Commvault Cloud Reviews

We use the solution for backup and recovery.

The solution's most valuable features are compression and duplication ratio.

The solution's pricing could be better.

I have been using the solution since 2020.

It is a stable solution. I rate its stability as an eight.

It is a scalable solution, and I rate its scalability as an eight. Currently, we have three solution users in our organization.

The solution's initial setup was complex. Our team contacted the vendor for assistance. They logged in remotely with us and solved the issue.

We implemented the solution with the help of our in-house team.

The solution is highly-priced.

I recommend the solution to others and rate it as a nine.

Our customers mainly use it as a mixed backup solution of primarily virtual environments, whether it is Hyper-V or VMware, and also in some cases, physical machines. Some of our customers must have tape access, which is one of the reasons why we often propose and use Commvault.

We are a partner and service provider for Commvault. For some customers in Belgium, we are also implementing Metallic.

In Holland, we have some installations with cloud connectivity. However, in Belgium, we only use the cloud for archival purposes at this time.

Commvault helps to ensure broad coverage with the discovery of unprotected workloads. This is important. From the moment that we set it up, we mostly have customers telling us what they need to back up. Then, you can list the machines that are not yet protected. Sometimes, we can see that they are unaware of this, and say, "We didn't know that those servers were not protected yet," or "We did not back them up yet." 

Sometimes, if you have multiple admins working in environments, you will see a growth of machines and the backup people responsible are not always aware of this. Therefore, it is very important to explain to customers that they need to perform a check monthly. They should also check with their admins or application owners to see what is necessary, because sometimes application owners may need to pay for it or the customer will need newer licenses. It is important for them to know, especially these days. In the case where you have servers which are not yet protected, you have bigger issues.

We use Commvault's ransomware protection and detection on media agents. From the moment that we can configure media agents, we have already enabled that option. We will then address with customers the possibilities, a way forward, and regular checks with resources. As a service provider, if we configure a customer, then they will set up a monthly restore test. Also, if a customer demands it or finds it necessary, we can perform disaster recovery tests.

Commvault can do everything for every operating system and application. Whether it is cloud-based, like Office 365, or not, it is possible with Commvault. 

Sometimes for customers, it is difficult because you can see all the features. Sometimes, it is difficult for them to use or understand it. Once they have had some training from Commvault or us, they are really happy with the solution.

I would assess the Command Center as a very useful but sometimes difficult tool. It is multipurpose. It has all the features of logging and monitoring, especially for the actual setup. For us, it is easy because we work daily with it, but for customers who only use it once a week, they sometimes have some difficulties. Command Center is not user-friendly for beginners.

This is also the reason why we propose to customers to use the Web Console. I know that some older customers are not yet really aware of this tool. However, from the moment that they start using the tool and search possibilities, they will then go to that Web Console instead of the Command Center.

Ransomware is a major problem these days, and whatever improvements they can make to be more secure on this is always good. At this moment, they have a large install base and a very broad package for backup of applications, for OSs and Hyper-V, with a cloud integration. This will be a major part of their growth and change in the future. 

We would like the ability to restore to and from the cloud to on-prem. While they are already very big in this aspect, this could be an improvement over the next few years.

I have been using it for approximately three years. However, my company has been using it much longer.

It is a very stable product that has many features. 

Scalability is very good. It can go very far with the number of media agents and its database. 

You have hyperscale possibilities, which is not something that I work with a lot. However, if necessary, you can also use the appliances to scale. 

For normal environments with servers and media agents, it is rather easy to scale. We sometimes start with small media agents using a physical server. We always have the possibility to extend it with more disks. It is easy for Commvault to scale the disk capacity.

The technical support is very good. We have a general account with Commvault where we can open cases and get assistance. Up until now, it has always been very good.

Positive

Sometimes, they have already used Dell EMC NetWorker. When Dell EMC tries to sell them PowerProtect, we will suggest moving to Commvault because we know it is very good and has a stable environment.

The initial setup is straightforward because I know the product rather well. I can say that customers who see it or sometimes migrate from another product to Commvault find it difficult. For example, you need to have a CommServe server with a database. The database could be on another server or virtual machine. Then, you will need to have media agents.

By using our service provider solution, customers often have less work than before. They don't have to manage an environment themselves. They can get reports about whether backups fail or not. They can also ask us to perform restores, etc.

The main reason that customers often choose us is because we can use Commvault as a service provider. So, the customer does not need to install a CommServe server and database on-premises. Instead, we can simply use a media agent with clients and back up their data on a temporary media, then replicate the data to our data center and servers. So, they will have double security, e.g., on-prem for fast restores. Initially, after one weeks to two months, they will have longer copies and retention periods on our site, where they have the possibility to perform restores or replication to their on-prem environment.

Sometimes, for customers, the setup is difficult compared to Veeam, which we sometimes also sell to much smaller customers. However, for the bigger customers, we use Commvault.

If it is a bigger physical and/or virtual environment with a lot of applications, Commvault is the way to go. We have noticed with Veeam, especially if you have physical database servers, that it is sometimes a hassle to configure and back up. For smaller customers who only have a virtual environment of around 50 to 60 VMs, Commvault might be too big, painful, and difficult. In these cases, we might propose the Veeam solution.

Rubrik and Cohesity have large cloud solutions. However, in Belgium, it is mainly the virtual environment that we need to protect as well as physical servers for bigger customers, which is why Commvault is the best solution for us.

I primarily still use the Commvault Command Center. We teach a lot of customers to use the Commvault Web Console because it is easier for them to use. Also, for future upgrades, the newer versions are aware of the web and HTML5 interfaces, but not Command Center.

It is good to have an assessment of the environment beforehand to really look at the retention of the customer's backups. If they are already using a solution, it is important to determine if the configured retention times are up to date. It is also important to know if cloud integration is necessary or will be in the future.

I would rate this solution as eight out of 10. There is always room for improvement.

We use Commvault to back up our NetApp environments to a file and data server. Commvault backs up everything, including our databases and the log files from these databases. We have a cloud, but we're not managing it with Commvault yet. We are also not using the isolation and segmentation features. We're only using Commvault internally, but it's still important for us to have those features. We've chosen Commvault for its full capabilities.  

Commvault is faster than NetApp's native Snapshot technology. Management and restoration are easier. We don't need to mount or unmount volumes from NetApp before restoration. With just a few clicks, we can immediately get to the data we need to restore, and the restoration is completed instantly. It's fast, accurate, and up to date.

We save a lot of time doing backups and restoration with Commvault. Our goal is to do everything within eight hours. We have several terabytes of data that need to be backed up daily, and we do it overnight during a period of eight hours maximum. We can usually get that done in three or four hours.

However, it hasn't cut back on our storage or infrastructure costs. Our NetApp environment is already a network cluster, meaning the data is saved in two locations. Then we installed Commvault on a third location, so we can restore from that if the other two fail. We were forced to invest in putting servers into that small data center, so there were no direct cost savings.

Backup is the reason why we bought Commvault. We need to ensure that all of our backups are done daily. This is very important because we use it for disaster recovery, and we need this data back. We're a production environment. If we cannot restore in the event of a failure within X number of hours, it has a considerable impact on our company. Five thousand people are working at the factory who depend on this data. If it's not available, they can't work. 

Consistent recovery is also essential. Every day, we have users who delete a file and need to restore it. Our backups must be up to date.

Commvault's interface has a lot of sub-menus, and sometimes it's hard to find the information you need. You have to click a few times before finding the right window. The overview could be better.

We've been using Commvault for almost three years now.

Commvault is stable. We've never had problems with it. It's always available, and it's doing the job without any issues. It never fails. Sometimes we miss a backup, but there's always a reason for it, and it's not the fault of Commvault. In the last three years, we've never had to open a ticket with Commvault. That shows how stable and well-performing it is.

We are looking into scalability because we're not yet using Commvault for the whole organization. The main limitation is the cost of implementing it at a lot of sites. Every year, we put it on our agenda to adopt it across Europe. We've selected some spots, but sometimes we've had to scrap a few because of the cost. However, soon we'll have the data we need for broader implementation. 

We have around 15 affiliates, including five big ones. Currently, it's running at two of those. Every national affiliate is responsible for its own budget, and it's up to them to decide if they want to spend the money on it. They have the built-in Snapshot technology from NetApp that they can use, with all its limitations, or they have the full-blown Commvault option, which needs investment first. Every year, we evaluate if we replace the NetApp Snapshot technology with Commvault. Quite often, there are other priorities.

But that hasn't stopped us because sometimes we use Turkey's Commvault to take backups from all those countries. So the scalability is excellent. It's easy because you just add the server, and it's up and running.

Installing Commvault is straightforward. It's a "next, next, finish" installer. For deployment, we had help from a third party who had experience with Commvault, so it was pretty easy to configure all those things.

Altogether, it took four or five days. We had to do some fine-tuning. It was a new product for us, so we had to learn how to use it too. The installation itself only took a day and a half. We spent the rest of the time learning tips and tricks and all that stuff. For management, we work with a third-party partner in India called Infosys. We also have a team of three people here in Europe supervising it.

When we installed everything in Turkey, we used a partner over there called Datacore. They were outstanding. We vetted them first using the same process we use for approving projects. I would rate them nine out of 10. 

For us, the return is that we can get our data back in the event of a disaster. That's the most important thing. We're not looking at it in terms of a return on investment in hardware. The data is what matters the most. If we lose that, it will cost us a fortune compared to the money we spend on installation. You cannot compare those two things.

Commvault's price is quite high. You have to pay for the licenses and the hardware you need for the Commvault environment. If you don't have all the hardware, you have to buy it, which can cost a few million. In the end, it's vital to protect our data, so the price isn't an issue. However, it can be a hard sell to your top management. They say, "Well, you have your NetApp snapshot technology. Why go for something else when that is doing the job? Why should you spend a few million to implement another backup solution?" 

If you can find a decent reason, then it's great. With the pandemic, it's becoming difficult to justify expenses like this. Everybody is afraid about the impact and wants to avoid extra costs as much as possible.

In the beginning, we were looking at around six or seven products, and then we made a shortlist that included Veeam and Cohesity. We looked at solutions from most of the big, traditional companies. We chose Commvault because it has all the features we want. It's also a good fit for us because it supports a wide range of platforms, including NetApp and Windows, and we use several different platforms. 

I rate Commvault nine out of 10. If you want a stable product that you can rely on, you should definitely go for the Commvault environment.

We use it in the most traditional way: for backup and restore. We don't use it for all the other things that are also possible with it because we are quite a big company. We have all the specific tools we need for specific purposes.

We tested Commvault in the past for archiving, but in those days it was not really stable yet. So we selected other solutions for that.

We use Commvault on everything. We are using it in our own data centers but also in the cloud. We use Azure for most things, but we also are working on testing some things on AWS.

The benefits to our company are the performance and scalability and the willingness of Commvault to connect to talk with us about any requests we have for changing the product, and to do understand what we're looking for. If possible they also implement these things in quite a short amount of time. If a new feature is needed, or it should be doing A instead of B, they're always willing to listen to requests and build them. That's great.

The fact that the solution is a single platform has enabled our company to accelerate growth and drive innovation. We're using it in a traditional way but our resources and services are moving to the cloud. It helps that the way the product works, what we are used to doing in the traditional way on-prem, can be done the same way in the cloud. That makes it easier overall and makes the transition easier.

There are ways the solution helps our admins to minimize the time they spend on backup tasks, but in some ways, the solution doesn't. But that's more related to our way of working and not related to Commvault. Using it saves us about 40 hours in a month, thanks to its automation features.

In terms of saving on infrastructure costs, in our environment that's not measurable because we have a dedicated platform and dedicated infrastructure for it. But we see the benefits of the deduplication. It's saving petabytes in our environment.

The backup and restore activities are valuable and being able to use it in a hybrid space. You can easily back up on-prem and restore to the cloud and vice-versa. The scalability is also good.

The solution's interface is easy to use. For manageability, it doesn't matter where the resource is coming from or going to. That's the great power of the Control Panel: It's easy to use and does not matter if you manage on-prem or cloud resources.

Commvault works quite well as it is. But we are an MSP, so for us it's fairly hard to customize it for branding it.

There is also room for improvement in the multi-tenancy and security. That's been a hard thing for us and for Commvault as a vendor. Sometimes it's hard to implement new features in multi-tenancy environments. The new features are great, and it's good that they are there, but they are not always usable in an MSP environment.

The solution's breadth and depth of cloud support are good but could be better. Some cloud features that are common-sense, especially on AWS, are not completely integrated yet in the product. They are a work-in-progress. Overall, cloud is moving and innovating also very fast. That also makes it very hard for Commvault to comply with all the new features. Sometimes a cloud provider like Microsoft changes something and a feature is broken in Commvault.

We have been working with Commvault as a backup product for about 12 years now. As an MSP, it's very hard to switch from vendor to vendor. But the solution also works great. We have no real reason to switch to another product at this moment. We are always looking at the competitors, but not all the competitors can comply with all the things that we need.

It is very stable. We have some little issues with it, but when we have issues they're always related to the application we want to back up, not to the product itself. We ask a lot of the product; we use it in a fairly hard way on several things. Sometimes we hit the boundaries of the product and we encounter issues. But in day-to-day business, we don't see any real issues related to the infrastructure or the load we can give it.

It scales very well. If we need more capacity or more power for performance, then we add additional nodes without needing to do a complete redesign of the product or the environment. We can easily add extra power.

We have about 10,000 clients running with approximately 2 petabytes of data being backed up. That will double in the upcoming year to two years. We also have about 1,000 end-users of the product and most of them are doing restore activities.

Their technical support is very good.

But a hard thing for them is understanding how to work with an MSP. They assume, sometimes, that as an MSP, we have access to everything. But that's not the truth and it's not possible. That makes troubleshooting hard for us and for them as well. But they are quite fast in responding and try to help as quickly as possible. Still, most of the cases that we have with customer support need to be escalated directly to development.

We previously used an IBM solution. The main reasons we switched to Commvault were cost and complexity.

The setup of Commvault was complex but that's related to our environment. As an MSP we have very high security guidelines, so that made it hard. But that's not related to Commvault, it's related to our security environment.

Our deployment took almost a year. We had to make sure our design was good before we did anything. Most time of the implementation time was in the design phase. The actual building-up of the solution was quite fast. We were done in a month, starting from scratch.

For deployment and maintenance we need four to five people who are backup system admins.

We did it by ourselves.

We have seen ROI in several respects, but not as fast as we want.

We look at everything on the market. Every year to two years we do a new evaluation of the new techniques and products. We are always comparing it with Veeam, for example. We have Veeam running in several places. We test the two solutions and compare the results with each other.

Out-of-the-box, the manageability is one of the big differences. For end-users, sometimes Commvault is too complex and, while it's getting better and better with the latest versions, it is still not there. The most important thing is what my end-users say to me about using Veeam. It's very straightforward, easy-to-use, and does what it needs to do. Veeam and other competitors are point solutions. They are very good in specific situations and specific environments.

On the other hand, Commvault is a product that can manage a lot of things, and most competitors don't have the scalability and the large support-matrix for as many products, versions, and applications. Commvault allows us to use one product for almost everything. It's better than the competitors. We want to have everything in a single console, if possible, and that's what Commvault does for us.

The biggest lesson I have learned from using Commvault is to take your time. Especially in complex environments, the design stage takes a lot of time, but you need to do it well. Otherwise, you will have trouble in your implementation. We learned that the hard way. We wanted it built fast but, when the design was ready, we needed to rebuild several times.

Customers who can’t afford storage on their on-premise servers can easily use the product to move to the cloud.

I like the Metallic Endpoint feature. Whoever has an Endpoint license can store unlimited data on the cloud. Commvault provides unlimited restoration for free. Other products have a limit on restoration. When we cross the limit, we must pay for restoration.

The product does not provide an option to save a copy of data on-premises.

I have been using the solution for three to five months.

I rate the tool’s stability a nine out of ten.

The solution is scalable. We have three to five customers using the tool.

Whenever we raise a ticket, the support personnel connects with us at the exact time that they committed to. I can rate the support team a ten out of ten without a doubt.

Positive

The on-premise solution is a lengthy one to configure. We can deploy the solution in three to four clicks, though. The product is purely cloud-based.

To deploy the tool, we must authenticate our email ID on Commvault. Then, we will get a link from which we need to generate a username and password. Once we enter that username and password, we'll get a region of the cloud where we need to configure the storage tool.

The solution is worth the money. Depending on the customer’s feasibility, they pay for the license every year or every three years. The evaluation is given for 30 to 90 days, which has to be paid.

A sales manager, a technical manager, a COO, one of my colleagues, and I handle Commvault in our company. Overall, I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

My customers are not satisfied with the tool because there is a little trouble with the throughput of Metallic. If you go very large, you run into some problems, especially when moving things into the cloud and out of the cloud. This is not a problem of Metallic but a cloud provider problem. However, that's a normal thing we have with the cloud providers.

I wouldn't want any more features since, at the moment, it's very simple to do a SaaS backup and so on while doing more complex things since it is on-premises.

I am a reseller of backup products, not only Metallic but also for Veritas, CommVault, and so on. I am trying to resell the solutions. I like to resell it in combination with our hardware. I am not interested in selling the solution for the cloud because that's not with our hardware. I am a partner of CommVault, so I resell Metallic. My company also has a partnership with Veritas and Veeam.

I have been dealing with Metallic for my customers.

The product's stability is good enough. But, you have to compare it with other products. For example, I am using Veritas, and I am using it for CommVault, perhaps at home for myself. For the rest, I am selling. I am not doing the implementation. I'm only selling it.

Technical support is fine if you speak English. So, it is good enough if you speak English. If you prefer your native language, then it becomes a little bit more difficult.

Speaking of Metallic's competitors, they have an advantage in terms of pricing and buying deals or doing some more things in a smarter way. For example, Veritas provides better tools than Metallic. 

You need something in the cloud to do the backup. For example, I use CommVault on my laptop from work, and we use Commvault in the cloud, which is very easy and very good to use. Not Metallic, but with only Commvault, we are backing up to the cloud and our desktop. So, we can use it everywhere. If you have some problem, then you can restore it at home, which is very nice. It works very fine.

My suggestion to others is to size it correctly. I do recommend the products.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I use it for backing up the database of our Microsoft People server system.

Commvault has saved us time in managing our backup and restore processes, as well as backup management. It has definitely made our backup administration more efficient.

The most valuable feature is the ability it gives me to automate backups well and consistently, and to follow up on them as well. It also provides consistent recovery processes. Whenever we have needed to do a restore, it has worked quickly and efficiently.

The completeness of Commvault's coverage for databases is also pretty good. It covers all the bases with the major databases that we utilize within an enterprise.

I also like it because it's pretty easy to use and that it is pretty reliable. The user interface for managing it is good.

In addition, it auto-discovers the databases and that means lower maintenance on my side for individual database configuration.

There are two ways to use it and I prefer the web-based one over the app. I wish they were a little bit more matched in what they offer because the features aren't as available in the web-based interface as they are in the app.

I have been using the Commvault solution for about two years.

It's pretty stable.

It seems to be scalable. I'm not really involved in that side, being a user and not an administrator of it, but I know that they've had to add on and do upgrades to it. It seems to be working well. I haven't seen any disruption from that.

I use my internal company support team and they reach out to Commvault as necessary.

We were using Dell EMC NetWorker. We switched due to bad support and because we were having lots of issues. They were also slow in keeping up with the technology.

In general, I would give Commvault a thumbs-up. Make sure your people are involved in the procurement process so that they understand what it offers, and be sure to do PoC testing. But that's generic to any implementation.

Because my work with Commvault isn't necessarily technical in nature, it's more process-oriented, people in a similar situation should work closely with their administrators to make sure the admins understand what they need to do. The problems that we have with it are mostly to do with internal workflow.

The Command Center for getting a view of your data is okay. We have some internal issues with the way that the people who manage the system display things to us and give us access to certain things. But otherwise, it's okay.

It is used as a single backup for my small office's Microsoft 365 account, particularly the OneDrive files.

The best example is that it hasn't impacted my operations, which is exactly how it's supposed to work. It's supposed to provide a backup in the case of an unforeseen event or emergency, if something happens to the OneDrive. That's what it's there for. Otherwise, it shouldn't have an impact and it doesn't.

It provides daily backups and, since I'm not doing manual backups anymore, it has greatly reduced the time that it was taking me to do those. I was doing them every day so it has greatly reduced my workload. In addition, it has provided much higher reliability and efficiency. It's saving me on the order of 20 hours a month, as it does backups more efficiently and more often than I did or would have.

The most valuable feature is the one that I'm using, which is the backup of my OneDrive. Thankfully I haven't had to use a backup yet, but the solution itself seems to be working very well.

In terms of the speed of backup, it operates seamlessly, so I'd rate it as excellent. The first backup took a while because I already had quite a bit of information residing on my OneDrive, but now, with my daily use and workload, quite honestly I don't even notice when it backs up. It's completely seamless.

I've been using Metallic for about a year.

I have not had any issues with its stability.

It seems like it has good scalability, which is another thing that I'm interested in because hopefully I won't be a small business for long. I've never run enterprise-level software, but I'm very happy with Metallic, as the owner of a small business.

As the business grows, as I add users, the ability to add backup features is there. It's something I've discussed with their customer support and tech support. I'm comfortable that as I add users and begin to use more features in my Office suite and elsewhere, Metallic will be able to provide backup. That's really the primary reason I have it: data backup and security.

I use it every day for the business. It's in OneDrive now but at some point I'm going to have employees and it will have to migrate over to SharePoint. I will then need it backed up in SharePoint as well for use by my team.

In terms of ease of use, I'm not an IT professional. I own a small business. So it was a little challenging to get running, but Metallic's customer service — their technical support and their sales and customer contact representatives — were world-class; among the best customer service interactions I've had with anyone, anywhere, for any reason. That was very much appreciated. I appreciate their follow up, their diligence, their responsiveness. That was just world-class. There's no other word for it.

They're very responsive. When a question comes in, they follow up, even when they haven't heard from me. They check to make sure everything is working properly, and they answer any questions preemptively. I have the utmost regard for their customer service and their tech support and their ability to solve issues. They have done a phenomenal job of customer outreach, problem solving, and tech support; the whole nine yards.

I had a physical hard drive that I backed everything up to, manually. That was my backup plan, which was not a good backup plan. I'm much more comfortable with how things are operating now.

The reason I moved to Metallic was that my OneDrive files got too big. The manual backup was taking too long and it was not being accomplished as often as I wanted it to be. I knew I needed an automatic cloud backup.

The setup was a little bit difficult for a non-IT person like me. My OneDrive is protected by multifactor authentication, and to get the backup to begin behind that multifactor authentication took a little bit of almost customized support, even though I was following the instructions and the videos. That process could have been easier. But considering that I needed the additional support, Metallic was phenomenally responsive and I give them the highest marks possible for their responsiveness and support.

It was configured through Azure. That was hands-on on my part. It was simple to understand. But even though I followed the instructions, I wound up doing a screen share with tech support that uncovered some additional items that the instructions did not cover. That was the source of the initial problem. But tech support and customer support helped me overcome those efficiently and they were really responsive and helpful.

I knew the setup would take a little bit of time and I set the time aside. When it didn't work and the backup wasn't occurring or was having trouble, I got in touch with customer support and technical support and they provided assistance. And then I would get busy and not be able to respond to them for some time, and then they would get back with me. The plan was to sit down and have it all done but it didn't work out that way. It took a little bit longer than planned, but that was not Metallic's fault.

I got everything installed, but I didn't have any backups accomplished till after the free trial expired. But again, that was not Metallic's fault.

It was just me and the Metallic support. One of the customer support agents at Metallic, Alix, was fantastic. I don't recall the names of the tech support people who I spoke with, but they were also excellent.

I'm the only one using and maintaining it at the moment.

It hasn't saved money for my company on infrastructure costs but the idea is that in the event that something unforeseen or catastrophic happens, it will save me money. It's like an insurance policy.

It certainly provides me with more predictable costs for my backup requirements. And there is ROI because I've got a backup that I don't have to do manually. That saves me time and headache.

I looked at this at the beginning of the year and I don't remember what the prices were for all the other services, but I thought that Metallic's was fair. It was also highly rated, which was even more important than cost because I need a reliable, secure, backup method.

I looked into other options but Metallic seemed like it had the greatest ability to scale up, add features, and it had a good price.

I would highly recommend it.

The biggest lesson I've learned from using it is that when I expand, I'm going to need an IT consultant to assist, so that I don't have to spend the time doing it. I will want someone who can deal with the issues efficiently.

With the caveat that I haven't needed a backup yet, since nothing catastrophic has happened, I would rate Metallic and their team as a 10. I can only assume and hope that if, God forbid, something were to happen and I were to need the backup, it would be as good as the service has been so far.