VMware Live Recovery Reviews

In terms of recovery, if you have a test job script, you can put it on top of it. You can create custom steps so that it will be more granular. It will be an easy, one click solution when it comes to the recovery application.

It would be good if this solution could integrate configuration management software such as Chef Infra.

I've been using VMware SRM for more than a year.

The stability is always good because we replicate daily. I have never seen any issues because the replication is always 100% successful.

You can add multiple appliances, and it supports enterprise environments.

Technical support is very good.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The deployment takes about three hours.

VMware SRM is the best sustainability solution, I would rate it at nine on a scale from one to ten.

We use it for disaster recovery.

I like how VMware SRM is able to automate and orchestrate disaster recovery.

The price, in general, could be lower.

I've been using this solution for probably three years now.

It is a stable solution.

It is scalable.

My experience with technical support has been fine.

The installation is straightforward if you have the required skill level. It took about a week for the initial setup.

The price could be lower, in general. My clients pay for an annual license.

I recommend VMware SRM and rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten.

We are using this solution to serve our customers in different sectors.

We are using VMware SRM as a disaster recovery solution for our customers. We are working with vSphere, vSAN, and other infrastructure VMware solutions. VMware SRM is completing the solution.

VMware SRM is very effective between two sites with identical twin storage, you can have synchronization between the two sites. 

We have had an issue when some customers have traditional designs and sites. For example, on one another site, they are using hyper-converged, using VMware, or Nutanix. We have a problem with the synchronization between the storage for site to site. This is the main issue. We are adding some other tools to support the synchronization to allow the movement of the workload from site to site easily.

Not all customers have VMware in all workloads. Some customers have a difference, VMware environments, such as Red Hat or Nutanix. VMware SRM is very effective for VMware customers. However, when you have other workflows with other vendors, you can not always use this solution.

I have been using VMware SRM for approximately 12 years.

VMware SRM we mainly use for our mid-size business customers. For small business-sized customers, we have different solutions we can deliver, such as Veeam. If they are a small customer that does not have a professional DR site we have a variety of solutions we can deliver depending on the customer's needs.

Enterprise businesses have many VM and the amount depends on the design of the data centers, which storage is being used, or is it hyper-converged or converged. We are choosing the best solution depending on the customer's need.

When comparing the difference between VMware SRM and Dell EMC RecoverPoint there are many differences between them both. VMware SRM is an automated tool for disaster recovery, RecoverPoint can do a similar job but it has better protection more than an automated tool for moving VMs. 

With our customers, we are delivering both solutions, Recovery Point and SRM, because they already had the Dell EMC storage and owned Dell Recovery Point, we only added the VMware SRM tool for moving the VMs and storing them from site to site, as an automated tool.

Dell RecoverPoint has the edge over VMware SRM in one area because they can work with other vendors, not only Dell EMC. Some customers have workloads on the cloud, Dell RecoverPoint is very effective for them.

I have used Veeam and other solutions.

The price of VMware SRM depends on how many VMs the customer has to move. There is a difference between the standard and enterprise license. I'm presenting the standard license to my customers because the total of VMs is not more than 50. The customer needs only the standard license and the cost is very effective for him.

I rate VMware SRM an eight out of ten.

We use SRM for our failover strategy. It is for disaster recovery on failover.

Our systems fail over using SRM. So, we do a big bang DR, which is biannual, and we fail over our fairly massive Epic electronic health record (EHR) and our core applications. It takes us about 30 minutes to fail over using SRM, which is pretty good. In most hospitals that have Epic installed, Epic does the audit to make sure that we can fail over if something were to happen. Normally, sites will have a DR solution specific to the EHR, but right now, our pain point is the third-party tier-one clinical applications.

We've had configuration issues on occasion. We start to fail over, and then we have to call it off because the configuration is not right, or the data stores aren't configured correctly in the secondary data center. Oftentimes, it is just the experience level of the team, and we have to bring in the vendor to help and validate our configuration.

I have been using this solution for probably five years.

Their support is excellent.

I would rate it an eight out of 10. There is some complexity there, and that's where I would bring it down from a 10.

I use VMware SRM for DR testing and VR.

The solution is simple to use and has effective automation.

VMware SRM does not have the capacity to do DR tests. We had issues whenever we were doing tests with the root cause analysis. We had 70 to 80 percent successful results because the vCenters were overloaded and that was the reason that we were having capacity issues.

We have been experiencing an additional problem when adding a regular VM in the replicated storage. By default, it will show an error. However, there is not any monitoring mechanism that would show you are not supposed to have a regular VM which is non-VR in the replicated SRM storage. Whenever we used to do testing we had to figure out that a regular VM is there and remove it manually.

I have been using this solution for approximately seven years.

The stability should be smooth, and as for the capacity, we should be able to run the test successfully. However, from our research and DR test results, we came to the conclusion that we have to run the DR test during the non-production hours. Logically, they should be able to be done during the production hours, but that is not the case. We have to ensure that the vCenters are free and are not doing regular work for us not to have any issues during the DR test.

There needs to be better stability during heavy capacity in future releases.

The solution is easy to scale.

The solution is used extensively in our large organization.

When we first started out using this solution we encountered a few issues and used the support but we now know how to fix most of the issues and have not used them. Additionally, we have our own team for support.

The installation is logically simple and in the medium range of difficulty. However, you need to make sure you have the proper infrastructure.

I have evaluated Veritas and Zerto.

I would advise others looking into implementing VMware SRM not to totally be dependent upon it. Review other solutions, such as Veritas regulatory platform and Zerto. There are newer VM DR options coming out regularly and they should not have only one solution.

I rate VMware SRM a six out of ten.

We are consultants in disaster recovery software. We implement VMware products for our clients.

It is easy to implement for my clients. 

It's a very nice product.

I would like to see this solution be more scalable.

We currently use our security in addition to VMware SRM.

I am certified in VMware and VCloud. 

I have been using VMware SRM for ten years.

We have no issues with the stability of VMware SRM.

VMware SRM is scalable, but it can be improved.

We have 15 to 20 customers who are using SRM. We have customers not only in the US but in the UK also.

They provide very good technical support that is affordable.

We are also using Zerto.

It is very easy when it comes to integrating with a data center or an appliance, but it's a bit complicated.

The length of time it takes to deploy depends on the database we are accessing. It can take two hours to deploy.

We have two senior persons to deploy and maintain it.

I am not involved with the pricing. 

We have a procurement team and sales team that work with the vendors.

I would definitely recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate VMware SRM an eight out of ten.

VMware SRM is used for our disaster recovery site, which is an on-premises colo (Colocation) facility. The general use case is for disaster recovery for three of our applications those being imaging, payroll, and real estate.  

I would say SRM's ability to recover my virtual machines in a timely manner and to perform bi-annual testing are the two things it has provided that are really valuable.  

I would say VMware has room for improvement with this product. I am sure it is probably better in their 7.0 version, but there are still some bugs in the 6.O version that relates to using it with different browsers. I think a lot of what I run into is related to the 6.0 version. I believe a lot of those bugs have been fixed in the UI once you upgrade to 7.0.  

We have been using the VMware SRM solution for about six years.  

The stability of SRM has been excellent. I would give it a nine-out-of-ten. It is a pretty solid solution.  

I believe it would probably scale just fine. I only protect 25 VMs based on our licensing and I do it that way even though I actually have about 200 virtual servers. I can not really say I have done a lot to test scalability. In the six years that I have been dealing with SRM, I have just been protecting those 25 VMs. I do not have hands-on experience as to how well it would scale out.  

I have dealt with the technical support at times in the last year. I would give VMware's tech support a nine-out-of-ten. They are responsive and get you a useful reply.  

Disaster recovery was completely done with physical servers prior to when we started using VMware. When we went to VMware, we started using SRM. So the first time we went with the virtual environment we deployed SRM. We just went straight with SRM just because it is a VMware product. It was already well-integrated and did what we needed it to do.  

The installation and initial setup were pretty straightforward. The deployment, overall, was pretty straightforward. There was a little implementation structure we had to factor in related to my storage array. But besides that, it was pretty straightforward and easy enough all the way around.  

I pay for SRM per year. It is about $3,000 a year for the 25 pack. The package gives you the ability to protect up to 25 virtual machines.  

From what I have seen, a lot of these new hyper-converged systems come with certain components that do a lot of what SRM does. My opinion and advice to people considering SRM would be to look to your hardware vendor or consultant. They may have some replication pieces in there that allow you to possibly not use SRM or go ahead and stay with what you already have. Depending on your situation, different combinations might prove more beneficial either within the architecture or by cost-benefit. There are a lot of options out there now for disc replication and bringing machines up at other locations.  

On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate the SRM as about an eight-out-of-ten.  

We have three different VMs. During long business hours, we can shift from PR to DR. It has high availability.

Setting up VMs can be done quickly. It is easy to use. 

The improvements should be as per customer requirements. 

I have experience with VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery.

The stability of the solution is a nine out of ten, as it is highly stable. 

Two hundred users are using the solution at present. 

I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. 

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