VMware Live Recovery Reviews

We are the partner as well as the integrator, and we mostly work in the integration industry. Integration is our core business, but we also do partnership activities. Most of our projects are based on integration, custom developments, solutions, and designing enterprise solutions.

We use it for recovery purposes, such as for DR sites.

If I talk about vCenter and the auto failover of the VMs, such as live migration, that is a very cool feature that we require in our environment because we have different data centers, and if some of the servers fail, they automatically failover and move the VM from one side to another. That is a very cool feature we mostly use.

Regarding third-party integration, I built a personal product integration with VMware Live Recovery with vCenter. This integration was to integrate external systems using VMware Live Recovery features about the information regarding what is actually running, what the VM status is, how it is consumed, how many users are landing on that, and what the actual workload is. We did not integrate with other products too much, but we basically use it for our infrastructure only and using vSphere.

We definitely appreciate everything. The interface is very intuitive, attractive, and very easy to use.

For support issues, they help with the issue, but it takes a very long time. The reason is that they engage a very initial resource and then escalate to another level, and during these level escalations, our time is wasted. They do not understand the severity of the issue. They go through step-by-step and then go to the upper level. This may be their SOP, but we require instant support and instant resolution of the problem, so here VMware Live Recovery is lacking. They follow their SOP, but they initially engage very low-level personnel who are not able to answer or resolve the issue, so they escalate or take a very long time to resolve the issue.

The main issue is to improve the approach of resolving solutions.

I may not be able to suggest new features because in these recent months, I have not been very close to it as we are exploring different solutions.

We have been working with VMware Live Recovery since 2015 and onwards as per my knowledge.

For our test labs, dev labs, and production, it is very stable. We also deployed it in an African-based country for a mining solution, and we did not find any problems. It was very easy.

I am not using it right now, so I do not focus on those things. The scalability and deployment are very easy for us to manage, but I will not be able to provide more detailed information about this at the moment.

From a small incident I remember, they were very helpful and are actually supporting very efficiently. Support is very good.

Our team has dedicated personnel for support who engage with the supporting teams. I heard and interacted with them as well. Improvements are always required in support.

Positive

We do not use NSX yet. I am basically working on the application side and looking at the upper layer rather than true infrastructure.

It is easy to install. Anyone can install it very easily.

We only used vCenter and vSphere. We did not use any other products.

We implemented through our team.

I would rate the return on investment at 7.5.

We have been using VMware Live Recovery since 2015, and most of our effort relies on it. I personally feel that it is very easy to use, easy to manage, and provides many features compared to other virtualization platforms and products. These are the strong points in my point of view. We mostly prefer to recommend this to customers due to ease of use, abundant features, and support.

Recently, just for development purposes, I tried to sign up for an AWS tenant, but unfortunately, I tried multiple times and failed to sign up. Then I left that and did not try again, so I have not bought anything from AWS.

We use VMware Live Recovery App Volumes for VDI (Virtual Desktop Infrastructure). For testing purposes, we set up our VMware Live Recovery to do those tasks, but in production, we have a separate team.

I am not deeply involved in the infrastructure side, so I cannot provide detailed information about specific products or pricing.

My overall rating for VMware Live Recovery is 8.5 out of 10.

We use VMware Live Recovery for creating new hosts and new servers. We synchronize all of our software from our data center to our co-location in real time, so when a disaster happens, we switch to the co-location.

The functionality of the features is helpful for us. We find the resource scalability quite good, and we can increase resources easily. We are comfortable with the solution, and it has proven to be beneficial for enterprise solutions. We fit well with this solution.

The capability and the functionality of the features are very helpful for us. Every feature is quite good, and we haven't faced any issues or have any complaints.

I would like to see improved integration services with other solutions, such as SIEM management or security monitoring.

I have been using VMware Live Recovery for around ten years.

We haven't faced any stability issues. So far, we haven't encountered any problems.

The scalability is quite good. We can increase resources easily without any problems.

The tech support is quite good and very helpful. They are knowledgeable. However, due to different time zones, it can be challenging when they want to assist us. But overall, there are no issues.

Positive

We did not use any previous solutions before VMware Live Recovery. We directly use VMware.

The initial setup was quite easy and straightforward.

A third-party vendor handled all of the implementation.

We find VMware Live Recovery cost-effective. It fits well with our resource capability and planning.

For cloud-based solutions, the cost seems quite pricey, so we stick to on-premises deployment.

We evaluated cloud-based solutions, but the cost was too high.

VMware Live Recovery is a very useful tool for live recovery. It is beneficial for enterprise solutions, and VMware already has a good brand with very helpful tech support.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

In our organization, we have deployed VMware Live Recovery for disaster recovery purposes. We have two data centers, and VMware Live Recovery is used for data replication between these centers. It is used to ensure data availability and for migration purposes when the primary data center is down.

VMware Live Recovery is simple and understandable within the VMware environment, especially when integrated with vCenter and ESXi hosts. It is used for data replication between data centers and allows for quick response in times of failure, ensuring data availability. This solution helps with efficient data migration.

The licensing area needs improvement as the cost per virtual machine is high. If they offered discounts or minimized their prices, it would be more beneficial.

I started using VMware Live Recovery when it was deployed for Ethiopian drug supply chain and road authority.

The technical support from VMware is very good and operates based on a service level.

I have experience with Veeam Recovery Manager, but VMware Live Recovery is more user-friendly within the VMware environment.

We use a three-year license, and the cost for VMware Live Recovery can be high. Previously, when acquiring a license for Ethiopian drug supply chains, the price was significantly high, especially after Broadcom joined VMware.

I have experience with Veeam Recovery Manager.

I give VMware Live Recovery a rating of ten out of ten. It is a very interesting and good solution in my environment. I recommend this product to others because it is used extensively for managing a large number of virtual machines.

In my total career spanning 20 years, I've focused on business continuity, specifically in disaster recovery.

The solution offers a rich set of features, well adapted in the market. There are many solutions available around this area. The community provides good knowledge, so I can get answers if I have special inquiries. It saves resources in general, allowing for fewer managers. The solution includes several automations.

The licenses need to be easier to quote. At the moment, it is complicated with all the changes. The pricing structure is pretty expensive, especially after the recent changes, and it's important for the cost to be justified based on the features used in production.

I don't have any exact numbers, however, the solution seems pretty stable.

There seem to be some limits, however, I'm not personally aware of them.

We are reselling Nutanix and VMware stack.

The basic installation is straightforward. Fine-tuning requires specialists.

Our professional services team is engaged on a regular basis and depends on the size of the customer and the environment.

The solution is pretty expensive after the changes, and it depends on the size of the customer if it's worth it. Larger enterprise customers can automate several features, making it cost-effective.

We are also not actively selling some products, which are out of our scope.

Sven Twist needs more live adjustments. For smaller customers, not all features are used.

The solution is used for clients who have large environments with more than 250 virtual machines utilizing VMware Live Recovery.

The primary valuable feature is the ability to have automated DR. They have vMotion, which ensures that any changes on the main production site reflect on the application layer on the DR site. This is a very important tool. Another beneficial feature is the ability to control traffic within the application.

The solution includes a load balancer called Avi, which is a product from VMware itself. From one product, users can implement the whole scenario for networking. For north and south traffic, a firewall is required, which works effectively. For large environments, users can implement Area Operation and create scripts and rules for automated DR.

There is no ability to control the database itself, and it needs to be configured as active-active. Additionally, the price is not suitable for startup companies, which necessitates looking for alternative solutions.

Currently, there are no AI tools in the version we use for our clients. AI capability has not been implemented yet, though it may not be necessary for such a tool. The runbook serves as the guide for DR processes. We have implemented an internal initiative using Microsoft Copilot's Page feature and Microsoft Loop. This allows for interactive updates to the runbook and AI verification of scripts.

From our observation, there are no complete AI DR tools available. We are conducting a POC for Splunk AI Ops, called ITSI, but have not found any fully robotic features. For operations and DR, complete AI tools are still not available.

The solution has been in use for more than four years.

The deployment process is very effective. However, the price remains unsuitable for small clients. Small clients typically don't have a VMware hypervisor due to cost constraints, so they use native cloud providers, making VMware Live Recovery unsuitable in these cases.

Since working with startup companies began this year, the VMware Live Recovery cost is very high for small companies. We are seeking solutions that don't require the VMware hypervisor and can work with native OCI cloud. We currently use Veeam, Acronis, and VMware Live Recovery.

We need a disaster and recovery tool that can be deployed as a virtual appliance on a cloud provider. For on-premises environments, we use Veeam for small clients and VMware Live Recovery for large environments.

We are searching for alternative solutions. While Acronis is convenient, it's a cloud solution that cannot be used due to Saudi regulations. We require a solution that can be deployed within a cloud provider in Saudi Arabia or in a local data center.

The solution received a rating of 8 out of 10. Integration with other VMware products is excellent. VMware Live Recovery performs very well when used with a VMware hypervisor, particularly for large clients who can afford the high price tag.

We are partners for Omnissa, resellers and partners for Microsoft and Acronis. For Veeam, we are partners and use it for small clients with Veeam Data Platform Essential. We have three clients using Veeam Data Platform Enterprise with Veeam ONE.

Being based in Saudi Arabia, we primarily work with the government sector. We use Oracle Cloud because they have all native services in the Saudi region with two data centers. Other providers have limited services or single data centers. Huawei presents challenges with high traffic costs. Oracle proves more cost-effective for our clients, and we depend on Hybrid Benefit from Azure and Oracle Cloud.

As a managed service provider with VMware, we offer virtual desktops to our customers. We support around 80+ customers, some use VMware, some use Hyper-V... it varies. In total, we support around one million virtual desktops. 

My role as an enterprise architect is to provide solutions to these diverse customers.

From a VMware perspective, we use SRM, or Site Recovery Manager, for disaster recovery. SRM has an automated recovery process, which reduces the need for manual intervention during a disaster. This minimizes downtime and ensures faster recovery times.

The automation of failover and failback processes. is key. During a disaster or planned migration, SRM automates the failover process to the recovery site. It coordinates the shutdown of virtual machines on the protected site and powers on corresponding VMs on the recovery side.

This automation is crucial because it may involve hundreds of VMs that can't fail over all at once. SRM follows a specific procedure, ensuring that virtual machines are recovered in the correct order according to a predefined recovery plan. This minimizes downtime and ensures complete recovery.

Additionally, after a disaster or migration event has been resolved, SRM automates the failback process. This allows you to return virtual machines and data to the original production site.

Automated recovery is one good feature, SRM also offers simplified management. It has a centralized interface for configuring, testing, and executing disaster recovery plans across multiple sites. This means management from a single point, even for many sites.

Recovery plans can be different for customers. So, another important feature is the policy-based protection within SRM. Recovery plans can be customized based on business requirements, including Recovery Point Objectives (RPO) and Recovery Time Objectives (RTO). These objectives might differ between industries – healthcare might need a more aggressive RPO, for instance.

Additionally, SRM offers failback capabilities and reporting features for compliance.

While there are no major drawbacks, some potential improvements could address complexities in implementing and maintaining SRM. 

The cost can be significant, and there's a resource overhead – meaning SRM consumes resources on both protected and recovery sites. 

Additionally, it has a lot of dependencies on VMware infrastructure, and testing can be complex.  Testing often requires extensive approval at the organizational level. 

Finally, sufficient bandwidth is crucial, failover things are purely dependent on the bandwidth availability, so network limitations can impact performance.

I have been using it for 15+ years. 

One needs to consider the factors contributing to stability. Firstly, it's a mature technology with a robust architecture. It integrates seamlessly with hypervisor APIs. 

Additionally, there's certified compatibility for the product. Hardware and software vendors ensure certification for compatibility with VMware.

Furthermore, VMware consistently releases updates, security patches, and enhancements, addressing vulnerabilities and improving capabilities. The extensive support, documentation, and active VMware community all contribute to the solution's ecosystem. Overall, I consider VMware SRM a stable product.

The product is scalable. As a market leader, I don't anticipate challenges with its scaling capabilities.

We handle the support. Our company handles support internally, but we do raise tickets directly with vendors when needed. VMware's support is good. 

They have extensive pre-defined documentation that resolves roughly 80% of issues, providing solutions readily available to most customers.

Positive

We primarily compare with Dell servers and Microsoft Hyper-V.

VMware SRM focuses on disaster recovery automation and orchestration. Competitors offer similar capabilities but may differ in how they handle them. 

For example, Microsoft has its Hyper-V hypervisor and failover platform. They've also integrated Azure Site Recovery for cloud-based resource recovery. Others, like Nutanix, may utilize tools like AHV for live migrations.

Implementing and managing SRM can be complex, especially for organizations with limited expertise in virtualization and disaster recovery technologies. 

It may require dedicated resources and training to effectively deploy and maintain. Typically, senior Level 3 and Level 4 system administrators are best suited for this due to the complexity involved. People with less experience might find it a bit difficult to understand.

There are various steps involved in deployment. A lot of planning is required, including hardware compatibility checks, installation, configuration, networking, storage, VMware creation, and integration with monitoring, backup, and security systems. Additionally, a lot of testing and optimization needs to be done.

The timeline depends on the scale of the deployment - small, medium, or large complexity. For a small deployment with templates, it might take around two months. Medium complexity could take three months, and a large, complex deployment could take around five months.

Moreover, VMware SRM with VMware infrastructure is easy. VMware's widespread adoption across data centers simplifies integration. Standard software features streamline integration with networking, storage, Active Directory, monitoring, backup, data recovery, and security teams. I don't foresee significant complexity with integration.

For virtual desktop environments, there are different sizing approaches. Sizing can be based on the number of servers or the number of virtual desktops managed.

For example, with a hundred servers, it depends on the support window – 24/7, 16/5, 9/5, etc. We might deploy our own on-site engineers, with a mix of one senior, two mid-level, and two junior staff.

If we size based on the number of virtual desktops, then one resource per shift might support a thousand desktops. To cover 24/7 with two weekly off-days per person, we'd need a minimum of five resources for a thousand desktop operations.

Mature products like VMware SRM often have higher costs. Their capabilities are extensive, but the licensing model can be complex.

It's a very good solution. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

I definitely recommend VMware SRM for organizations with complex environments, particularly if cost is not the primary concern. It's important to understand that the solution is powerful but also has some inherent complexity.

I recommend VMware SRM for those with complex environments, especially if cost isn't a major limitation.

I have mostly worked with VMware SRM, which is a solution tightly integrated with the product.

The most valuable feature of VMware SRM is its integration with the VMware platform.

VMware SRM's platform agnostics should support on-cloud usage as well. VMware SRM has to add a couple of features related to the cloud.

I have been using VMware SRM for five to six years.

VMware SRM is currently a very stable solution, but we came across many issues three to four years back.

I rate VMware SRM a nine out of ten for stability.

VMware SRM is a scalable solution. Our clients are generally enterprise businesses.

I rate VMware SRM an eight out of ten for scalability.

VMware SRM's technical support is very good.

Positive

We also used to have Datto and Carbonite for DR.

I rate VMware SRM an eight out of ten for the ease of its initial setup.

The solution's deployment took a few days.

VMware SRM is a little bit pricey. On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate VMware SRM's pricing a seven out of ten.

Overall, I rate VMware SRM a seven out of ten.

Our company's clients use VMware SRM for disaster recovery. 

Each OEM has varying USPs or different architectures. Some competitor solutions offer faster backup processes than VMware SRM. A native hypervisor feature is found in certain other solutions, but VMware offers it through a separate license from VMware SRM. 

The infrastructure of the solution needs to be more software-based, and less dependent on hardware. 

I have been working with VMware SRM for ten years. 

The solution is satisfyingly stable and can be easily used or administered. 

There are a few SKUs with the solution and now it has been taken over by Broadcom. The basic license of the tool can be availed for 25 VMs and can be scaled up to 75 VMs. So, based on customer requirements, our organization suggests the SKUs for licensing VMware SRM. 

The tech support offers satisfying product support. In some instances, the support team takes more time than expected to understand the issue and run diagnostics. 

OEMs are also used to share their core support or shared support. If a customer buys licenses from HP or Dell for support, they get it from the hardware OEM, and then the issues get escalated to a VMware team.

In this support format, a customer might receive delayed responses, and the resolution time window can be longer than in another direct or pro support format. I would rate the tech support an eight out of ten. 

Positive

The solution offers an easy deployment process. A professional with experience in virtualization technology can setup the infrastructure and deploy VMware SRM within a few days. One or two professionals are enough for the setup and maintenance of VMware SRM. The solution is adopted by businesses on small, medium, and enterprise scales, as it's a critical application for them. 

The solution can be seamlessly integrated, but for some specific non-compatible hardware storage, some customizations need to be implemented. Popular third-party platforms like HP, Dell, and NetApp support the native features of VMware SRM for storage replication purposes. 

After Broadcom acquires the solution, numerous licensing changes are being implemented. VMware and Broadcom will educate partners and customers on the new licensing policies.

For instance, if a customer purchased the product two or two years ago and now has to procure a new license of VMware SRM, it may impact VMware's present and future business. I would rate the pricing a nine out of ten. After Broadcom acquired the solution, the licensing cost increased drastically, and other similar solutions are available at a competitive market price. 

Broadcom has to brainstorm on lucrative SKUs or offerings to onboard, especially startups or small-scale businesses. 

Our company's customers use VMware SRM for disaster recovery across varying sites. VMware SRM maintains a connection between two different sites, if one site goes down there remains another site in our company as a backup to manage the load of different production applications. VMware SRM is considered an automation tool that helps customers migrate or restart the virtual machines at the recovery site. 

The tool allows our company to customize disaster recovery plans according to business requirements. As per the precedence of virtual machines, the solution is restarted at the disaster recovery site. VMware SRM is a highly comprehensive tool, which is why customers often choose it. 

The non-disruptive testing feature is a mature technology in the solution which is also found in competitor tools in the market. The replication and failover capabilities are quite easy to set up and use. This feature has a straightforward configuration that doesn't require expertise. Any professional with knowledge of virtualization and replication technology will be able to effortlessly manage the workflows that need to be configured. 

At our company, when we replicate the virtual machine on a distant site, the data is expected to be consistent. If data consistency is not maintained, then problems arise irrespective of the replication technology, whether we use SAN to SAN or other types of data applications.

The data consistency of VMware SRM depends upon the environment and connectivity between the two sites. I would overall rate VMware SRM a ten out of ten. For VMware environments, VMware SRM is considered a necessary product to deploy. 

Before purchasing VMware SRM, I would advise others to build a disaster recovery plan with RPO and RTO involvement. When we recommend VMware SRM to the clients of our organization, they seem worried at first about the LTO and percentage of data loss in case of disaster. 

VMware SRM offers five to fifteen minutes of RTO, which can be concerning for customers on some occasions, especially if the customer belongs to BFSI, e-commerce, or any digital, commercial business category. 

As highlighted, the most valuable feature of VMware SRM is production replication. It efficiently manages notifications and ensures accessibility within the VMware environment itself. It is advantageous compared to other products, such as Veeam, Commvault, or backup solutions, which may involve additional costs.

They could enhance the automation features for the product.

We have been using VMware SRM for ten years.

It provides a stable environment. I rate the stability a nine out of ten.

The product is highly scalable. We encounter challenges while changing the portfolio. Overall, it works as per our expectations. We have deployed it for more than 200 enterprise customers. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten.

We rarely contact VMware's technical support team as we can manage most issues with our technical support capabilities. Sometimes, we escalate a few incidents to them. We receive good support services.

Positive

The initial is straightforward if you have prior experience working with it. I rate the process a nine or ten.

In scenarios with around ten to fifteen VMs, the configuration process can typically be completed within a day. It might take around a week or two for a critical environment with 200 VMs.

We set up the infrastructure in the production site and deployed the virtual environment. Later, we configure the virtual environment and storage. For physical servers, a physical-to-virtual conversion is executed. Post-production site deployment, attention turns to the disaster recovery site, where the Site Recovery Manager is set up on both ends. Further, we can do migration testing.

It is an expensive platform. I rate the pricing an eight out of ten.

Most of the customers are running production environments on-premises. They have their own DR environment in a different location or cloud. Business continuity planning helps us with maintenance, unexpected downtimes, or disaster recovery drills. We can seamlessly integrate it and migrate it to the DR site.

Orchestration and automation features play a significant role in disaster recovery, particularly when interfacing with the VMware vCenter. It provides seamless integration.

Incorporating non-disruptive testing capability in disaster recovery procedures has significantly benefited the overall recovery testing processes. For instance, during the production application to the disaster recovery (DR) site, customers can now check the capability and compliance of the replication process without causing disruptions to the live production environment. SRM administration has consistently proven effective in reducing recovery time objectives (RTOs) during real recovery events.

I rate it a nine out of ten.

We typically use it for disaster recovery testing. It automates the process of failing over from a protected site to a recovery site, helping us achieve our RTO (Recovery Time Objective).

It has simplified data center application and failover processes, but the underlying technologies can be challenging. 

If we're using replication appliances, configuring them to work with SRM can be complex. Additionally, bandwidth and VM size can impact performance.

I would rate the ease of setting up and configuring my recovery plan in VMware SRM, a ten out of ten, with ten being the easiest.

The "Test Failover" feature is valuable. It lets us run a test and see if recovery reaches the RTO. It also shows us any issues with our VMs. 

It prompts us to perform a test failover by failing over a vm or a group of vms. Once the failover is complete, it verifies if the recovery reaches its initial stage.  We can also manually trigger the failover by the click of a button.

We also used the non-disruptive testing feature but only on a few test machines to confirm functionality. It works well.

There is room for improvement in the replication interface and functionality. Every time you open a remote site, you need to sign in again.

Ideally, single sign-on after integrating with vCenter should provide secure credentials that avoid re-entering passwords for every remote site access. It takes time every single time.

It has a ton of features, but ease of use could be improved. It gets better with automatic configuration over time, adapting to access. If you bring in a storage test application, maybe an automatic plug-in to the adapter, say for HPE or other storage providers, would be helpful. We wouldn't have to go to the provider's sites to download them.

The product itself is smooth, but timing issues arise due to replication lags in multiple areas.  When this happens, we encounter errors. In our most recent environment, we left the virtual machines running at the recovery site, hoping to avoid redeployment.

In this organization, we have been using it for about five years. I've been working with it for more than that overall, maybe eight years.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

The usage is restricted to a maximum of three users. They are administrators. It does not need much scaling because one server can manage a certain number of hosts. It really depends on the underlying replication infrastructure.

Overall, I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

The escalation matrix seems to depend on who gets the tickets. There are many articles due to AI, so the customer service and support want you to go through those first, even when you need immediate support. It also depends on your package. Weekend support is limited (Monday-Friday), which isn't ideal for disaster recovery. For disaster recovery, we want 24/7 support.

But once we get to an actual support person, it's good.

Neutral

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a nine out of ten, with ten being easy. 

The complexity of the initial setup depends on the deployment model and current infrastructure. 

On the new base, it will be difficult because we need to install it with existing replication in place. That requires knowing how to integrate the tool. On-premise or cloud integration is a bit easier. 

Deployment itself is minimal. Configuration takes longer, usually a day or two.  It may take more or less time, depending on the size of the environment. 

I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, with ten being expensive. VMware sells in bundles of 50 VMs, so if we want to expand with a smaller number, we have to buy the whole bundle.

Overall. I would rate the solution a nine out of ten because it helps our organization.