It was already well-integrated and did what we needed it to do.  

The installation and initial setup were pretty straightforward. The deployment, overall, was pretty straightforward. There was a little implementation structure we had to factor in related to my storage array. But besides that, it was pretty straightforward and easy enough all the way around.  

I pay for SRM per year. It is about $3,000 a year for the 25 pack. The package gives you the ability to protect up to 25 virtual machines.  

From what I have seen, a lot of these new hyper-converged systems come with certain components that do a lot of what SRM does. My opinion and advice to people considering SRM would be to look to your hardware vendor or consultant. They may have some replication pieces in there that allow you to possibly not use SRM or go ahead and stay with what you already have. Depending on your situation, different combinations might prove more beneficial either within the architecture or by cost-benefit. There are a lot of options out there now for disc replication and bringing machines up at other locations.  

On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate the SRM as about an eight-out-of-ten.  

We primarily use the solution for migrating our DR site.

We have a system that can now move us to a DR site. I have yet to experience any major crisis, however, so I haven't yet tried it. 

The solution runs well in the background, just in case we need it. 

It is stable. 

The solution has the capability to scale well. 

I don't have any notes for improvement.

I'd like the installment and configuration to be more seamless.

The user experience could be more friendly.

It's, by definition, a complicated product. 

We'd like the entire solution to be more automated. We'd like as much automation as possible. 

The solution is very expensive. 

I've been using the solution for more than five years. 

We haven't had any stability issues. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable.

We have not tried to scale the solution. However, we are aware that it can be quite scalable. It depends on the license. 

The initial setup and configuration can be complex. It's a complicated product. I'd rate the complexity of implementation eight out of ten. 

It took us a few months to fully deploy the solution. 

We had an in-house team and professional service to manage the setup process. We did not do it fully by ourselves.

The pricing is very high. However, you get what you pay for. You need to invest a lot of money in order to gain any functionality. In order to have a DR site and maintain it, you need the investment. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. It's expensive. However, it's a good investment. 

We primarily use the solution for disaster recovery.

The replication is the solution's most valuable feature. If we have some issues on the VM in the main site we can migrate it to another site automatically. 

The configuration assembly for the VMware is good.

If you have a failover case, you need to work on it manually. It would be helpful if this could be automated. It would simplify things.

The stability of the solution is great. We've tested the system and haven't discovered any bugs.

The solution is very scalable.

Technical support is amazing. They have a great background in VMware issues and engineering.

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's quite simple. However, those that implement it must have some experience in virtualization. In terms of deployment, you can have a demo regarding SRM and need to apply the scenario on it. Afterward, you can apply it to your environment. It's very easy.

I handled the implementation myself.

You need a license for SRM. We have a permanent license. There aren't additional fees if you need access to support. However, you can upgrade to another support tier. If you like, you can pay extra for premium support.

We're using the on-premises deployment model.

I'd recommend the solution. I'd rate it ten out of ten.

We use SRM for our failover strategy. It is for disaster recovery on failover.

Our systems fail over using SRM. So, we do a big bang DR, which is biannual, and we fail over our fairly massive Epic electronic health record (EHR) and our core applications. It takes us about 30 minutes to fail over using SRM, which is pretty good. In most hospitals that have Epic installed, Epic does the audit to make sure that we can fail over if something were to happen. Normally, sites will have a DR solution specific to the EHR, but right now, our pain point is the third-party tier-one clinical applications.

We've had configuration issues on occasion. We start to fail over, and then we have to call it off because the configuration is not right, or the data stores aren't configured correctly in the secondary data center. Oftentimes, it is just the experience level of the team, and we have to bring in the vendor to help and validate our configuration.

I have been using this solution for probably five years.

Their support is excellent.

I would rate it an eight out of 10. There is some complexity there, and that's where I would bring it down from a 10.

We use the product to implement discovery for server and database solutions.

The software is user-friendly. It has a good and effective user interface.

The product's stability could be better.

We have been using VMware SRM for eight years.

I rate the product's stability an eight out of ten. Sometimes, we need to restart the system as it stops working. It needs improvement.

We have 400 VMware SRM users in our organization. I rate its scalability a ten out of ten.

The technical support services are good.

The initial setup is straightforward. We need to download the application file and deploy it in vCentre Server. Later, we need to register a static manager to create a bridge between two environments. After that, we check if the static environment is configured with the data centers.

The software is expensive. There is a one-time cost involved in purchasing the license.

I recommend VMware SRM to others and rate it a ten out of ten. I advise other users to always install the latest version.

We use it for disaster recovery.

I like how VMware SRM is able to automate and orchestrate disaster recovery.

The price, in general, could be lower.

I've been using this solution for probably three years now.

It is a stable solution.

It is scalable.

My experience with technical support has been fine.

The installation is straightforward if you have the required skill level. It took about a week for the initial setup.

The price could be lower, in general. My clients pay for an annual license.

I recommend VMware SRM and rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten.

The interface of VMware SRM is quite basic and doesn't offer much in terms of features. The solution is strong when it comes to protection and analytics, with the latter being added later on. Protection has been the major feature that we have been using, and it has been quite effective for our needs.

The two main areas for improvement in VMware SRM are pricing and administration guides. Pricing is always a consideration, and it could be improved. The administration guides can be complicated and difficult to use, so it would be helpful if it was made easier. Administrators don't want to find themselves in a situation where they can't find what they need, so it's important to make sure that the tools are easy to use.

I have been using VMware SRM for six to seven years, which is also the longest experience I have had with any VMware product. Our company recommended it to one of our customers initially, and after that, we had complete freedom to implement it for them. It was a good experience overall. Additionally, my company has a partnership with VMware.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

The scalability of VMware SRM is good. Scalability for Azure and AWS is also good. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

My company deals with enterprise-sized customers.

VMware's vendor support was good. I rate VMware's technical support an eight or nine out of ten. To be more specific, I rate it an eight out of ten.

Positive

I rate the initial setup process of the solution a seven or eight out of ten on a scale where one is difficult, and ten is easy. The setup process was not too difficult or too easy. Essentially, we were imaging all their physical servers on the cloud.

In our company, the deployment process takes about an hour. In some cases, due to the size of the data we were dealing with, it took a couple of days, which was the maximum, but usually, it was completed within a few hours.

I rate the solution's pricing a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is the lowest and ten is the most expensive.

l always recommend others to have a POC in place. It's always about whether a solution suits your environment or not. So if it does, then go for it. If it doesn't, one should go for another solution. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.