Commvault Cloud Reviews

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 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.

We use Commvault to back up all our enterprise solutions, like MS SQL, Exchange, file servers, and MongoDB, but we don't use Commvault for multi-environment management. There is a primary site and a disaster recovery site that we control offsite with one console.

I know Commvault has another interface for the multi-site, but I've never used it before, so I don't have any experience with that. However, we have a passive primary server at the disaster recovery site, and if we have trouble at the main site, we can use the disaster recovery server. 

Commvault makes it easier to back up new additions to our environment. For example, when we added MongoDB, we found it in Commvault and could start backing it up. 

Right now, we are trying to integrate Kubernetes platforms into our environment, and I'm sure that Commvault can back up those. Commvault keeps up with new technologies, and if you upgrade to the latest stable version, you can find everything you need.

Backing up with Commvault doesn't require much effort. Commvault's reporting features are also excellent and user-friendly. It's easy to find anything we want. The workflow feature is handy, too. For example, we schedule an automated monthly backup and restoration test that we used to do manually. That has been integrated with Commvault's workflows and running automatically every month for four years. 

It runs all the tests and emails us the reports. We take daily, weekly, and monthly snapshots, and I integrate the storage snapshot scripts with the Commvault workflow. The Commvault workflow runs all the scripts and sends us the reports. It also features cloud-side reports and workflows. Commvault has many tools for backing up, restoring, and archiving, but we use another service for our archives. 

Commvault can show us unprotected workloads, servers, and SQL databases. It's a good feature, and I periodically get reports on this. However, it's a low priority because we are waiting for our inside customers to tell us whether they want something backed up or not. They must follow that, but we are using terabyte-based backups. We don't separate the agent— MS SQL or others—and we are only looking at the terabyte trends, so it's predictable for us. 

Our main pain point is that some of our hardware is old. For example, the SSD disks for our application database are slow. It's hard to avoid a slowdown in our environment because the size of our backups is growing every year. If you're growing and don't upgrade the environment, you will see slower backups and restores. You must enhance the environment if you are growing.

I've used Commvault for about 10 years, and we used it at my last company for around six years. 

Commvault's stability is good.

We have no problems scaling Commvault. I don't remember the numbers, but we have a terabyte license size. It's about 400 terabytes, but the backend is in the petabyte range. 

Troubleshooting is easy because Commvault support responds and finds the root cause quickly. When I've contacted support for other solutions, some of them ask you to recreate the scenario. They ask you to increase the debugging level and reproduce the scenario to get the error again. As a result, we waste a lot of time troubleshooting those solutions. With Commvault, we don't need to devote much time to the operational and troubleshooting aspects. 

I've used NetBackup before, and I think it's a good solution. It required more effort than Commvault, but I prefer it over EMC NetWorker. NetWorker was labor-intensive, buggy, and hard to use. We spent a lot of time dealing with EMC support. They have a large, competent support team, but we spent too much time with them. 

NetBackup is better than NetWorker, but it has fewer features than Commvault. NetBackup also has an old-fashioned interface that is harder to use than Commvault's. It's not user-friendly. Commvault is the best of the three.

Setting up Commvault was straightforward. You set up the primary server first, then the media agents, disks, and agents for clients. Each of those steps is easy. It's like a "next, next, finish" Windows installer. You can deploy it in half a day in a smaller environment, and it's maybe one or two days for a large one. 

Of course, it depends on the size of the agents and how many you need for your physical environment. If you have a rigid environment, it's effortless because you only define the vCenters or the Hyper-V management console, and that's it. You can take backups. 

On the other hand, you must install all the agents if you have too many physical environments. Still, Commvault makes it easy because you can install everything from the user interface on the primary server. In total, we have five people, including me, managing Commvault and all our other storage solutions. 

I rate Commvault 10 out of 10. If you're planning on implementing Commvault, I suggest doing a PoC first to try out all the features and to compare them to other products. We did a PoC for backup solutions to test some new features for our enterprise solutions, and some of the products didn't make the cut, so I would recommend a PoC.

We use it for server, laptop, and desktop backup.

We are using the latest version.

Commvault helps our admins minimize the time that they spend on backup tasks and other projects since we are now managing a single console to administer all the backups, instead of a full console.

It is a very good tool for server backup. We can restore any server, e.g., physical or VM, in a very short amount of time.

Commvault Command Center is very good and user-friendly. We can select any user's data or a server in its Console.

Commvault provides us with a single platform to move, manage and recover our data across locations. Especially for our IT, this is a very important part of our data storage.

The recovery option is very good. It is a user-friendly option to recover any data.

When we started using Commvault, we felt that there were some technical issues with managing it, but we are comfortable enough with managing it now. There were many issues, like index corrupting, when we first started, but all those issues were resolved by the Commvault tech team.

Its major disadvantage is it's expensive. Otherwise, the solution is good.

I have been using it for the last six months.

It is a very stable solution.

Scalability is very good.

We use a third-party to resolve issues first. They first try for L1 or L2 support. If they are unable to fix it, then they escalate it to Commvault technical support. 

The support is very good. I would rate them as eight out of 10.

Positive

We were using Symantec Backup, which did not have features like centralized management. Commvault has a centralized, single console where you can manage multiple locations of user's desktop data, which is one of the important features of Commvault.

We switched to Commvault because we were looking to centralize management. This reduced IT administrator time as well as providing stability and reliability for data backups in a single console, and we didn't get these features from Symantec. 

It reduces IT man-hours by an hour per day.

The cost for Commvault is very expensive, even support is very expensive. The full cost of the solution is 50,000 INR per year, which includes 20 VM backups, server data backup, and 200 desktop and laptop agent licenses.

They have recurring support changes.

They should reduce the support and license costs so anyone could start using Commvault. Due to its cost, customers are reluctant to use Commvault.

The first time, when building infrastructure, the cost is quite high.

We evaluated Veeam and Veritas NetBackup. 

We chose Commvault based on some customer feedback and technical reviews of Commvault. The main difference of Commvault is the single console to manage everything.

Go for Commvault. It is a very strong, stable solution. Technically, it is a very reliable solution with a single window console to manage all backups. Definitely, we recommend customers should go for Commvault. Though, it would be nice if Commvault could compromise on the pricing part.

I spend two hours every day on Commvault monitoring and managing performance as well as fine-tuning.

We implemented on-premises, so it is not connected to any public networks. Therefore, hacking is very difficult.

I would rate Commvault as eight out of 10.