Oracle Data Guard Reviews

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 use it for application disaster recovery. It is deployed on-prem, and one side is our side, and the second side is Microsoft Azure.

Backup and application continuity are most valuable.

The usage of block storage devices in the cloud or migration of a type of storage from one site to another site can be improved. Currently, we have to use multi-node to single node because of the lack of storage support on the Azure side. It did not really work. Our DBA had to spend a lot of time tweaking the Data Guard tools, or the underlying Oracle VMs, to make sure that Data Guard would run on top of different types of storage. So, if it can support transporting or getting from one type of storage to another type of storage in a different site or a different technology, it would be very helpful.

Its support should also be improved.

I have been working with this solution for the last two years.

If one is most stable, I'd rate it a two out of five. We were facing some issues. It isn't something that you set up and then go to sleep for two years. We have to maintain it and tweak it several times, but it is still very good in terms of stability.

It is very scalable and reliable. 

I would rate it a two out of five. It is not very good. There are a lot of community guides, but Oracle documentation is not straightforward, specifically when you use one site as the cloud site and one site as your on-prem site. If one is the best, in the cloud arena, I would rate them a two out of five. There is some community support, and there is some Oracle support, but they still have room to improve.

It was complex. My DBA had a difficult time. If five represents the most complex, I would rate it a five out of five in terms of complexity. 

It required multiple experts. It required Microsoft support, our own system experts, and an external DBA to make the transition work. It took us two weeks to move from one Data Guard replication to another Data Guard replication.

It is not a cheap product, but if you look at the price, features, availability, scalability, and maturity, it is a very good product. 

Involve Oracle as early as you can and do a version upgrade to the latest DB version before you try to migrate to the cloud. First, do all the migrations that you need to do locally in your Oracle database, and only after that, do a cloud migration.

I would rate it an eight out of 10. It is quite reliable, but there are problems. It is not perfect. There is a monopoly of technology, and this is the only cost-sensitive product around. The other products are either very expensive or not reliable.

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. 

We have a primary database and a secondary database. Both databases are on different sites, which are geographically distant. One site is used as the primary site, and the other one is used as the secondary site. We have configured Oracle Data Guard to instantly replicate the data from one database to the other database on a different site. That's what we do with the Oracle Data Guard at this point. It's about business continuity.

We have found the replication feature the most useful. We use this feature the most. 

The ability to recover a database with less effort and the use of Oracle Data Guard Broker to administer the complete environment are also very useful features.

One thing that can be improved is the GUI. It would be good to have a very nice GUI to easily configure and administer, providing different presentations to the database administrator. 

The feature that can be included is the integration with third-party monitoring systems, that is, monitoring systems from other vendors, not only from Oracle.

We have been using Oracle Data Guard since 2010. Currently, we are using the latest version. 

We didn't have any incidents that caused any major problems with this implementation. There aren't any concerns regarding the stability of this solution. 

Once implemented, we can administer the whole environment with no downtime. We can switch over between sites and keep on using Oracle Data Guard like this. Until now, there aren't many things to do. It has been very good. That's why we keep on using this solution.

It was a good experience when we had to replicate it to more than one database and use it for new database creations and all such things. It was very simple, and until now, there are not many problems or gaps in the usability of this solution. It works very well.

We didn't have many problems and much experience with technical support. 

Once implemented, we only have to monitor and take care of the gaps in the solution. Most of them happen because of the connectivity, either bandwidth or something else, or because of the growth of the database or the data being migrated from one database to another.

The initial setup was quite complex, but it was because of a different implementation approach. It's not so complex as such. 

When it was the manual version 9, we migrated it to version 11, and now we migrated again to version 19, which is a different approach for implementing it. In the beginning, it was new and quite complex, but not so much to be done later.

It's mandatory in order to be ready for any incident when someone has a similar environment. 

When we talk about Oracle, we are talking about the venue database, translation of database, online translation of database, and atomic translations. When we need to guarantee the stability of the database, we have to be careful. 

In financial enterprises that use Oracle as a secure relational database management system, the data that you have is very important, and it is the asset that brings the most value to the company. I would recommend that every implementation that goes to the production environment must be done together with Oracle Data Guard. Even small databases can be powered by this solution. 

I would rate Oracle Data Guard a nine out of ten. During all these times and all these years, if I can count the number of times that we had to intervene or we had to do something by ourselves, I can't count more than three times.

My primary use case is to cache our monthly data and ensure that same data is copied for DR (disaster recovery) side. This solution is deployed on-premises. 

One of the most valuable features is real-time replication. The version we're using is reliable and easy to deploy.

Oracle could be improved by the ability to manage it on the cloud. This on-premises version is secure and reliable, but I'm sure that they will soon provide a cloud solution that will be even better. In one to two years, we will probably move to the cloud—we have already moved to the cloud with Microsoft Exchange, but our databases are still on-premises. I would prefer managing a cloud version of Oracle.

I have been using Data Guard for about five years. 

This is a stable solution. We have one person who is responsible for maintaining and working on the database. 

In our organization, we have over thirty to forty people using Oracle ERP solutions. 

We have Oracle's Extended Support. Whenever an issue arises, we log in to the portal and our queries are resolved with the help of Oracle's technical support. The support could be better, but we are still using the support offering of our old version of Oracle and the legal portion normally suggests an early upgrade to the newer release. 

The installation is straightforward. It's not complex at all, and our IT guy managed it easily. 

We implemented through an in-house team. 

We work for a non-profit organization, so we have a discounted rate on licensing and other purchasing agreements. 

I rate this solution a nine out of ten. We are currently running version 11g, but we are planning on upgrading to 12c. I always recommend Oracle Data Guard for anyone considering implementing it in their organization. 

The primary use case of this solution is on disaster recovery. this software is reliable and is suited for long distances.

One of my customer's sites was a database made with Data Guard specifically because of some issues that were on the network. We found we could switch to Oracle Data Guard and it took less than one minute to switch over, which was fantastic. 

I'm constantly looking for the best solution for protecting my data in data filters, and most are powerless in terms of protecting our Oracle database. The Oracle Replication Solutions and Oracle Data Guard are the best in this area, however. The stability and resiliency are closely monitored, and you cannot find the same protection solution outside of Data Guard or Oracle RAC for protecting your data. 

It's a very good solution if you want to protect your data across two data centers, or you have a middle man or many administrators who use these solutions for protecting their data. It's very reliable compared to other solutions that are most often not storage-based.

Oracle is not easy to implement, and you cannot find clear documentation on the internet or, unfortunately, on the Oracle website. You have to do a lot of research yourself and spend a lot of time seeking out all of the best documents that are related to Oracle on other websites. If they could create more documentation and improve their library of resources, it would be very helpful.

The IP implementation and maintenance are a little bit hard to manage across Oracle solutions, including Oracle Data Guard.

I have been using the solution for more than eight years.

Oracle Data Guard is quite stable but you do need to check on it every day to ensure functionality. You have to define some of the operating system stabilities yourself and you need to be sure to deal with any problem in your operating system because good functionality really depends on the operating system. 

Scalability is good because you can cluster your Oracle Data Guard and Oracle RAC. That way you can switch to Oracle Data Guard gives you scalability, and, in comparison with other solutions, it is very stable and scalable because of these features. Most engineers prefer to use Oracle Database. Compared with other solutions, Oracle is a little bit hard to implement and maintain but as a technology, it's very good.

In terms of the number of users on the solution, it varies by project. On one of our latest projects, we had more than 10,000 people directly on the database.

Unfortunately, because of sanctions, we can't directly contact Oracle or use Oracle's knowledge base. I've indirectly contacted them because, in some cases, it's a must to have Oracle support. Sometimes you can't solve problems and you need to have accessibility to support to solve them. Support is very important in many cases because the information is crucial for many companies that want to avoid facing disasters in their data centers.

We didn't previously use a different solution. We exclusively use Oracle products.

The initial setup is very complex. Users need to be familiar with the operating system, as well as how their network and Oracle Concepts as a network, work.  

In our last implementation, deployment took between five and eight hours. There were some problems in correcting each solution on the network and then we wanted to test for its stability and we wanted to simulate the environment quality before pushing it online. 

Ultimately, we found some problems and discovered how to resolve them after a few hours. We just needed to figure out how to connect the database directly on S08 LAN. We had many issues. In one case the link of S-storage was disconnected for example. 

Some countries try to persuade that you should use all of the networks, but in some cases, you have to find your own best way forward. In this case, we found we had to connect the storage models directly through the user feature on the Oracle Database.

Implementation is not easy. Going forward, I'm going to make a script for implementation for this database, and I think it's going to be easier for implementation in the future.

For most projects, we have two people that handle the implementation of the solution. One as a solutions engineer and the other was DBA administrator. Sometimes you also may need to use a network administrator as well. At minimum, you need two experts and maybe three in some cases. You want accurate maximum availability in-network, especially on the network.

I implement this solution for some of my clients and I consult on the best way to implement the solution. Most of the information on the net is not reliable, but at this point, I'm an expert. I could write my own book on how to implement this solution for my customers. Most of the time I prefer dealing with user experience. Some firms also use ADEO to ensure my implementations are good and stable.

It is not easy to calculate of ROI of this software.

In some cases, some costumers chose to buy a lot of licenses to have software - at least at first. I'm not happy and okay with some policies of Oracle. In some cases, you have to pay extra money for some features. It's very hard to have access to software directly in comparison to buying some licenses. You can adjust them for some Oracle software, however, if you want to develop or expand your features, it's typically hard to do so in my country.

Based on my friend's and colleague's experience, they find it a little bit tricky to use Oracle for buying certain software or getting extra features, and based on my experience, most free and open-source projects are already pretty good. 

There is no redundant software as stable, and resilient data guard.

Most of my projects are on-premise, and most of them are based on low-cost engineers and information on the internet.

Right now, the cloud is really good if you change units. There is a direct limitation on some solutions because of the cost being high for this type of software and I chose not to use the cloud. 

The solution is quite functional, however, I do find that some features are not great in real production. You need to have the software to ensure the continuity in the case of using Oracle.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten due to its difficulty in terms of maintenance and audio problems. I'm also looking for CTCT maintenance and implementation and wish is was a bit easier.

We use Data Guard for online replication from data center to data center for high availability. This is the most important feature.

I'm not really sure about what needs improvement because we use all Data Guard's features successfully.

Pricing is expensive and can use improvement. 

I have been using Oracle Data Guard for about eight years. 

Over the course of eight years, I do think this solution is very stable. 

It is scalable. 

We also use Active Data Guard. We use it to clone the production environment. We constantly use it. 

I have contacted their support. We have been using their support more. We open cases one to five times a month. We use a lot of Oracle databases and because of that, we contact their support a lot. 

The quality of support will depend on the support engineer. If we speak to an agent from the Asian department, it could be a little difficult to understand the terminology. If it's with somebody from the US, Canada, or Europe, they're easier to understand.  

We also use a real application cluster rack database. I have experience with IBM. 

The initial setup was not complex. At first, many years back it was complex, but it's getting easier to set up in the last couple of years. It's been easier in the last few years and has been easier than past versions. 

We had somebody help us with the deployment. 

It is a very useful administrative IT tool. It saves on costs.

I strongly recommend Data Guard. I've been using it for eight years and I would strongly recommend it. 

I'd rate Oracle Data Guard a seven out of ten. To make it a ten, the core base license could be cheaper. The cloud environment would also make it cheaper. 

The solution is quite complete. The entire package, and all the features that come with it, is very good.

The pricing of the solution is quite high. They should do what they can to bring it down so that it is more reasonable for customers like us.

The response times for technical support can be quite slow. They should work to lower these wait times so there are fewer delays in assistance.

We've been using the solution for eight years.

The solution is quite stable. We haven't experienced any bugs, glitches, or crashes. We find it to be quite reliable.

The solution is scalable. If a company needs to expand it they can.

We typically work with enterprise-level clients.

We've only reached out to technical support maybe one or two times. The technical support response times can be a bit long. However, overall, we've been satisfied with their level of assistance.

The initial setup is quite simple. I would describe it as straightforward. It's not complex.

We're Oracle partners. We've worked with databases 11G and 12C.

If a company is planning to implement Oracle solutions, I would suggest they also implement Data Guard.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is for data protection, disaster recovery, and it's used as a backup database to restore the primary databases.

It gives the client comfort in case of any incidents, disaster or any catastrophic situation because it maintains, manages, and monitors the database and keeps a backup.

The most valuable features are the backup and restore. With this in place along with the clustering, the database is safe from hacking, hardware failure, power failures, and system crashes. 

If anything were to happen you can immediately recall your data and bring your production server back to business.

It's flexible and easy to maintain because you are configuring your primary database and a standby database in one or more locations.

When the data replicates into the standby database there is a possibility of having a microsecond amount of data loss. 

The data loss occurs when there is a network disconnection between the primary and secondary standby database located in the data centers or if there is a crash in the primary database.

The data is generated on the primary database which is configured to the standby database to duplicate it on a real-time basis. So if there is a system crash or disconnection and in the time it takes to get it back up, you can lose a microsecond amount of data.

When I experienced a small crash, I compared the data between the primary database and the standby database and found that there was a small difference in the amount of data. Not all of it was replicated or backed up.

It creates issues with synchronizing the data.

Because the focus in Data Guard is in the backup and restore, there hasn't been much with the interface. 

In the next release, if there could be more focus on the interface to include add-on features that would be an added advantage going forward.

I have been using Oracle Data Guard for almost six years.

This solution is stable. We haven't experienced any issues with it.

The initial setup is straightforward. It's not complex.

The time it takes to deploy depends on how long it takes to replicate the primary database and to configure the standby database, but on average it can take a couple of hours.

You only need one or two people to maintain the system.

We are integrators and we implement the solution for our clients.

This solution is for small to medium-sized businesses, who can't afford to have two data centers or two servers.

Oracle Data Guard has many features to ensure that the database is in place. In case the primary database goes down or is corrupt in any way, you can recall the data immediately to restore the primary database.

It's important to know that backup is in place at any given time.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

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.