Commvault Cloud Reviews

We provide backup services to our customers and we implement Commvault for most of our backups. This includes cloud with VMware, cloud with IBM, cloud with Azure, SAP applications like HANA or traditional SAP, for databases including Oracle and DB2, and across several operating systems including AIX, Solaris, Windows, and Linux.

We have a separate, private backup network. It has its own appliances from different vendors and the information on it is not visible to our main network. This is to help protect against ransomware and other threats.

Commvault provides us with a single platform to move, manage, and recover data across our on-premises and cloud locations, which is something that is very important for us. We have data centers in Mexico, Panama, Guatemala, and the Dominican Republic, and we need to administer all of the environments from a single location in Mexico.

The administrators connect to all of the environments on-premises. We have two flavors; the multitenant environment and the dedicated environment. We manage all of these from Mexico.

Commvault is very good in terms of coverage for applications and databases. This is important because we don't only administrate backups. We have managed services that include the database, application, operating system, and storage. We talk with the administrators for the database and operating system to create a policy that ensures all of the data that we need to recover the environment is complete.

The recovery process is consistent across platforms and this is important to us because clients give us the information, and we need to back it up and to ensure that we can recover it if they have a problem.

The recovery options are good because we offer our clients a complete recovery of their information, as well as an option for partial recovery, based on their needs. For example, we can offer the recovery of a single table in a database, depending on what the scenario is.

The most valuable feature is the compatibility with our entire environment.

The embedded deduplication engine is really good because we use a Near Line SAS disk as a repository for our backups, and we don't need to pay for another appliance such as a Data Domain or Quantum so that we can have hardware-based deduplication.

One of the benefits of using Commvault over the years has been that all of our administrators have the ability to perform admin functions. They haven't had any complaints about the interface.

Commvault has support for multiple storage platforms, which is helpful for us. We use block storage for some backups, and we use appliances that have duplication capabilities for other backups. The method in which Commvault fits in depends on how much money the client spends. For example, if they have a higher budget then we use PCI-compliant appliances, or snapshots in the backups to ensure that we don't have ransomware. Other clients pay only for the amount of storage that they use. In some cases, we use replication at the host level, whereas in other cases, it is at the hardware level. The console that we have with Commvault can manage all of the environments and hardware that we have.

I would like to have a manager-level dashboard to review the backups. This is not from an administrative perspective where you can see the details of the execution. Rather, it would only show the percentage of completeness for each one.

I have been working with Commvault for more than eight years.

We have not had any problems with stability. 

We have more than 10 implementations in all of our data centers.

Using Commvault helps to minimize the amount of time that we spend on backups. I am not exactly sure how long it would take otherwise, but we back up approximately four petabytes of information each day.

Scaling is not a problem for us. If we need to, we can install more servers and install a new console.

We use Commvault support on a daily basis. People from the database teams need help restoring data, so they contact Commault for assistance.

I would rate their support a nine out of ten.

Prior to Commvault, we used Veritas NetBackup for five years.

A lot of our environment is currently backed up using Commvault but we are planning to use Veeam and Commvault together. Veeam is priced better than Commvault and right now, we use Veeam to back up our virtual machines. As we split more of the information between the two different applications, we may use Veeam for cloud environments, and for traditional environments, Commvault.

There are some applications like SAP HANA that are not compatible with the Veeam software. In cases like this, we use Commvault.

This product is very easy to set up. The reason is that we do everything. We implement, we operate, and we migrate. One of the reasons that we continue with Commvault is that we have spent a lot of time training people. This means that the people in the company can do everything without the need for third-party persons.

It takes between two and three hours to install a new console.

Over the years that we have had this same software, people on the admin team have become certified by Commvault. This ensures that they are doing things properly and doing them well.

We charge our customers on a per-gigabyte basis.

Using Commvault has helped us to reduce storage costs because, in some cases, we changed to block storage. Using block storage and software-based deduplication is cheaper than the appliances that have deduplication embedded in them. In some cases, we have reduced our hardware cost by 50%, whereas in other cases, it has been reduced by more than 75%. It depends on the technology that we compare. For example, the Data Domain appliance is perhaps four times the cost of the Near Line SAS disk in traditional block storage.

Reducing the hardware that we have in the data center, also reduces our costs in terms of energy and space. I do not have an estimate as to how much we save.

Commvault is more expensive than Veeam, which is the reason that we are changing to Veeam for cloud environments.

We had been running Veritas NetBackup and did an RFP to change the backup software. We tested Veritas, Commvault, TSM from IBM, and Dell NetWorker. The finalists were Veritas and Commvault. We found that there were more advantages to using Commvault. For example, it has deduplication embedded into the software and if we wanted this with Veritas, we needed to pay an additional fee. This is why we changed and we have maintained it for several years.

In comparing solutions, I think that generally, today, all software solutions are the same. We have the same compatibility using Veritas, TSM, NetWorker, and Commvault. The main reason for us to maintain Commvault is the expertise that we have with the tool. All of them have deduplication capabilities and can use different repositories, so I don't have a problem with the other brands.

Commvault has the capability to discover unprotected workloads, although we don't use this because we only work with policies. Our clients tell us the policy that they want to apply to their environment, and we don't analyze their environment beyond the scope that they specify.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

It's being used as our main backup and recovery product. We use it to back up virtual machine infrastructure, using VMware and/or Nutanix. We use it to back up our SQL, Exchange, and File Systems, where is a mixture of Linux, Windows and Solaris. We also use it to backup NFS and CIFs Shares under NetApp. We also use Commvault for Oracle Backup and/or RMAN Clones.

We migrated everything we had from other vendors to Commvault. About 95 percent of everything in our environment, is being backup by Commvault.

On-Prem, Cloud, Data Centers.

The disaster recovery features of Commvault have improved the way we operate. In the past, we had a very complicated process for testing disaster recovery. That kind of testing is one of the nice features of Commvault. You are completely sure that your data resides in multiple locations at the same time and you can be sure Disaster recovery Data it's there in case you need it. 

HyperScale X also helps our admins to minimize the time they spend on backup tasks so that they can spend time on other projects. We are a big company and we have at least 80 locations using Commvault. We have admins for it in four or five regions on different continents. Overall, I would estimate HyperScale X has improved our productivity by 30  to 35 percent. We are more productive using Commvault than with other backup software.

It has also helped to reduce storage costs. We chose the solution because it decreases the backup costs for our end-users. We have been able to reduce backup costs by at least 50 percent.

There are a number of features we like HyperScale X:

• The deduplication is pretty good. 
• We also like the ability to generate reports using the Command Center feature. 
• We like how the software upgrade process works. 
• From the start, the disaster recovery for the CommServe has been very robust and flexible and works pretty well. 
• It also provides us with protection from ransomware, by default for Windows, and it can be enabled for Linux as well.
• Replication and Auxiliary Copy features, like dynamic throttling, are helpful.
• There is also the flexibility to create self-service capabilities for end-users and to give them access to restore their managed servers for data.

In addition, HyperScale X provides a single platform to move, manage, and recover data across all locations in our environment. The CommServe is the brain of Commvault. It's the server where the index and the cache are stored for the backups that are happening in the environment. All the management is centralized from that CommServe server. You can manage all the clients and all the infrastructure using one interface and one server. For redundancy, you have a disaster recovery CommServe server in standby mode. You can configure a disaster recovery backup to happen every 15 minutes.

Using the Commvault interface, you can customize and generate multiple reports to easily see what is protected and what is not protected in the environment. There is also a third-party feature called Commvault Activate. It's a separate product and you need another license to use it. That product specializes in discovering the environment, and the data in it, that you are not backing up.

You can manage everything from two interfaces. There is a Java console (CommCell), but in the near future that will be fully replaced by the Command Center, the HTML5 interface. The Java interface is not great. The Command Center interface is far better and it looks nicer, but it doesn't have all the powerful features available in the Java console. The place to improve the product is on the management interface level because that's the point where it's not perfect.

Today, to manage the product, you just have to use both interfaces. The Java interface is basically for the admin because it has all the powerful features in it. The HTML5 interface is mainly used by end-users, and by admins when they just need to generate a report or see something graphically to help with the management of Commvault.

One other note. I would rate the ransomware feature at about eight out of 10. There are different processes for enabling ransomware protection on Windows versus Linux systems. In the current version, there is no ransomware for HyperScale X. That feature has been released in CV SP 24.

We have been using Commvault HyperScale 1.5 and HyperScale X for the last three and a half years.

It's pretty stable. We haven't had a major issue in the three-plus years we have had Commvault. 

There were some issues in the first year, until we managed to acquire the skill sets and learned how the product should be used, including the best practices. But overall the environment is pretty stable. 

We perform a disaster recovery test twice a year and the product is robust and resilient.

The solution is pretty scalable. You can grow the environment. We have been using the same CommServe server for the solution for the three years that we have had Commvault, and we have just scaled and scaled the solution. We started with about 3,000 clients and now the number of clients has doubled or tripled.

HyperScale X, which was released one year ago, is more scalable than version 1.5. You can put more nodes in one cluster and, because of that, you can increase your overall storage.

We don't have the Commvault Activate solution. We are thinking about acquiring it in the near future to improve our environment. Our migration from other vendors to Commvault took between one and two years because our environment is so large. Right now we are fine-tuning the product and the processes around it. Perhaps we will use Commvault Activate starting next year. It will be in our scope.

Support for the product is pretty responsive and pretty good compared to the other vendors. Commvault's support is far better than Dell EMC's support.

If you hit an issue or a bug, Commvault support is there. And it's pretty easy to solve something that support cannot handle, if it's a bug that needs to go to the Commvault developers. We have initiated sessions with their developers to solve an issue that was affecting the environment. Because support is responsive, you can solve almost everything.

And if you need a feature that is not available, Commvault developers are responsive there too. They usually integrate such requests within a few months, and after that it's available for use.

Positive

In the past, we used Dell EMC NetWorker and Dell EMC Avamar. The main reasons we switched to Commvault were the storage and backup costs. We wanted to find a cheaper solution. In addition, we wanted a solution that we could manage using a single interface, versus the multiple interfaces that we had with Dell EMC. Third, we wanted something that was simpler to manage and that could perform disaster recovery much better, including disaster recovery testing. We also wanted the ability to upgrade agents and software in a centralized fashion. We have seen an improvement on all of these points with Commvault, as a replacement for Dell EMC.

The initial setup process is pretty complex. I was involved with the product from phase one. There are multiple points where you need to configure the product to have it functioning well in your environment. It's a complex product. There is a lot of stuff to set up from scratch to have things working as expected.

The time for deployment depends on how much infrastructure there is and on how many media agents and VSAs you need to deploy in the environment. For the first deployment we did in our environment, it took us two or three days to finish all the settings. But we were new to Commvault and we needed some time to understand it and to familiarize ourselves with all the options. Today, if we need to deploy a remote, on-prem site, where there is one media agent and one VSA, where the requirement is to back up a small or a medium site, the whole process can be done in a few hours. We work with Commvault's professional services to automate some of the deployment steps using Commvault's workflows.

Initially, we had about six petabytes of data that had to be migrated from one environment to another. It was pretty complicated because we had to disable the backup in one place and enable and configure the backup in another place. The process was also complicated because we had to look at the remaining space, how many workloads we needed to migrate, and how much had been migrated. We had to create procedures and train operations.

Commvault was new to everybody in our environment. Everybody had to become familiar with it and with the new processes and procedures. We had been using another technology for five years. Today, everybody in our operations, in our engineering, and our managers, is familiar with the product. Now, because we know the processes, everything moves much faster than it did in the past.

We have decreased the cost of our backup infrastructure using Commvault, by 30 to 35 percent.

Also, using Commvault HyperScale X has taken us to new ground where we can offer self-service recoveries to our customers and give them access to whatever server they manage. The other plus is the automation that we can create with Commvault's workflows to decrease the time it takes for a site deployment. That also translates into money saved because instead of having one admin resource occupied for a day to deploy a site, we can deploy a site in five minutes.

The pricing is far better than we had in the past. The license for Dell EMC was not too expensive, but the storage, given that Dell EMC is based on data domains, was pretty expensive.

We evaluated Veeam, as well as Dell EMC NetWorker and Avamar. Before we bought, we ran some try-and-buy and some PoCs in our environment, to see how the products handle things. We were convinced that Commvault is better and fits better than the old product, and we acquired Commvault.

The pros of Commvault are that you can manage everything from one console and the disaster recovery scenario functions much better than with Dell EMC NetWorker. Also, Dell EMC Avamar was specialized to back up VMware environments and NetWorker was specialized to do them all. We wanted a solution that could do all the backups that are required in our environment. Veeam was not able to handle all our backup scenarios. Veeam is very good on VMware backups, but you cannot do Oracle backups, SQL backups, or file system backups. We were looking for a solution that could fit all the backup requirements, operating systems, and appliances that we have in our environment. There are very few products that can cover all of them, few of them are: Dell EMC NetWorker and Commvault.

Involve Commvault support from the start, at the implementation level, to be sure that you implement the infrastructure with best practices. What can happen is that, a year after you implement the infrastructure, you notice that your clusters have not been properly set up and it's too late to change anything. Use their support during the implementation. Have some sessions with them to understand the whole infrastructure and the whole process of deploying HyperScale X.

We made a mistake in our first implementation, three years ago (Hyperscale 1.5). The recommended number of nodes per cluster was six, but for some reason we added nine. Because of that, we had some issues. Don't make the same mistake. However, HyperScale X, released in the last year, is a little bit more scalable and more flexible. Clusters can exceed nine nodes and can be extended further (current limitations per cluster are around 5 PB).

If someone is buying Commvault today, they should try to buy HyperScale X. It's the next generation and has some advantages. It can help avoid issues with clusters, moving forward.

Overall, we have been impressed by the features of the solution and by the responsiveness of Commvault's support. We like the product and we feel we made a good decision in acquiring Commvault and working with them. We are pretty happy.

I use Metallic to back up a customer's environment. It's the solution offered by our partner, a South African company called Data Protection Management. I'm just the intermediary, providing data loss prevention to my client. I've never seen the interface or used the platform. My client uses Metallic to backup data from Microsoft solutions like SharePoint and OneDrive. 

The reporting could be improved because the reports we get from our partner aren't sufficient. It isn't very detailed. I'm not sure if it's an issue with our partner or Metallic. They do a full backup on Monday and incremental backups throughout the week. However, we don't get detailed reports about the size of the incremental backups. The report just tells us whether a backup was successful. 

In addition to the core backup features, I would also like to see Metallic add patch management. It's a crucial way to minimize threats against data sources. 

I have used Metallic for six months.

I rate Metallic eight out of 10 for stability. 

I rate Metallic 10 out of 10 for scalability. 

I rate Metallic support 10 out of 10. They did the setup for us. Metallic support was exceptional, and they knew what they were doing. 

Positive

I rate Metallic nine out of 10 for ease of setup. Metallic set up the solution for me, but they walked me through the process. It seemed easy and took a few hours. 

I rate Metallic 10 out of 10 for affordability. It's highly cost-effective compared to other products I've used. I pay a monthly fee of 57 rands per user as a reseller and sell it at a markup to my client. 

I rate Metallic 10 out of 10. Metallic is user-friendly, cost-effective, and the technical support is impressive. 

We primarily use the solution as a backup for databases, VMs, or servers. 

Not everyone has agents for everything and Commvault has agents for most products. It's the most complete.

It's easy to install. 

It is stable and reliable.

The solution can scale. 

I don't have any notes for improvements. 

The price could always be lower. 

We'd like to have local support in Germany.

The POC is only 30 days, and it really should be 90 days. 

I've been using the solution for ten years. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. I'd rate the reliability nine out of ten. It doesn't crash or freeze. Based on what is possible, it is okay.

The solution is very scalable. I'd rate it ten out of ten in terms of the ability to extend.

Everyone uses the solution. We have 20 to 30 people using the product. That includes consultants. 

Technical support is currently based in India. I'd like to have more local support. 

We did not previously use a different solution. 

The solution is simple to set up. It is not complex. 

It takes approximately two weeks to deploy the solution.

You simply download the .EXE file and start the installation. 

We had one person that handled the setup. We had an engineer, myself, handle it. 

We handle the initial setup ourselves. We did not need any outside assistance. 

I have not really noticed any ROI.

Inside the 30-day trial period, you do not need a license. After that, you need to pay yearly.

The prices are pretty high. It's quite expensive. 

I'm an end-user.

We are using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd recommend potential new users talk to a proper consultant and do a proper POC. 

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. 

Our company uses the solution to implement cobots for customers. 

The global application provides a lot of storage for customers.

There are good security features for Google, videos, irregular encryption, and backups. 

The solution includes the best compatibility metrics for integration and they are managed by Google support. 

The Google reporting is very, very good. It lets us know our data or any losses so we don't need tickets to check our data. 

There is a lack of marketing in our region so there needs to be a focus on improving the solution's reputation. We believe in the solution but competitors like VIN have an edge in the market. 

The network and service need to cover more regions than just the Middle East. 

The solution should provide virtual updates on Linux OS via a host address or in utilities instead of via a secret database. 

I have been using the solution for seven years. 

The solution is very stable so stability is rated a nine out of ten. 

The solution is scalable so scalability is rated an eight out of ten. 

Technical support is helpful but it can take one or two weeks to sort out issues. 

I rate technical support a seven out of ten. 

Neutral

The initial configuration file can be a bit complex. A professional technician who is provided by the vendor should assist with setup. It would boost the solution's reputation to provide configuration, expansion, and upgrade services to customers. 

We implemented the solution in-house and the initial configuration took about four hours. 

The cost of an integrator license is moderate and its features cover most customers. Application features for government or compliance require a separate license. 

Our company proposes solutions to customers depending on their use cases. We have multiple applications and multiple technologies. 

For example, we propose a particular solution to customers in the banking or government sectors. We propose another solution for small or medium companies in the general business sector. 

For every security level, there is good stability and integrity. 

Support could improve and the initial configuration would be easier with assistance from a professional engineer. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

The rate of duplication is great because when you do the first full backup, it duplicates 20%, but when you do more increments, depending on the mode, the duplication is 99%. It is also great at detecting ransomware. It's not an antivirus, but when you copy files, the system can send you a message such as, "Mr. Albert, have you downloaded 10,000 files in two minutes? Why are you doing this?" Again, it's not an antivirus, but it notifies you if something is wrong with your system.

The interface could be improved because it has two different consoles. The first console is Java, and it is a little complex, but you can do 100% of the operation. But now, there is an alternative console of HTML 5. It is trendy and simple, but you can only do 70% of your operation. The HTML console is perfect for a client or a partner.

You have all the information centralized with the Java console, and I believe they plan to transition to the HTML console fully.

We have been using it for three months, deploying both on-premises and cloud. The choice of on-premises or cloud depends on what the client wants.

I rate the stability an 8.5 out of ten, and there is a small room for improvement.

It is easily scalable. We have about 300 users of Commvault Complete Data Protection in our company.

We have used technical support, and you can contact them by opening a ticker and in a few minutes, they will action it. For example, we opened a ticket last week, and the issue was solved in 30 minutes.

Veeam, Veritas and Rubrik are three software comparable to Commvault Complete Data Protection. Veeam is competitive in price and demand. Their solution is not very good, but many people use it because it is not expensive. Commvault Complete Data Protection, however, is the best out of all of them.

The initial setup is simple.

I rate the pricing an eight out of ten, with ten being a good price and one a high price. Depending on the client, they have different types of licensing.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. We would like to see a single console for everything in the future.

We have the solution deployed on-premise and private cloud.

There are many valuable features of Commvault HyperScale X giving many possibilities to complete jobs, particularly with the backup and restore.

HyperScale X is not user-friendly. There are many settings that have to be done on your own. It would benefit from a better interface. 

Commvault has a command center that is easy to use, but it does not have the functionality you need, so you have to switch to the Java GUI.

I have been using Commvault HyperScale X for five years.

The product is stable if it is set up correctly. HyperScale X is sophisticated software that requires you to configure it on your own. This can be difficult to handle.

This solution is scalable. In our company, we have two users of the product.

The support offered by Commvault HyperScale X depends on the country you connect with. U.S. support is better than the support offered in India. With the language barrier, different lingo, and how quickly they speak, I often cannot understand what they are saying.

Prior to using Commvault HyperScale X, we were using Commvault with Windows Server. We switched due to the complexity and software updates with Windows. HyperScale provided a good offer that would improve our space requirements.

The initial setup of Commvault HyperScale X was not complex, however, it was not easy either. It took two days to set up the appliances, which we completed with the assistance of a consultant.

HyperScale X is expensive. 

Anyone considering to implement Commvault HyperScale X should do so based on their own needs. There are many tools you can use, but it is complex even if you are running the command center. VM is an easier tool, but it has reduced functionality. 

I would rate the product a seven out of 10 overall.

We use it to back up everything in Office 365: our Exchange mailboxes, SharePoint, OneDrive for Business, and Microsoft Teams. And we use it for Azure Active Directory. The thing we use it the most for is recovering email messages or mailboxes.

We moved our email to Office 365 and, when we did that, we were using an on-premises Commvault solution but that was not an efficient way to back up the O365 mailboxes. Metallic has definitely improved our ability to back up and restore email, as well as the other online systems.

Also, we spend very little time with the Metallic solution because it just runs, so it has reduced the amount of manual work required to manage our backup operations. With our former solution, I was spending two hours a week on that, so it's saving me that much time. The other benefit is that I now have three or four other people on my team who can do the backups and the restores, as necessary. With the on-premises solution it was very complicated and I was the only one who could do it. Not only have we reduced the time from two hours a week to almost zero, but we now have multiple people with the ability to use the tool.

And when it comes to infrastructure costs, it's saving us about $25,000 a year.

It is very easy to use and that's been good for my team because I can have multiple people use the solution. It's very intuitive.

In addition, the granularity of the Office 365 Backup & Recovery feature is very good. We've used all of it, recovering data from each of the four systems that we back up with it, and it works very well.

It has also been very reliable.

The speed of the Office 365 Backup & Recovery feature is adequate. Microsoft controls the amount of bandwidth that people have when they're using Azure and the O365 environment. It's not really a Metallic issue, it's more of a Microsoft limitation. If they could work out something with Microsoft to improve the speed, that would help. But, generally speaking, it's been fine. I don't know of anything else that I'd want to see improved.

I've been using Commvault for about 18 months.

We're very satisfied with the stability.

The scalability is excellent. Any plans to increase our usage of it in the future will come naturally with time.

I've contacted their technical support a couple of times and they were very good.

We switched to Metallic from Commvault's enterprise backup because that solution is not in the cloud. Given that it was on-premises, trying to back up the resources in the cloud was inefficient. Metallic is in the cloud and it can talk directly to those other cloud resources. It was designed better for what we need to do.

We used Commvault Metallic's implementation services. There was an engineer on the phone with us and he walked us through the steps and everything worked as it should. It was very simple. The configuration is all done through a web browser; just point and click. The deployment took about an hour. All I had to do was get it up and running and show my team how to use it.

Our experience with the Commvault engineer was excellent.

There are four of us who use the solution, including me. The others are all system administrators. We haven't had to designate anyone for maintenance.

It's hard to measure the ROI of a backup solution. It's like car insurance. You have to have it but it only pays for itself if you have a catastrophe.

The solution is licensed based on the number of objects that we're going to back up, and that's a known quantity. As a result, we get predictable costs for our backup requirements. The actual storage on the back end of the system is included and that means we don't have to plan for any storage growth or changes there. We just have to plan for the number of employees that we have. That makes it very predictable.

We researched Veeam Backup & Replication. The main factor in deciding to go with Metallic, at the time, was to stay with one backup vendor so that we did not have two different solutions in place.

The evaluation was to compare what Metallic was capable of doing with what Veeam was capable of doing for what we needed. We thought that Metallic was adequate so we stayed with that.

Use their professional services for the implementation. That was very helpful because whenever you're configuring anything that works in Azure, or AWS for that matter, there are complexities. The professional services walk you right through that so you don't stumble. After that, it's very simple to use.

The solution is definitely appropriate for an enterprise-level environment. The performance for both backup and recovery, in an enterprise, is very good.

When we signed up for it, it was a Microsoft Azure-based storage solution and Commvault has its relationship with Microsoft. We're just leveraging what Commvault offers, so there's not really any flexibility, but that's okay with us. We just subscribe to the service and it does what we need it to do. We didn't need storage flexibility or anything like that. We just needed what the solution had to offer.

What I've learned from using Metallic is "keep it simple." We use a very simple approach to back up everything and it works just fine.