We performed a comparison between Oracle Data Guard and Quest Rapid Recovery 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 most valuable aspect for me is undoubtedly the failover capability and the assurance of data safety provided by Oracle Data Guard."
"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."
"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."
"You can see how the logs are applied, check the apply time, and how far behind the standby is at any given time."
"Backup and application continuity are most valuable."
"We use Data Guard for online replication from data center, to data center for high availability. This is the most important feature."
"Technical support is very good. If at any time we write a ticket, we get the appropriate answer on time."
"The most valuable feature is the flashback standby, which allows us to test without scrapping the database."
"The compression and deduplication features have helped to save on storage costs."
"The solution offers a 100% guarantee that if it's backed up you will be able to restore it onto any platform you want."
"The best feature of the solution is the user interface."
"Built-in encryption helps to secure our data as it travels from our on-site server to our off-site backup server."
"It is very easy to use and very easy to manage. The fact that I can easily recover data is valuable. I don't use it much. The only way I have been using it is that sometimes, people ask to recover the data, which is a very easy process. It takes only a few minutes to get in and get the data from the server."
"One feature I found that's the most valuable in Quest Rapid Recovery is the VM standby feature which is very useful for my current customer. The solution also has a great replication feature. The third most valuable feature in Quest Rapid Recovery is the five-minute RPO and the fifteen-minute RTO. The solution is also very user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is the disaster recovery process from the data center."
"The local mount utility is most valuable. I do restores fairly regularly. Thankfully, I have not ever lost an entire server that I've had to resurrect, but I certainly have people who erroneously saved over a file or have deleted a file. So, we've done that quite a bit. We still have the DL4000 appliance, and we had, kind of, extrapolated that out over a five-year period. Now, we're in year six, so we had to add storage, which we did as a SAN next to DL4000, but prior to adding in that extra storage, we, here and there, would run into situations where for whatever reason, it would want to be pulling a new base image, and then we would run out of storage. So, we would utilize the archive feature and archive the old data that we want to hang on to, but we don't necessarily need it taking up current data storage. Being able to export out really old data is most valuable to us. Then, we just store that on a NAS that we keep in another building."
"The predominant issue lies in the communication link between the secondary and primary databases."
"Oracle Data Guard is stable, but you need to keep monitoring the system all the time. You need to keep monitoring the archives."
"They may need to include the monitoring and the alerting part in Data Guard."
"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."
"A significant improvement for Oracle Data Guard would be enabling the disaster recovery site to handle read and write operations, not just data storage."
"Overall, there are some operational issues that need to be dealt with."
"We would like to be able to see the date time stamp when you execute DGMGRL commands."
"It is a rather complex solution, so it could be more user-friendly."
"I think the self-paced learning and knowledge base can always be improved so that users can self-service without having to contact either a reseller or Quest. I know there are things that I would have been looking for to try and solve. And the only way I could get there was to actually open a ticket rather than go through self-service through the portal."
"In terms of what needs improvement in Quest Rapid Recovery, though the solution is seamless, right now, they are just giving the software which means we'll need to arrange the hardware. If they can combine the appliance and software, that would be a great approach. In the next release of Quest Rapid Recovery, it would be great if they'd add a folder backup feature because only a snapshot backup feature is available at the moment."
"I don't really think that there is a whole lot that needs to be changed. It would be nice if you could deploy the agent without having to reboot. When I upgraded my core to the latest version, I also wanted to update all of my servers, but I had to put that off because I can't just shoot it out there. I have to make sure it is at a time when I can do a reboot right away."
"Sometimes, when we have certain batches for Windows, it needs to be restarted. When it's restarted, the service is configured as a delayed start. Sometimes, you need to wait too long until it rights itself, or you have to do it manually."
"For the most part, it is really good in terms of flexibility and choice of recovery methods. What we found lacking was being able to back up virtual volumes that are clustered. We ran out of luck there. There should be an option for backing up clustered virtual volumes."
"There could be better space management for incremental data. When you use incremental data, the space in the appliance keeps on going up. There should be a better way to manage the space. You have to manage the incremental data to reduce the time."
"It's not really Quest's fault, but the only issue that I had during the time when I was doing a lot of our restores is whenever the server reboots, it has to bring all of the repositories back in again, which takes around five to six hours to pull eight terabytes back in again."
"When you do a full backup, all of the memory resources on the server are used, which is something that should be improved."
Oracle Data Guard is ranked 10th in Backup and Recovery with 31 reviews while Quest Rapid Recovery is ranked 27th in Backup and Recovery with 18 reviews. Oracle Data Guard is rated 8.4, while Quest Rapid Recovery is rated 8.8. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest Rapid Recovery writes "Allows us to do point-in-time recovery and mount the whole server and saves quite a bit of time". Oracle Data Guard is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Zerto, Veritas NetBackup, Commvault Cloud and Rubrik, whereas Quest Rapid Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Quest NetVault, Azure Backup, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and Rubrik. See our Oracle Data Guard vs. Quest Rapid Recovery 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.