We use Dell EMC for a large portion of our general infrastructure and hardware stacks.
We use Dell EMC AppSync for replicating between our development and production systems. We primarily used it for large database portability or similar scenarios.
Dell AppSync is an efficient data management platform designed to streamline operations, enhance productivity, and ensure quick and reliable access to data across enterprises.

| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Dell AppSync | 15.2% |
| IBM Storage Defender Copy Data Management | 16.2% |
| Perforce Delphix | 13.5% |
| Other | 55.1% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 3 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 1 |
| Large Enterprise | 6 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 26 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 14 |
| Large Enterprise | 33 |
Specializing in application-consistent, automated data protection, Dell AppSync is a user-friendly solution that supports businesses with seamless backup, cloning, and recovery of critical data. It offers a comprehensive approach to managing application environments, making it indispensable for organizations seeking reliability and agility in data management.
What are the most important features of Dell AppSync?Dell AppSync finds specialized applications in finance, healthcare, and IT sectors where data management efficiency is critical. For instance, in the finance industry, timely data recovery ensures uninterrupted service delivery. Similarly, in healthcare, it safeguards patient data, enabling quick access to information when required. This adaptability makes it a preferred choice for industries where seamless data management is key.
Dell AppSync was previously known as AppSync, Replication Manager.
Getronics
| Author info | Rating | Review Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Programmer Analyst at Mankato Clinic, Ltd. | 3.5 | For five years, Dell EMC AppSync provided fast, reliable data replication, significantly improving our operations. Ultimately, its lack of flexibility and one-to-one replication constraint forced us to switch to an in-house system, despite sacrificing some speed. |
| Pre-sales specialist at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees | 4.5 | As a sales person, I find Dell EMC AppSync a very helpful, easy-to-use, and stable storage management solution with good support, rated 9/10. My main suggestion is to add cloud transfer features. |
| Tower Architect at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees | 3.5 | I valued its snap mirror and 3rd-party backup integration for larger backup windows. However, I encountered complex setup, LUN management problems, and stability issues requiring agent restarts, indicating needs for better snapshot speed. |
| Engineer at a logistics company with 1,001-5,000 employees | 4.0 | I found the solution offers easy replica management and consistent data recovery, improving organizational recovery. However, the replica mount function is slow with Veritas, and the IRC Client occasionally malfunctions. Initial setup requires careful attention to connectivity. |
| EMC Storage Specialist at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees | 5.0 | I found EMC Replication Manager easy to deploy and scalable, integrating well with EMC arrays and VMware. Despite needing patches, it was reliable with good support, though the market has evolved. |
| Sr. Systems Analyst with 51-200 employees | 4.0 | I appreciate the consistent application snaps and good EMC support. However, the GUI becomes unusable with many bookmarks, causing memory errors. Setup was complex, and I'd recommend the newer AppSync version. |
| Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees | 5.0 | I find EMC RM a very useful, reliable solution for automated data replicas, aiding backup and analysis. Its complexity and initial setup are drawbacks, but it delivers good customer ROI. |
| Engineer at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees | 4.0 | I found Replication Manager effectively automates replication, providing consistent test/dev environments. Despite initial compatibility issues and slow support, it became stable and easy to use, significantly improving efficiency and ROI. I recommend it. |
| Senior Systemms Administrator at a tech services company with 51-200 employees | 4.0 | I find Replication Manager excellent for its easy integration with SQL/Exchange, VSS, and Recoverpoint. Its straightforward setup and stability are great. However, I'd only recommend it for small-scale environments due to its limited scalability for large enterprises. |
| Senior Systems Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees | 4.0 | I've used this for 10 years, appreciating its application-consistent replication and seamless failover. Customer service is excellent. However, I found implementation complex, with deployment issues, despite its overall simplicity and great functionality. |

We use Dell EMC for a large portion of our general infrastructure and hardware stacks.
We use Dell EMC AppSync for replicating between our development and production systems. We primarily used it for large database portability or similar scenarios.
It shortened the data applications between our development and production because it had a significant speed increase and reduced complexity.
While the system is still running, a large portion of the rotator could occur.
There were some limitations in the product that prompted us to shift away from it. You could only have one AppSync profile per server to target where the data could be replicated to. There were a few specific feature limitations in terms of flexibility that required the development of an alternative. However, that was the only flaw.
In relation to, the replication destinations. We wanted to collect data from multiple systems and then replicate it on a single system. AppSync was based on a one-to-one replication footprint, which was the limitation that we had encountered. We needed to combine several systems into one. That was one of the scenarios provided by the solution.
I would like to have the ability to bit the same system with multiple AppSync replications would definitely be beneficial to us. And general flexibility enhancements.
We recently transitioned off of it, but we used it a lot, to begin with. We switched to a new solution this year, but we've been using it quite a bit. That would have been at the end of last year, in the fourth quarter of 2021.
I believe we divided that into a few different categories; however, we may still use AppSync for some of our use cases. But, I know in my team, we actually moved into an in-house built system that our development team put together. We basically created an internal edition of it.
Prior to transitioning, we used Dell EMC AppSync for five years.
We use it on-premises, but we also have a VMware-based office cloud solution. It was with both our on-premises and private cloud scenarios.
It was very reliable. We didn't have any reliability issues with it at all during its useful life for us.
In terms of scalability, it kept up very well with our rate of growth. We have no issues with the scalability of this solution. On that front, we've received nothing but positive feedback.
This solution is used by no more than two or three system administrators and developers.
Technical support was good. We had a positive experience with Dell EMC AppSync.
We work on a lot of projects that revolve around generalized, on-premise storage arrays. In general, we have a pretty mixed bag of other solutions.
One of our primary storage solutions is Dell Isilon.
We may have used another solution in the past, but I can't recall. I don't recall the situation or recall much before AppSync.
One of our in-house solutions features the flexibility that we require in terms of replicating selectively for mobile systems. The advantage is the increased flexibility and ability to run some of the scenarios that we desire. We haven't been able to match AppSync's speed or reliability. So we've gained the flexibility we require, but at a cost in terms of both speed and flexibility in our current solution.
The initial setup was pretty straightforward. I believe one of the advantages we saw was that the configuration was manageable.
I can't tell you how long that took. I believe the onboarding process was fairly simple and took about a month or two. I believe we had a simple implementation strategy in which we focused on a few specific items and then gradually expanded into other areas as we progressed.
I believe we primarily performed an in-house integration. We worked directly with Dell EMC on some of the initial post-sales issues.
It was primarily set up and managed by an in-house team.
I believe we were pleased with the ROI. I would have to look at something that shows some details on it, but I believe it was generally regarded as a successful ROI.
I believe we paid them on a yearly basis. I'm not sure what they were, though. As I recall, we paid them on a yearly basis and thought it was a costly solution for the use case.
Fungible Storage isn't something that we have implemented, but have evaluated. I was curious to see what the offers were and if there was anything we could use, but I didn't have any specific need or use case in mind.
I would say that it's a good solution to look into if speed and reliability are primary drivers, as well as flexibility is. It's something I would recommend.
I would rate Dell EMC AppSync a seven out of ten. It has excellent performance and reliability, and with a little more flexibility, it could be nearly perfect.
We are a solution provider and Dell AppSync is one of the products that we implement for our clients. I am not a technical person but know these products from a sales perspective.
Dell EMC AppSync is primarily used for managing storage and we sell it as part of our system.
This solution is very helpful and easy to use.
You cannot manage storage without this solution.
It would be helpful if this product has features for transferring to the cloud.
This is a stable product. You have to use it in order to use our system.
This is a product that you don't need to scale because it's part of the system.
Technical support for this product is very good.
We did not use another similar product before this one.
The initial setup is very easy.
There is no effort required for maintenance.
The cost of this is incorporated into the system that we sell.
We did not evaluate other storage management solutions.
I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.
Snap mirror and implementation with 3rd party backup software.
It gave us enough time to do the backup for big databases and mount them in a certain location, from there on tapes. So basically made the production database independent of the backups, so we could have the backup window larger.
Speed of the snapshots, the way how lun's are managed.
About 2 years.
Some issues with Luns management, luns weren't expired. Also issues with its own database. It didn't marked the unmounted databases and those had to be marked manually.
Yes. Periodically I needed to restart the agent on the client side and sometimes on the server side.
No issues.
Quite good, there was a very good specialist.
Technical Support:Technical support was the same with customer interaction.
I did. However the ones which was a little bit later it fixed some errors, no extra features offered.
Yes it was rather complex, way too many prerequisites.
I've took over the product with almost 0 knowledge about it. The person which handled this product left the company before any knowhow transfer so basically, I don't know who or in what conditions was implemented.
Don't know, software was bought and I was just managing it.
No. I was the person in charge to manage it and didn't consider other options.
In few steps you can configure your replicas without using auxiliary scripts. Easy management. Almost 'plug and play' solution. Provides consistent replicas.
Yes. Recovery some data in Oracle Database. Just mount my replica in other host and my DBA and Application Teams can recover some data with no downtime to the company.
Mount replica function through EMC RM needs to be faster because when you are using Veritas volumes with mirrors the mount routine is too late (the mount process time is directly proportional the volume size when you are using Veritas Volume Manager (vxvm)).
2 years.
No.
Sometimes IRC Client doesn’t work properly and you can only see when some jobs fail and something is wrong and you need restart the IRC Client.
No.
4 out of 5.
Technical Support:Technical Support: 3
Engineer Support: 5
It’s an attention point was certify if RM Server and clients can connect on the Storage Arrays and all Storage certificates were imported well. If these step is not OK, you can’t configure and add the Storage Arrays on Replication Manager Server and you can spend some time troubleshooting.
Vendor Team implemented the solution. I would rate their level is 3 ‘cause sometimes we needed check all docs and execute steps.
Best practices: Ask the Vendor if you can see other enterprises which usE EMC RM; if possible ask with other IT professionals which work with the product; try to solve all your questions; Evaluate if the tool is compliant with your enterprise’s RPO and RTO. These are a few best practices to decide if you can proceed with the implementation or not.

Integration into EMC's other products (Arrays) and Vmware ESX.
This production was used to integrate with EMC's arrays and to Clone Vmware datastores, this product was very easy to use and understand what it was doing under the covers, it also made training staff on the product a lot easier.
N/A
2-3 Years.
No, installation and configuration were pretty straightforward.
Calls did get logged with the vendor (EMC) and it was recommended to install several Replication Manager patches.
No issues with scalabilty, we expanded the solution to include several Replication Manager agent servers and even added a DR Replication Manager environment.
EMC has always been easy to deal with in reporting problems or asking for help on any configuration issues we might have.
Technical Support:EMC has always been easy to deal with in reporting problems or asking for help on any configuration issues we might have.
Installation and configuration were pretty straightforward. Installation was straight forward, as long as you follow the guides that EMC have released, i found them very good and easy to follow.
This was implemented by our in-house team.
Wasn't involved, so can't comment on this.
The market has moved on quite a bit since i implemented this solution. However if you wanted a reliable product to work with new or existing EMC products then i would recommend taking a look at Replication Manager.
App Consistent Snaps/Bookmarks and Snap and Mount function.
We have application consistent snaps of SQL mounted to development VM’s daily.
Each replication manager installation can only handle so many records. If you have over a certain number of bookmarks or snaps, the GUI becomes un-usable.
3 years.
No.
I occasionally get an “out of memory error” from the GUI. I think this has to do with us overloading the application.
Yes, if you have over a certain number of bookmarks or snaps, the GUI becomes un-usable.
With replication manager, EMC support is pretty good, it seems to be a small team of knowledgeable engineers.
Technical Support:With replication manager, EMC support is pretty good, it seems to be a small team of knowledgeable engineers.
No previous solution.
It is fairly complex. There is a lot of prerequisite software that has to be installed on the client side.
It was installed by a partner. Their level of expertise was adequate.
Consider using the newer version (Appsync) instead.
The EMC RM is a very useful technology for consistent data replicas for a significant application portfolio like MS SQL, MS Exchange, Oracle DB etc. Our customers are using RM mostly for backup offloading, data analysis (by making an automated database clone) and so on. Automation is the word. All tasks are performed without user intervention, for example at night. And also it is very reliable solution.
Not mine, but customers. As I said, mostly the automated process of data movement like databases for analysis, testing and development. It allows customers to focus on the application and database, not on servers and storage infrastructure.
The product needs to be less complex (compatibility, solution enabler etc.). Nowadays the AppSync seems to look very good.
I've been using the solution for about 5 years.
Sometimes, mostly caused by compatibility issues.
No.
No.
Yes, as an IT consultant I'm using Appsync from EMC which is partly a RM replacement and also Netapp's SnapManager product family with Netapp storage arrays.
It's a bit complex, you have to check compatibility twice for all products involved.
I'm a consultant so I'm implementing RM as part of our solutions to the customers. So the question is not relevant to me.
It depends on what is RM used for but generally we have good customers replies on investment returns.
It's easy to evaluate the product without buying it so take the chance and try it.
There are always other options but with EMC storage on the backend, this is the only solution (with AppSync) with automated processing and support for many current applications.
The automatisation of the replication process is the most valuable feature.
Before we used to manually synchronize the replica volumes with source ones, then mount replica volumes on target servers, then starting databases with new parameters.
With Replication Manager we just configure/schedule the replication process once and the work is done automatically.
The product can be used to create/refresh an environment similar to production one. The replica environment can be used for test&dev or backup reasons.
The replication process can be scheduled with Replication Manager and this is a real benefit: Imagine that you need the image of your production environment at midnight. No employee is available at this time to do the work, but with Replication Manager schedules you can do it whitout problem.
Replication Manager is an orchestrator of Replication: it uses several products to enhance the replication automatisation. I think that the compatibility matrix should be extended, especially with UNIX environments.
17 months from June 2012 to Novembre 2013 : I've tested the product on local lab, then installed it on a customer site and accomplished support/maintenance tasks.
Yes, due to incompatibility between Replication Manager 5.4.0 and VXVM5.0 (HPUX): The replica didn't mount successfully on target host in the beginning.
This issue was resolved after Replication Manager 5.4.2 version was released.
No.
No.
When I deployed the Replication Manager and detected issues, I found that the technical support was not really helpful because they spent a lot of time to found a hotfix which resolved my problem. I think that now the product is more mature and technical support also.
No, we used scripts and manual interventions to create/refresh a replica environment.
Setup steps are easy to complete, but for my case I detected some incompatibilities and this was not helpful...
I think that with newer versions the setup should be easy to complete.
I was part of the vendor (partner) team which implemented the product on customer site.
Since I had the opportunity to test Replication Manager on local lab, I think that my level of expertise was good.
Test&dev environment takes less time to come up and now it is always consistent thanks to replication manager.
I don't have exact numbers but I think that fact should have a very good impact.
I am not an end user and I work for an EMC partner. So for replication automatization requests we suggested Replication Manager directly and customer bought it.
I don't know if he evaluated other options...
Go on, you'll enjoy using it. Once set up, the configuration is very easy using the RMGUI, and stability/scalability is not a problem.

It's integration with SQL and Exchange for VSS-based backup works perfectly, the agent is easy to install, the GUI is easy to navigate and debugging is easy to enable/disable.
I also like the way it has all the Navicli commands to do a Snap or a Clone on the EMC SAN arrays bundled so that no scripting is necessary.
It's integration with Recoverpoint is also very useful for DR failover testing.
It means that the manual database scripting for truncating of the transaction logs is no longer required as Replication Manager has the inbuilt scripts to do this for you. I find this invaluable.
I have used this product for several years now with no complaint.
None...it's straightforward to install and configure.
Replication Manager is a mature product now so all stability issues have long been ironed out.
From my use of the product, I would only recommend Replication Manager is a small-scale environment replicating up to 50 Servers/FileSystems/Databases. It works great on it's interaction with Recoverpoint and the various EMC NAS/SAN arrays but it's limited for replicating large enterprise environments.
Very good.
Technical Support:Very good.
I have not used any other Product that compares like for like with Replication Manager (Backup products like CommVault cannot be compared in the same category as RM).
Very straightforward...just click next, next....The product assumes that you already have a good working knowledge of your environment from Virtual Infrastructure (need vCenter Server hostname and login) to your SAN array configuration and finally to the hosts you are replicating. The install and configuration of Replication Manager will ask for these details during the install to be able to populate the hosts, storage and Virtual Environment (Hyper-V or VMware) if it exists.
Implemented in-house.
Due to my past experience with Replication Manager, I did not hesitate to use this product as it perfectly suited my requirements.