We performed a comparison between AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery and Oracle Data Guard based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Backup and Recovery solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The setup is pretty straightforward."
"We have never had any issues with scalability."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, it's not complex."
"It provides our disaster recovery solution. It works fine in our tests."
"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is a fairly stable solution."
"The initial setup is really straightforward."
"Technical support has been very good. They usually respond quickly to our requests."
"We went from an organization with minimal to no disaster recovery. I was able to spin up the disaster recovery environment with AWS rather quickly and meet business requirements."
"Backup and application continuity are most valuable."
"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."
"The most valuable aspect for me is undoubtedly the failover capability and the assurance of data safety provided by Oracle Data Guard."
"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."
"The solution has been stable so far."
"Oracle Data Guard is scalable. I rate it a ten out of ten."
"The solution is really very stable. One good thing about it, compared to other products, is that you can just run it and forget about it. Unless you come across some interruptions in the network, it works like a charm."
"We chose this solution for the availability of the databases. We can't afford Oracle Grid, this is the best solution if you want something similar that's less expensive."
"The user interface, customer support, and the recovery time for the current customer query could use improvement."
"Definitely there should be better logging. From a customer perspective I would like to see more logs on what is happening. If there is an issue, I would like to know what the problem is. Right now, we have to depend on the support of the vendor to check and let us know, because we don't have access to a lot of logging information."
"I would like to see better support for creating and working with archives."
"I have not seen any areas that need improvement at this time."
"The failback could be improved. It should be more intuitive."
"The UI could be a little sleeker."
"Sometimes a server will get a bit behind. "
"The bandwidth is a constant upload communication to the AWS DR environment, so if you do not have the proper bandwidth, it will definitely eat up your internet line."
"The initial setup is complex."
"A significant improvement for Oracle Data Guard would be enabling the disaster recovery site to handle read and write operations, not just data storage."
"They may need to include the monitoring and the alerting part in Data Guard."
"Oracle Data Guard is stable, but you need to keep monitoring the system all the time. You need to keep monitoring the archives."
"For every standby server you have, you must pay a licensing fee, which is the main disadvantage."
"The IP implementation and maintenance are a little bit hard to manage across Oracle solutions, including Oracle Data Guard."
"It is a very useful administrative IT tool. It saves on costs."
"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."
More AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is ranked 33rd in Backup and Recovery with 11 reviews while Oracle Data Guard is ranked 11th in Backup and Recovery with 31 reviews. AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is rated 7.4, while Oracle Data Guard is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery writes "Free, easy to use, and offers good support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Data Guard writes "Ensures high availability, disaster recovery, and data protection for Oracle databases through features like real-time data synchronization, automatic failover and zero data loss". AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is most compared with Azure Site Recovery, AWS Backup, VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery, Zerto and Veeam Backup & Replication, whereas Oracle Data Guard is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Zerto, Veritas NetBackup, Commvault Cloud and Rubrik. See our AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs. Oracle Data Guard report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.