Oracle Data Guard Reviews

We have a couple of Oracle systems that are attached to different types of applications.
In terms of Data Guard, we use it for factory monitoring.

We like Oracle because the solution is very robust. It's also efficient for queries and is easy to scale.

The database administration needs improvement. With Oracle, we have a lot of features for administrating data, but it might be too many. It needs to be simplified. It should be automated. Looking at Enterprise Manager, there are too many KPIs in place. Directly on-site, we do not need to choose all of them. Administration, generally speaking, needs to be improved.

Oracle should also continue to simplify the upgrade using Data Guard. We have already seen reduced outage timing any time we are doing upgrade, so maybe they are heading in that direction, but it can always be improved.

The stability of the solution is good.

The scalability of the solution is good. We have roughly 1,000 users right now.

Technical support is very good. If at any time we write a ticket, we get the appropriate answer on time. 

The set is straightforward but it is dependent on the audience you have. Internally, we have experienced DBAs, so deploying Oracle is straightforward. If we had to do the same job for an external company it could be complex. 

Previously we were doing the set up ourselves. Now, for more than a decade, we work with a third party, and we delegate the deployment, the support, and the maintenance of the Oracle Database.

The pricing of Oracle is average. It's not inexpensive but it's okay.

Currently, we are using the on-premise version on the solution.

I would rate this solution eight out of ten. I would recommend the solution because it is a good product and it's working fine. But I'm not sure if it's suitable for every consideration or any environment.

Data focus is the main issue. Most of the features of a new database still go to an Oracle administration section.

The monitor can predict if you have any issues or develop actions to find a solution for them.

We use the product for data recovery.

There is always room for improvement. This product needs some improvement in administration. I would love to see something that makes monitoring much easier. 

The product needs some of the GUI tools so there is no need for all the long process.

Oracle Data Guard is stable, but you need to keep monitoring the system all the time. You need to keep monitoring the archives. If some of the archives have been deleted, you need to do it manually. It is a lot of work pressure and a lot of monitoring. 

You need to do the dummy work every day just to ensure that Oracle Data Guard is working at the point when you need it.

Scalability with Oracle Data Guard is not straightforward, i.e. the configuration.

We use two different kinds in that case of data guard. You cannot keep looking at the overhead of the projection servers. Oracle Data Guard should know what you are doing. This is the problem. For migrations, it can be a long time.

For Oracle tech support, you do it yourself. When you open a ticket, it can take time to solve it. Often you can find a bug that went unreported.

The initial setup is straightforward. Just follow the documentation. For our present situation, it was dependent on the project and the database files. 

Sometimes the setup took one day, sometimes only one hour. It was depending on the size of the database. It could be very fast for me.

I did the implementation of Oracle Data Guard by myself.

Oracle Data Guard is a free solution. When you apply for Enterprise Manager, it comes for free with the solution. When you apply an enterprise solution to a database, you have to pay. It depends on the connotation of the project and what you need for the protocol.

Keep monitoring. This is the problem with the product. You have to keep monitoring the system all the time, just to avoid the interruption from the archive mode.

I am going to give Oracle Data Guard a seven out of ten. It still needs improvements. When you are doing the troubleshooting there are no monitoring tools. You have to keep watching the log all the time. Also, for the configuration, if you miss one of the backlogs, you have to re-issue again. Re-issuing is not easy. It's a long process to do it.

We implemented Oracle Data Guard for disaster recovery, even though one can't implement disaster recovery across multiple sites using stretch clusters, and implement a server pool at both sites. You have to build a dedicated server pool on each of the locations. 

We only use this solution from a functionality point of view to provide software coverage, so I haven't seen any special functionalities yet. It just really provides recovery in case of a disaster. It also provides a really good product forecast, like what will happen after 2023.

It is a rather complex solution, so it could be more user-friendly.

The solution has been stable so far. I would like to know what the performance impact will be when we go to the really big database of a customer. Because you have to synchronize everything to that effective location, with no data loss extracted, which means you have to go for a really hot interface. So you have to look at the experience for big databases. But so far there have been no problems with big databases.

So far we've only had to open one ticket regarding a failure with the encryption manager of defected fault and it was handled well. We've dealt with Oracle's customer service for eight years, and their service is astonishingly good. 

Oracle has a team that can help you with the setup. We have tested the solution for more than 2 months because moving our labeled, especially our big databases, because it's always an issue. With Data Guard, the main thing was for the application to switch the default recovery site in case of a disaster, and finding out how to score this site afterwards. 

It's a master of making money! If you want to have everything automated and done smoothly, you have to add additional licenses. They should have more standard licenses without us having to go for additional licenses to get full support. 

Regarding infrastructure, most of the time the additional costs for uploading systems, alarming the operations, patching the operating system, caring about the shadow data, all of this needs to be maintained as well. So we end up having additional costs and that's why I would advise others to avoid it, if possible.

I don't really have any advice for other users, because we only use the solution's basic functionality for disaster recovery. Personally, I would advise others to avoid it due to its complexity. On a scale from one to ten, I rate this solution a seven. From a functionality point of view, I can't complain about Data Guard. But I would avoid it as it adds more complexity to a configuration, which is not necessary. From a setup point of view, Oracle has experienced people that will help you with it. 

Oracle Data Guard ensures data protection and disaster recovery. The better way to configure Data Guard is by having an Oracle production database on one site as the primary database, and an Oracle standby database on another site. This solution provides high availability.

If you have a problem with your primary site and can't access your primary database, you can continue working with the database that you have as standby on the other site, by changing its role to primary.

Another valuable feature is the possibility of backing up the database from the standby database instead of the primary database, to avoid backup process overhead in the primary system.

Active Data Guard is other feature with advanced capabilities that extend basic Data Guard functionality. Some of the functions of Active Data Guard are: 

• Real Time Query - Offloads read-only workloads to an up-to-date standby database
• Automatic Block Repair - Automatically detects a block corruption and repairs it.

I think it would be great to have a graphical interface assistant (like DBCA, ASMCA, NETCA, etc.) for initial configuration, monitoring, configuring Oracle Data Guard Broker and all the Data Guard Broker commands, without needing Oracle Enterprise Manager Cloud Control installed.

There is no issue with primary database stability. Once Data Guard is configured, you don't have to change anything more in your primary database.

Oracle Data Guard is a feature available only in Oracle Database Enterprise Edition, and is available for extra cost.

Provides an active data guard.

I would like to see better failover.

We have been using this solution for five years.

There were no scalability issues.

I would give customer service a rating of 7/10.

I would give technical support a rating of 7/10.

We did not evaluate another solution.

We did not implement through a vendor team.

We did not evaluate other options.

This is one of the most stable products to support critical DR sites.

It provides us with online replication.

I would like to see replication/fail-over sites.

We have been using this for over five years.

There were not many deployment issues.

There were not many stability issues.

We sometimes had scalability issues with read only.

I would give customer service a rating of 8/10.

I would give technical support a rating of 7/10.

There were no previous solutions.

It was a self-driven setup. It was not too much trouble.

We implemented in-house.

We are under ULA.

We did not evaluate many other solutions.

It simply works.

We moved from on-premises to a private cloud.

Only our ERP admins use this solution, so it's about five people.

The most important feature is that if I want to test the database at the disaster recovery site, I can take a snapshot, test it, and then revert it back to the original state without needing to restore the complete database from the primary data center to the disaster recovery.

They may need to include the monitoring and the alerting part in Data Guard. In case there is a delay in the sync from the primary to the DR site, it is going against more than the expected RTO or the RPO, we should be able to get an alert or see it in the dashboard.

I've been using this solution for three years.

The stability is good. It's very reliable.

The scalability is good. If we want to add more databases, we are able to do it without any issues.

The initial solution we used was a basic solution that involved manually copying the logs from the primary to the secondary site, and there was no automation.

Initial setup is of medium difficulty if you know how to use Oracle Data Guard. Implementation took three days.

Implementation was done in-house. We only had a maximum of three people deploying the solution. 

The cost is expensive.

I would rate this solution 10 out of 10.

We primarily use the solution to have the peer site and a copy of it available in our global data center.

The installation process is straightforward. 

The solution is stable and the performance is good. 

The solution can scale as needed. 

Recently we had a P1 case that we needed to raise. There were so many other problems that cropped out of it when we were trying to execute a fix. 

Overall, there are some operational issues that need to be dealt with. 

The solution should be more secure from a protection perspective. 

There may be some bugs in the solution right now. 

We've used the solution for eight to ten instances. It's been a few years. 

The performance and stability are great. It doesn't crash or freeze. I find it to be a reliable product. 

I would say that the solution is scalable. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. 

We have about 3,000 users on the solution right now.

The initial setup is not overly difficult. It's not complex. It's very easy, very straightforward. 

I cannot recall the exact amount of time the actual deployment took. 

We have some engineers that can handle the setup process. We have eight or nine that can handle deployment or maintenance tasks. 

We pay a yearly licensing fee to Oracle. 

I also looked at MySQL as a potential option before choosing this solution. 

I'd rate the solution at a five out of ten. We've recently had some issues and aren't very satisfied with it right now. 

At this point, I would not recommend it to others. It might be too buggy for most people.