We performed a comparison between NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP and VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, Pure Storage, IBM and others in Cloud Software Defined Storage."The most valuable feature is the ease of file storage."
"ONTAP is great for helping you migrate on-premise workflows to cloud environments."
"Its functionality and technical support are adequate to help prevent failure due to errors."
"We use the mirroring to mirror our volumes to our DR location. We also create snapshots for backups. Snapshots will create a specified snapshot to be able to do a DR test without disrupting our standard mirrors. That means we can create a point-in-time snapshot, then use the ability of FlexClones to make a writeable volume to test with, and then blow it away after the DR test."
"Its scalability is very good."
"The FlexClones make all the management easier for us."
"We're able to use the SnapMirror function and SnapMirror data from our on-prem environment into Azure. That is super-helpful. SnapMirror allows you to take data that exists on one NetApp, on a physical NetApp storage platform, and copy it over to another NetApp storage platform. It's a solid, proven technology, so we don't worry about whether data is getting lost or corrupted during the SnapMirror."
"The Cloud Manager application that's on the NetApp cloud site is easy to use. You can set up and schedule replications from there, so you don't have to go into the ONTAP system. Another feature we've recently started using is the scheduled power off. We started with one client and have been slowly implementing it with others. We can cut costs by not having the VM run all the time. It's only on when it's doing replication, but it powers off after."
"The most valuable features are the backup and disaster recovery services."
"We feel the ability to move virtual machines while they are still running to be the most valuable feature."
"The initial setup is easy depending on the environment you are working with."
"Technical support is very proactive and helpful."
"Setting up VMs can be done quickly. It is easy to use."
"The navigation on some of the configuration parameters is a bit cumbersome, making the learning curve on functions somewhat steep."
"I would want more visibility and data analytics where we can see anomalies within the shares within the GUI."
"We want to be able to add more than six disks in aggregate, but there is a limit of the number of disks in aggregate. In GCP, they provide less by limiting the sixth disk in aggregate. In Azure, the same solution provides 12 disks in an aggregate versus GCP where it is just half that amount. They should bump up the disk in aggregate requirement so we don't have to migrate the aggregate from one to another when the capacities are full."
"The key feature, that we'd like to see in that is the ability to sync between regions within the AWS and Azure regions. We could use the cloud sync service, but we'd really like that native functionality within the cloud volume service."
"Something we would like to see is the ability to better manage the setup and tie it to our configuration management database. We manage our whole IT infrastructure out of that database."
"I would like to see more information about Cloud Volumes ONTAP using Google Cloud Platform on NetApp's website."
"One difficulty is that it has no SAP HANA certification. The asset performance restrictions create challenges with the infrastructure underneath: The disks and stuff like that often have lower latencies than SAP HANA itself has to have."
"When it comes to a critical or a read-write-intensive application, it doesn't provide the performance that some applications require, especially for SAP. The SAP HANA database has a write-latency of less than 2 milliseconds and the CVO solution does not fit there. It could be used for other databases, where the requirements are not so demanding, especially when it comes to write-latency."
"VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery could improve by enhancing the network bandwidth from the storage."
"When starting up the replication and converting it to the virtual machine I had some problems. I had to start the process again and that is inconvenient."
"It would be ideal if they added advanced analytics or AI to the solution."
"The automation should be simplified or improved."
"The improvements should be as per customer requirements."
More VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery Pricing and Cost Advice →
NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is ranked 1st in Cloud Software Defined Storage with 60 reviews while VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery is ranked 4th in Disaster Recovery as a Service with 5 reviews. NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is rated 8.8, while VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP writes "Its data tiering helps keep storage costs under control". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery writes "Application can be migrated from one host to another in respects of virtual machines without the user taking notice". NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is most compared with Azure NetApp Files, Amazon S3, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Google Cloud Storage and Portworx Enterprise, whereas VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery is most compared with Zerto, VMware SRM, Veeam Backup & Replication, Azure Site Recovery and Rubrik.
We monitor all Cloud Software Defined Storage 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.
