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."For regular backup and restore solutions, this product is fine."
"It's on the cheaper side and not too expensive for users."
"It provides our disaster recovery solution. It works fine in our tests."
"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."
"The solution is dependent on the network bandwidth. For example, if they have a bandwidth of 10Mbps the solution will run a little heavier. If the bandwidth is good the solution runs well."
"The most valuable aspect of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is its instant block replication feature. This allows us to perform live block verification and eliminates the need to concern ourselves with recovery point objectives. This capability is particularly advantageous for critical workloads."
"We have never had any issues with scalability."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, it's not complex."
"Oracle Data Guard is a free solution. When you apply for Enterprise Manager, it comes for free with the solution."
"The solution is quite stable. We haven't experienced any bugs, glitches, or crashes. We find it to be quite reliable."
"The most valuable features are the backup and restore. With this in place along with the clustering, the database is safe from hacking, hardware failure, power failures, and system crashes."
"One of the most valuable features is real-time replication. The version we're using is reliable and easy to deploy."
"It is a top-notch product, super stable, making it our go-to for internal operations."
"The most valuable aspect for me is undoubtedly the failover capability and the assurance of data safety provided by Oracle Data Guard."
"We use Data Guard for online replication from data center, to data center for high availability. This is the most important feature."
"It's a very good solution if you want to protect your data across two data centers, or you have a middle man or many administrators who use these solutions for protecting their data. It's very reliable compared to other solutions that are most often not storage-based."
"Sometimes a server will get a bit behind. "
"The UI could be a little sleeker."
"The failback could be improved. It should be more intuitive."
"The solution's network setup and a lot of the control tower setup could be improved."
"I would like to see better support for creating and working with archives."
"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."
"I set up a test, deleted the source, and went to fail it back, and it didn't work."
"The user interface, customer support, and the recovery time for the current customer query could use improvement."
"For Italian medium-sized companies, the main challenge lies in the cost associated with licenses."
"There is an issue with their application on ODG. There were a lot of edits in the logs. Sometimes, we only get a little cue from the Data Guard Broker logs if there's an issue."
"I think it would be great to have a graphical interface assistant (like DBCA, ASMCA, NETCA, etc.) for initial configuration, monitoring, configuring Oracle Data Guard Broker and all the Data Guard Broker commands, without needing Oracle Enterprise Manager Cloud Control installed."
"For every standby server you have, you must pay a licensing fee, which is the main disadvantage."
"Oracle could be improved by the ability to manage it on the cloud. This on-premises version is secure and reliable, but I'm sure that they will soon provide a cloud solution that will be even better. In one to two years, we will probably move to the cloud—we have already moved to the cloud with Microsoft Exchange, but our databases are still on-premises. I would prefer managing a cloud version of Oracle."
"Overall, there are some operational issues that need to be dealt with."
"A significant improvement for Oracle Data Guard would be enabling the disaster recovery site to handle read and write operations, not just data storage."
"The initial setup is complex."
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.