AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery Reviews

We are using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery for backup purposes in our company.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is convenient because it is cloud-based technology.

The strong points are the stability and scalability of the solution, as well as the convenience of it being cloud-based.

The cost of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is seen as expensive.

We have been using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery for five or six years.

I rate the stability of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery as nine out of ten.

I rate the scalability of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery as nine out of ten.

The customer service and technical support for AWS are very good and helpful. I rate it ten out of ten.

We did not work with any other products before AWS.

We use a third-party consultant company to help with integration.

The pricing of AWS is considered expensive compared to other options.

We have also used Microsoft Azure as an alternate solution.

I would recommend AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery to other users.

My main use case for AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is to minimize downtime and data loss with fast recovery of our on-premises and cloud-based applications using storage, minimum compute, and point-in-time recovery.

I created this service for our resources using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery, so if something happens, we can recover it from launch using a launch template or using a template from the point-in-time recovery point.

For our day-to-day use, I use launch settings in AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery service to control how we recover an instance and launch an instance from the source, deploying in different availability zones and different regions for the disaster recovery.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery has positively impacted my organization by allowing us to replicate and recover our AWS components and services, so if we somehow lost our data or a resource or a disaster occurred, we can recover it from the source, enabling us to recover our data and volumes and customer things.

One specific outcome from using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is the recovery time, as we are able to recover our resources and services when a disaster occurs, and it is fast to recover data compared to doing so manually.

The best features that AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery offers include the ability to create custom actions for AWS Systems Manager using command automation, along with a predefined set of actions such as a CloudWatch agent, volume free space detection, instance pre-connection, verify volume integration, and creating an AMI from the source instance, which are the features I appreciate.

Out of those features, I find the AMI creation from the source machine and volume integrity the most valuable, as we use most of the volumes and instances on our AWS account, making that feature what we use most, and I appreciate it.

I believe AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery can be improved by providing more features, such as an automated or AI-based solution that detects issues before they happen, which is a feature I would want to see.

I have been using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery for two years.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is stable, but it can be improved.

The scalability of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is good, as we have experienced very much scalable resources and infrastructure deployment using it, so it is indeed good.

The customer support for AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is good, as they provide support based on priority, which I find beneficial.

I did not previously use a different solution as we were doing it manually.

Regarding pricing, AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery takes a price based on how much you recover and how much you store, and the setup is easy.

I have seen a return on investment, as using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery allows us to save and recover data, improving our customer SLAs, and since we are not facing downtime, our money is saved.

Before choosing AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery, we did not evaluate other options, as we had a clear mindset that we wanted to use disaster recovery.

If you want to recover your instance whenever some disaster occurs and you want to deploy your resources in multiple availability zones and regions while ensuring that you don't lose your customer data or your data and service configurations, and wish to improve the SLA, you can use AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery.

I chose a rating of eight out of ten for AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery because it can provide more features such as automated detection and AI integrations that would remove manual or human efforts, allowing for improvement.

The primary use case for AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is to ensure data replication and protection across diverse environments without the need for hypervisor integration. 

The product's most valuable features include its ease of deployment, cost-effectiveness due to AWS's pay-as-you-go pricing model, and continuous data protection.

The product could be improved by incorporating more AI-driven automation for deployment and additional security features. These enhancements would make the solution even more user-friendly and secure.

I have been using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery for several years.

The product is stable. 

The platform offers excellent scalability, allowing it to accommodate the needs of both small-scale environments and large enterprises without significant changes to the setup.

The technical support has been effective, providing necessary assistance and resolving issues promptly.

Positive

We previously used solutions like Double-Take and Carbon. We switched to AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery because of its versatility in deployment across different environments without requiring specific hardware or hypervisor dependencies.

The initial setup can vary in complexity depending on the specific environment and setup requirements. While the deployment process is generally straightforward, detailed planning and configuration are essential to ensure a successful implementation.

The implementation was handled by our in-house team.

The ROI has been substantial, primarily due to its cost-effective pricing model. It reduces downtime and data loss during disaster recovery scenarios.

We evaluated several other options, including traditional on-premises disaster recovery solutions and cloud-based offerings.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is a robust and reliable solution for disaster recovery needs. However, thorough planning and regular monitoring are crucial to maximizing its benefits and ensuring seamless operation.

I rate it a nine. 

If there is a data leak, incident, or compliance issue, auditors may want to verify whether there is a policy and plan in place for utilizing AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery. 

As part of a strategic approach, I have been part of a team ensuring compliance with various regulations, including HIPAA compliance. I have contributed to developing strategies to satisfy audits and inspections from various government bodies. These strategies outline the plans and features to be utilized if needed.

AWS, as a cloud platform, helps build trust in its services. There have been incidents where clients using Amazon services faced security breaches, but these stories seem more frequent with Microsoft. This might be a personal bias, and others may have different experiences. AWS proactively protects its reputation by addressing issues and investing heavily in its tools, app tech, and engineers.

Pricing could be improved.

The solution is stable because we haven't had any incidents.

It's scalable because of the value and investment it has made in terms of capacity.

Every business survives because of its reputation. In case of any disaster, AWS cannot guarantee 100% security, but it helps protect the company's reputation. It also assists in providing remedies to solve any particular problems that may arise. AWS is a platform that supports businesses.

It has pay-as-you-go pricing. The cost will be different if you are not utilizing it as often as possible because there are costs beforehand and after an incident.

If you are using AWS for your disaster recovery, it's important to use AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery to ensure continuity in case of any failures. Having a strategic approach means considering the cost of disaster recovery as part of your overall planning. 

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

For the CloudEndure DR, I have been using this for Oracle E-Business Suite and Oracle OBIEE. I've used it for the operating system and directory services as well.

The ability to clone is very helpful.

The installation process is very easy.

The solution's cost is reasonable. It's on the cheaper side and not too expensive for users. 

It is a scalable product. 

In terms of stability, it's reliable.

I have not seen any areas that need improvement at this time.

I've been working on the solution for the last two years.

The solution is stable. It's reliable. there are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

The product can scale quite well. it's not a problem. 

I haven't actually worked with technical support. I've managed to resolve any outstanding issues. 

It's very easy to set up this product. It's not overly difficult at all.

Once it is set up, it's not too hard to manage it. You only need one person to do so. You don't need a whole big team. 

We are able to install the solution ourselves. 

The cost is very reasonable. 

We are partners with Amazon.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We were using CloudEndure Disaster Recovery as a backup for websites when we had a double ISP outage.

CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is a fairly stable solution.

The solution never reduced our system's downtime. It would take us about a day to get the network configured properly for even doing a network failover test. The solution's orchestration capabilities did not simplify our disaster recovery process.

The solution's network setup and a lot of the control tower setup could be improved. The solution should provide more ease of use for the creation of cloud appliances for firewalls.

I have been using CloudEndure Disaster Recovery for three years.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten for stability.

I rate the solution a five or six out of ten for scalability.

The solution's initial setup was fairly complex, and the company that did the initial setup for us messed up a couple of times.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup a one or two out of ten.

The solution was deployed by three people from my team and two engineers from the company.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten.

The solution's replication was fine. We faced issues when we actually tried to utilize it. Every time we made a big change to any of the on-premise servers that were being replicated, we'd always have to change our replication engines, sizing, and the disc it's written on. Otherwise, it would end up taking around 30 days for a small monthly Windows update to replicate.

I would not recommend CloudEndure Disaster Recovery to other users because of all the issues we had with the wrong sizing and the fact that there are better solutions in the market.

Overall, I rate the solution a two out of ten.

My purpose for utilizing CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is to streamline our disaster recovery procedure. In the event of any issue arising in our on-premise infrastructure, we aim to quickly switch over to AWS. Our setup is designed to facilitate this process, and we frequently conduct tests to ensure its reliability. While we have yet to experience an actual disaster, we conduct multiple tests annually. Furthermore, as a partner, I implement this solution for our clients. Currently, we have five customers using it, with the number steadily increasing.

We have the solution deployed on-premise located on the Amazon AWS infrastructure.

Although we have not yet utilized it for an actual disaster, one of our clients has been affected by ransomware or similar attacks. It is crucial to be able to quickly restore their infrastructure outside of their primary infrastructure, and that is exactly what we are accomplishing with this solution. Since the client we are working with is not a large enterprise, they do not have the financial resources or budget to create a secondary site for disaster recovery. Our solution enables them to be prepared without having to allocate funds for a complete data center to perform the restoration.

The most valuable aspect of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is its instant block replication feature. This allows us to perform live block verification and eliminates the need to concern ourselves with recovery point objectives. This capability is particularly advantageous for critical workloads.

The failback could be improved. It should be more intuitive.

I have been using CloudEndure Disaster Recovery for approximately one and a half years.

The stability could be improved. There is sometimes a lag in the replication and we have to reinstall the agent. It does not happen all the time but when it does in a particular server we need to reset it. A lot of our customers are relying on this solution and this is not a good scenario.

I rate the scalability of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery a ten out of ten.

I have worked with the support once and I had a good experience. 

I rate the support of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery was simple with the new interface.

Both the customer and I are responsible for implementing the solution.

We have seen a return on our investment. When compared to the cost of building a complete data center, the solution is much more affordable. However, it can still be expensive for small customers since the snapshots require significant storage space. While the solution itself may not seem costly on paper, keeping several days of snapshots can increase the price. This is due to AWS EDS storage costs since that is what we are using for the snapshots.

I rate the price of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery a six out of ten.

Before implementing CloudEndure Disaster Recovery, my advice to others is to thoroughly read the documentation. We made some mistakes during our initial implementation, which caused problems and incurred additional costs. We attempted to failover a few servers just to test the solution but later realized that we couldn't simply delete them and resync from on-premises. We had to perform a full rollback, which we were not prepared to do at the time. As a result, we were unable to stop the server running on AWS and had to delete it entirely, causing us to start the synchronization process from scratch. This was a significant issue, especially since the server was a large five-terabyte space server. By carefully reading the documentation, you can avoid making such mistakes.

I rate CloudEndure Disaster Recovery an eight out of ten.

I've used the solution for migrations. I worked for a company that went Chapter 13, and we had to migrate into the cloud.

I've used it for disaster recovery as well. 

It is easy to use. I haven't had any issues with the client and console. 

When we tested it, it worked fine. 

The solution is free to use. 

The setup is pretty straightforward.

It's stable.

The solution is scalable.

Technical support is helpful and responsive. 

When I tested a failover, it didn't work. I set up a test, deleted the source, and went to fail it back, and it didn't work. 

The solution doesn't need any new features.

AWS is no longer using the solution anymore. 

I've been using this solution for about two years, before AWS bought it.

I'd rate the stability nine out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

I'd rate the scalability nine out of ten.

We do not have plans to increase usage at this time. 

I'm not sure how many people are using it. 

Technical support was excellent. 

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward. It was not complex at all. 

I did witness an ROI while using it. 

The solution was free to use. It was just the price of the storage, and that was it. It gave us 2,000 licenses, which is enough for anybody.

We are using an older version from before AWS bought it. 

This is a good product. I'd rate it nine out of ten.