We performed a comparison between Unitrends and Zerto 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."Stability-wise, I rate this solution a nine out of ten."
"It's not easy to scale it."
"It is a quick and easy way to organize my backups and to keep track of them."
"The simple and fast restore routine."
"The ability to diversify jobs within the same server helps break down a large chunk of data into more manageable and concentrated chunks."
"The ability to backup both physical and virtual machines, along with having an appliance store the backups locally instead of on a file server, NAS, or SAN."
"Replication to Forever Cloud."
"Backup/archive to multiple locations."
"It helps us keep our required retention period for specific documents and allows us to recover older documents if we have to compare and recreate those."
"This product is impressively easy to use. It's dummy-proof, once it's set up."
"We are doing continuous data protection. It works flawlessly. Our recovery points are measured in seconds. We have all these "baby snapshots" throughout the course of the day, so we can roll a VM back to any point in time, spin it up, and away we go. We're actively using that. It works great."
"It is cost-effective and stable. It protects virtual machines, and there is a fast recovery time."
"The granularity enables us to failover specific workloads instead of an all-or-nothing type of scenario, where you have to move your entire IP block and your data center, or you have to move large chunks of VMs. Those situations also make it prohibitive to test effectively."
"I've been fortunate enough not to need to rely on Zerto in an actual disaster, but we do testing every year. Sometimes, it's multiple times annually or at the year's end. It takes the recovery workflow, which would normally take a lot of planning, and reduces that to just a few minutes."
"The low RPO times of about four to eight seconds are very nice and very valuable to us."
"The replication for DR is really good, and the test failover within the application is really solid, along with the ability to manipulate RDMs or remove them."
"The amount of updates which are being released. Updates should be limited to two or three a year, focusing more on quality instead of a rushed bug release."
"There are a few quirks where the GUI, agent, and back-end are not precisely meshed."
"Probably the biggest issue I've had is actually paying for the unit, and part of that problem is that they use a third party for the billing."
"The solution’s UI can be improved. I am saying this because I have seen solutions with better UIs."
"The ability to run just differentials without pulling the full on your archive."
"If the interface could be less complex, it is would be great."
"Unitrends can be challenging to scale."
"Techs don't see to be well-versed in troubleshooting issues that arise and tickets stay opened for weeks for resolution."
"It works only for a virtual platform, it does not support bare metal."
"It is crucial for Zerto to collaborate closely with VMware in order to promptly test updates."
"The reporting could be improved in terms of the reports that you can show to auditors to prove that you have done the testing. I provide the reports that it generates now but, it would be great if, at the end of a DR test, it would generate a report of everything that Zerto did."
"From the relationship standpoint, we have never had a local rep in South Bend, Indiana. It has always been somebody in Boston, and there is not a lot of communication. That is one of the big things. We would like help driving the business and talking to our sales people as well as more involvement from them. We could really utilize it more, drawing more customers in, but we need help with that."
"Zerto generates many false positive alerts, which is annoying. I still have thousands of alerts in my inbox, and those are false alerts. When I check there's actually no problem."
"It would also be nice if you could update without having to download a new installation file for Zerto Virtual Manager. Within the app, it could prompt you to install and perform the installation from within the application. Generally, it's relatively easy to use, but it gets a little complex when customers have special network requirements and need to customize how long they want the save points to be retained. We need to work with the storage team on the backend to see what makes the most sense for the client."
"They are not cheap. They are more expensive than others."
"Zerto is solid. However, they are working on a cloud workload protection and protecting virtual workloads to more than one site."
Unitrends is ranked 44th in Backup and Recovery with 34 reviews while Zerto is ranked 2nd in Backup and Recovery with 236 reviews. Unitrends is rated 7.8, while Zerto is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Unitrends writes "The solution can be used to back up servers and Hyper-V cluster nodes, but its support is super expensive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zerto writes "Gives us business continuity capabilities during hurricane season and in case of ransomware". Unitrends is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Rubrik, Acronis Cyber Protect, Commvault Cloud and Arcserve UDP, whereas Zerto is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, VMware SRM, Rubrik, Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines and VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery. See our Unitrends vs. Zerto 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.
So does that mean you want to have a Disaster Recovery solution where data is not on site your bunker site? but yet allows for a fast recovery in case your primary site is down?
- What virtualization solution do you use?
- What is the link between the 2 (?) sites?
- What RPO and RTO are you aiming for?
- How much data do you need to recover?
If you don't have live backup? Well as per my understanding backup is always a happened at local site (DC) on VTL and or on Tape and they were offloaded to out of DC, but as mentioned correctly it can take 24hours or more depend on the Recovery site location, accessibility & final is data size. Now the correct terminology is Online Replication or Archive/log base replication, and it is completely depend on the RPO & RTO define by business. So, answare to your 1st query : No way you can do a site recovery if you don't have DR site. Many says to take a back on tape, on disk or on storage but if all these product are installed at production site i.e. DC, will not make any sense as your DC is down and not accessible. So, "must to have live back or rather Replication to DR site.
2nd question" fast recovery without VM in passive or standby mode at DR site. VMware has SRM which does the site recovery in case of disaster. Only condition is that you have to have a Storage with replication between the site. Other option as mentioned by Mr. Smith, is DR as a service model (DRaaS) from any cloud providers. Some of the Cloud service providers also offers CDP solution while not charging for DR site but conditions is DC must be hosted with them.
Tested used my own little setup for hyper V machines have an offsite server using altaro backup offsite server backup software with windows server
restored (anywhere) the Virtual machine was up and running within a 10min entire server
I would also recommend to use Vision DoubleTake at VM level dat has an CDP , continous data protection feature for filesystem replication and SQL integration also. It can be a choice of synchronous replication over DWDM lines if latency it not excceding 0,5 ms round trip, otherwise it will impact disk write ops.
If zero downtime is a must I would recommend using VPLEX,ViPER from EMC or HDS Global Active Device that will present disk LUN from SAN as a single device to more processing nodes, but thus means app is aware of SW clustering (can run in multiple nodes sharing the same filesystem ir SAN LUN).
In such approach in VMware ESXi you will present a datastore spread over DWDM like a strech cluster so you won't have to keep in mind where the app node is really running, the hypervisor will see the strech cluster as only one storage device, thus means you can move app with vMotion very fast to a second or DR site, or recover it to a DR site. More if app is SW cluster enabled then the app nodes will run seamlessly over strech cluster.
The 2 nd option I can see is to go for Hyperconverged infrastructure and application containerization just like Docker tehcnology. How to do it: for ex. Make use of technologies like VxRail appliances and OpenStack + app transformation in Docker (for Windows VM is not so complicate). Such technolgies will apply private Cloud technology for DR.
Hi there, we are talking about Recovery from DR site, now few suggestions from my side 1) what is the defined RTO & RTO. 2) Visibility of the RPO. 3) connectivity between two or three site to meet replication requirements. 4) DR for physical & virtual, both the environment. 5) how many time in a year do the DR Drill. These point need to think and perform to achieve desire & accurate recovery from DR site.
Hi you could try Arcserve UDP -> Instant VM.-
IfI understand correctly the guy needs a fast recovery solution for the production environment to a remote site, for Windows VM under VMware ESXi (or Hyper-V).
In my understanding a DR site means an alternate location with hot or cold standby systems, the recovery plan for business continuity is depending on their RTO and RPO.Unless an RPO and RTO are defined for IT services noboby could picture o solution for such cases. In general solutions are dependent of TB of data to be assured on remote site, basically there are many practices for assuring storage space in DR in case you would need to recover:- cold backup with ESXi that sustain test and development environment physically placed in DR, in case fast recover is mandatory, they could destroy the test/develop environment and restore data from scratch with VTL replicated in DR (backup and restore with 4TB/hour or more). The single point to be assured is correct IP addressing (test/develop could be treated as untrust zone and separated with VLAN and/or firewalls). You can use data protect and snapshots for VM, backup to tape, replicate virtual tapes and restore in case of a disaster (full recovery)- hot backup means CPU and storage for backup DR purposes but can be more faster, but cost a lot of money $$$$$$- rent some storage space and CPU from Cloud vendors, use as they need, maybee the DR location can be in the Cloud provider Data Center but data confidentiality can be a showstopper.
My proposal is to investigate the 1st option with fast backup of data snapshots (space efficiency if dedupe or data compression are available at production site at storage level) and sent them to a restore solution at remote site (virtual backups), restore ops must be tested from time to time to validate business data (not only apps).For fast backups you can try VTL or NFS appliances that include replication services, the bandwidth between sites must accommodate fast delivery to remote site (to assure that RPO and RTO, including restore times are met). I would not recommend a SW solution to replicate VM because if no storage is existing in DR dedicated for this purpose it make no sense to think on such solutions.The 2nd option if to address disk space and CPU needed with Cloud providers, otherwise disk space for VM and user data must be assured always in DR.
Hello,
I suggest taking a look at VMware - Actifio, It might be an option for the
environment you are working at. The minimum data backup for Actifio is
10TB. If your environment smaller than 10TB it will not work.
Regards,
www.actifio.com