Dell Avamar Reviews

My clients use Avamar to back up VM solutions on VMware's infrastructure.

The fast backup and recovery and the Full Backup features are valuable. When our customers have issues with data loss, Avamar helps them recover data within a few minutes.

Some customers need to back up to tape, but Avamar lacks support, so it costs a lot.

I would like to see backup for container-based applications. Avamar doesn't support container-based backup right now. Dell has a new product called PPDM that they just announced last year, and it has a feature for container-based backup solutions. However, PPDM doesn't support legacy applications like Notes and Domino and some of the high-end databases. Avamar supports all these, including Unix and Linux.

I've used the solution for more than five years.

I rate Dell Avamar's stability a ten out of ten.

I rate Dell Avamar's scalability a ten out of ten. There are over 100 servers, and I have ten companies as clients. One is an enterprise-level business, and the rest are medium-sized businesses.

The initial setup is easy. I rate it a ten out of ten. The time taken to deploy the solution depends on the end customer's environment. If it's complex, we'll need about one day to deploy. The price is quite low because right now, most of the Avamar appliances, like the DP4400, which comes together with Avamar, are ready to use. We just need to put the required IP addresses in the initial stages. After that, it's ready to use. We then just add a host to back up to Avamar. In this case, completing the implementations takes about two to three hours.

I rate the pricing a seven out of ten because it is expensive. I don't think small companies would choose Avamar because the price is high but reasonable for medium-sized companies. Normally, there are no additional costs when we choose the DP4400.

If the customer is a small business, I would not recommend Avamar because of the price. If the customer only wants a simple platform for data protection, though, Avamar is a really good option.

I rate Dell Avamar a ten out of ten.

We've been using this solution to backup our servers. It is a simple backup and restore data application.

It's very slow to backup and store information. It has two consoles and an application which are more difficult to use than a solution like Veeam. 

For future releases, Avamar should improve on the compression speed of their backups. This is a core feature of a backup and restore solution. The interface of Avamar could also be improved but this is something they are working on. In comparison, you don't need to wait three hours to restore Veeam.

This is a stable solution but does not offer fast performance. 

In certain scenarios, the support for this solution has been good. Often, the team take too long to resolve issues. 

Neutral

I have previously used Veeam at a different company. It is very good as a backup and restore solution. For example, I could restore a server on Veeam that has two terabyte storage used and it took approximately 20 minutes. On Avamar, it would take three hours. 

Veeam has a support team is very good with good technical skills.

This is a fairly expensive solution. It cost approximately 21,000 each year. 

I would advise others to use Veeam over Avamar. 

I would rate this solution a six out of ten. 

My primary use case is backend storage for our VMs. We are fully virtualized, using VMware for our virtualization layer, and we use multiple VMs for our applications, so we have multiple workloads for the education school information systems. Then we have our ERP and HR systems, and our infrastructure monitoring the networking solutions, and so on. All these VMs are backed up using Avamar.

By bringing in Avamar and keeping the repository on the data domain, we got a very high DDU and high compression and reduction in data size.

The most valuable features are data deduplication and compression, backup and replication, and instant backup, which allows us to restore our data at any given point in time.

There are two areas for improvement I would suggest. First, some integrations are not in place, such as the email alerts, which are not compatible with Office 365 SMTP gateway. Secondly, Avamar has no APS for monitoring or alerting.

I've been using this solution for three years.

Avamar is very stable - we've hardly seen any issues with it. We have had some problems with the virtualization layer but not with the product itself.

It's very scalable. We did face some issues with using multiple applications, but we added a couple of proxies, and it's gone very well since then.

Dell's support is excellent - if any issues occur, we open the case, and the maintenance gets done. The only problem is that sometimes they can be slow to respond.

I previously used Veeam Backup & Replication, but it wasn't very reliable or cost-efficient because there was no deduplication or compression, so we switched to Avamar.

The initial setup was very straightforward and took about a week.

I used a partner involved by the principal vendor, from a company called MDS. They were really professional and were experts on the product.

We have seen huge data reduction and data deduplication and compression, which is very cost-effective and cost-reducing for the company. Overall we've saved around $200,000 when it comes to storage.

Avamar's pricing is quite competitive compared to other vendors. We don't pay any costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

We evaluated Veritas and had previously used Veaam, but when we compared overall cost, integration, stability, and agility, we found Avamar was one of the best.

Before choosing any backup solution, run a use case so that you can evaluate the product and have proof of concept. I would rate Avamar as nine out of ten.

It is a backup solution. So, we do daily backups of around 3,000 VMware guests. That is normally just an image backup where it goes to the VMware API, backs up the image file, and then puts it on the backend to Avamar into Data Domain. It has a specialized storage system that does dedupe and compression, so we can get more on a single disk array. We have more than one site. We have a primary site and a secondary site.

At the Data Domain level, we replicate site to site every backup every day so that we have the availability in our secondary site for every VM. The replication is done with the architecture of the Data Domain itself. 

We have the rapid recovery solution that allows you to stand up any box at either location and have it come up online within just a minute or two. That's done via NFS. It becomes a data store into VMware, and then you vMotion it out. So, it has got rapid recovery at both locations as well.

We are using its newest version. We keep it up to date.

There are occasions where we have a problem with the system, and we can either try to fix it or recover it. With rapid recovery, we can get the system operational where people can get access to it in less than 10 minutes. So, we can have a problem with a system, and instead of messing around with it, we can bring up the copy. If it is a system that doesn't allow you to have a lot of daily change rate in the data, we can bring up yesterday's copy or last night's copy and have it up and running online in less than 10 minutes.

Every product is good and bad, but its claim to fame is that it is scalable. We're doing more than 3,000 VMs. Every single night a complete image backup to disks and replication are easily done in under four hours.

It is stable, and it ties very well with VMware API. If you've got VMware in-house, it is a very solid product.

It is very scalable, and that's its claim to fame, but that also makes it hard to make changes. Anytime there is a large piece of software, changing that piece of software is harder. You've got a larger install base, so you can't just rapidly change. We also use another product called Veeam, and it has this new feature called Continuous Data Protection, which basically lets you get very close to the way the system was in time. We have a system or two up there on which we have set 10 minutes Continuous Data Protection. So, we can roll it back to whatever it was 10 minutes ago, 20 minutes ago, or 30 minutes ago. This feature doesn't exist in Avamar Data Domain. That's the one feature I'd like to see first.

It can maybe have customized automatic routing. We have a Cisco ACI network. It is like a point-to-point network for everything, even multiple locations. It is flat, and that confuses Avamar Data Domain because it changes underneath Data Domain. It has some problems. They could do a little bit more on having an adaptable network or what's called a dynamic route network where it can be given a route and not care about it, as opposed to having to predefine it.

It has been in this shop for seven years.

It is very stable.

It is unlimited. Basically, it is great.

Being a backup solution, there are no users. We have the backup administrators to operate it, and if a user or a system administrator makes a request for our system, we restore that for them, but there are no users on it, per se. For our three locations, we have one backup administrator. Oklahoma City has two physical locations, and we have one location in LA.

It is currently being used extensively. We're going to the system as a software model where basically everything is deployed like the Kubernetes model. You basically have a few systems, and then everything is layered on top of it. It is sort of like a hypervisor but without the hypervisor layer. If we truly go that way, we'll probably have to go for a different backup solution that manages that better. We're testing that right now, and we're not sure how it's going to work for our shop, but that's what we're looking at.

I have interacted with them several times. We've had problems where we've got to have their help. They're average. It takes a while to get to the guy who knows what he's doing, but they've got support 24/7. You can call anytime day or night. So, they're average or a little better.

We used to use HP Data Protector. It was a nice product. It was an old-school kind of roll the tape, and we don't do tapes. We used Data Protector directly to tape. That was a nice product for physical boxes if you had a few. At that point, we had 200 or 300 physical boxes, and we backed them up. It took about a 10-hour cycle from about the time we quit work to about the next morning. We would run through this whole cycle and get that done.

It was complex. You have to have proxies. You can't just have one piece of hardware to back up all the systems in two facilities. You have to deploy proxy servers to every single VMware cluster. We've backup on a private backup network that had to be configured because we fundamentally do web service and financial targets out front, and we didn't want it to cramp that network. So, it is not simple; it is complex.

To do the primary site, it took very long. At that point, we were doing physical and virtual machines. We had some HPX physical, and we also had a mini mainframe seven years ago. It probably took a solid week to get it installed and get it completely operational. There were a few more details to it, but basically, we were up and running within about a week, but it is not going to happen in a day.

The first time we deployed it, they came out and set it up like a demo or a proof of concept. We took the model that they provided in that proof of concept, and we installed it ourselves, but we did have a proof of concept before we ever bought it. It was in-house for 90 days, and it included one Avamar, one Data Domain, and a couple of proxies in one of our clusters.

I had to mash a vendor. EMC is out to make money, and then they want to capitalize their ability to make money. That's not necessarily a negative thing in the business world, but I don't care for a lot of that. Once a product is in-house, I want to talk technical, and they technically knew what was going on. They were good and very professional. They knew their products.

Its licensing is weird. It is not just the licenses; we also purchase hardware. With most software products, such as Veeam, Commvault, and Data Protector, there is no hardware purchase at the same time. Because Avamar and Data Domain are tied together, they have an integrated pipe. You can separate them, but basically, they're designed to work as a couple. Because the Data Domain backend is designed to do dedupe and compression, we get 60:1. When you count it, you count it as a straight compression, but of course, that's with dedupe and some other stuff. You have to buy the hardware, the licensing, and the software at the same time. So, it's not just software.

It is expensive. The maintenance comes with it for five years. So, you buy the whole thing for five years, and your maintenance is included with it, but it's a big chunk of change upfront. We like capital expenses because we can CapEx them. We pay once every five years, so we spend a big chunk of change. You'd have to divide that out by the five years to come up with how much it costs. It's just about three-quarters of a million dollars for five years.

Be sure it is what you need. We bought it simply because we're a VMware shop, and we knew we were going to grow that particular core from our business and discontinue using physical hardware altogether. If that's a model that you're doing, it's a nice product. If it's not, you don't need it. 

I would also upfront negotiate the licensing model with them so that you know what to expect before you get into it. What we did not do is buy the cloud extension or an archive solution, and that is now becoming a fairly predominant piece of the pie that we don't have any licensing for. So, make sure it fits your environment, and you get the pieces that we didn't—the more modern archive and cloud control—so that you can have part of your environment out in the cloud. Many people are doing that. We're doing that. We just don't back it up that way.

I would rate Dell EMC Avamar an eight out of 10 simply because it is stable. It does a very good job of tying into the VMware API. EMC owns VMware, so they are more or less the same company. So, they're not going to make a change in VMware that adversely affects their software products. I've got to give it an eight just for that. 

Dell Avamar is a source-based backup solution. It is the best backup solution for people with laptops and desktops from various offices with a small bandwidth. We also use it for remote office backup tasks.

It is one of the best solutions for backing up Oracle and other servers. Our virtual environment backup experience has been good. One of the best features of the solution is that we can integrate it with Data Domain. We can store backups in Data Domain and replicate the data from one Avamar box to another. If one appliance fails, we can get the data from the other Avamar box. The product provides in-line deduplication at the source level. It is very good. I have used the product on VMware and Hyper-V. The tool integrates well with other solutions.

The recovery is a bit slow. There are some security gaps when we take backups of the client machines through the internet in cloud environments. The gaps must be fixed. If I use the tool to take backups through the internet, I have to open ports. It makes the entire IT environment vulnerable.

I have been using the solution for 11 years.

The stability is good.

I rate the product's scalability a five or six out of ten. I bought a license for 1 TB. The pricing was very high when I wanted to expand it to 2 TB or 3 TB. I had to consider alternate solutions to meet my requirements. The scalability is a challenge because of the price. Our clients are medium and enterprise-level businesses.

The support was very good when Avamar was handled by EMC. Since Dell acquired EMC, the support has been very bad.

Neutral

I rate the ease of setup an eight out of ten. For an experienced person, the deployment takes a few hours.

The solution is expensive. I rate the pricing a six to seven out of ten.

I will recommend the solution to others. The appliance is good. There are hardly any solutions that can match up to Avamar. It has always stood up to the test whenever we have used it. Overall, I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

Mainly we suggest it to our users, to our clients, when it comes to a fully virtualized environment of VMware.

The global duplication is great. The combination of those features with DD Boost from Data Domain, are the main features we suggest to our clients.

It is a very complete product.

The interface is fine.

We find the configuration capabilities okay.

It offers an easy initial setup. 

I don't have any notes for areas of improvement. 

We'd like to see something that could also work with Unix servers and physical servers to have a unified solution that works with everything. The use cases we have are sometimes a fully virtualized environment and sometimes a mixed environment. When it comes to mixed environments, we have to suggest NetWorker and with NetWorker, the way it works is it's a very legacy-oriented solution. It is not very cloud-oriented. It does not have many features that are the equivalent to Veeam, for example. Avamar is limiting due to the fact that it only works with virtualized environments such as VMware.

I've used the solution for less than a year. 

The solution is relatively stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. I'd rate stability eight out of ten. 

The main problem with scalability is the inability of the solution to perform backups on physical servers and cloud-oriented servers.

I'd rate the general ability to scale three out of ten. 

This solution does work for companies of all sizes. The solution is very versatile in that sense.

While I don't deal with technical support, the feedback from our deployment team is that they are pretty good. 

Positive

We've used Veritas, Dell NetWotker, and Veeam. Networker works well with legacy solutions, and Veeam does it all, including UNIX, Linux, virtualized, et cetera. 

Avamar only works with virtualized environments such as VMware.

There are also price differences.

Veeam is cheaper and more complete as a solution. It is not the most expensive. Veeam is very affordable for benchmarking financial solutions. It sits in the middle of all the other solutions. It is not very affordable when it comes to small to medium-sized enterprises, however. 

In terms of simplicity of use, I would rate Veeam as the most simple and most user-friendly when it comes to simplicity of use. It has a unique interface that can allow administrators to administer a very large scale of environments - including physical, virtual, and cloud, on the same plane. That's not the case for Dell EMC's solutions.

The solution is simple to set up. As long as an administrator has some knowledge, it's not too difficult. I'd rate the solution five or six out of ten in terms of ease of setup. 

You can deploy the solution in about half a day. 

I'm not really into deployment. We have a team that does deployment - a pre-sales team. I have very limited knowledge when it comes to deployment. That said, my understanding is only one person really needs to handle the deployment process. 

Jobs have to be set in the initial deployment, which is straightforward for recovering from older backups. After that, not much maintenance is required. 

The product is licensed by CPU. When it comes to Veeam, they switch from CPU to something they call universal licenses, which are instances. An instance can cover a VM, or an instance can cover a physical server, for example. It's a different model from CPU based licensing, and it has started to become a trend in Morocco especially.

I can't speak to the exact price of Avamar.

We sell the Dell EMC portfolio to others. We're a Dell partner. 

We're mainly using the latest version of the solution. 

I would advise potential new users to consider their environment before picking a solution. 

I'd rate the solution six out of ten. 

We're a solutions provider with backup and recovery software as our main focus, and my work deals with customer support for the backup domains from an architect's perspective.

Usually, it's for on-prem server backup. It's mostly virtual. We have VM backups and subsequent file backups, and we do file restores. In addition, the customer I work for has old Domino Notes, and we also provide support for that with Avamar.

We mostly work with its latest or latest minus one version. It depends on the bug fixes and vulnerabilities in a version.

For the on-prem backup, it has all the necessary features that we require. They keep coming up with new scripts and new updates. It's excellent for VMware backup, and we have no complaints. 

Everything is easy. We can do most things through the GUI. We don't have to go to the CLI for most things.

Avamar is not the best tool when it comes to taking Azure backups. Like Commvault, if Avamar can support VM-level backups for the cloud, that would make it a bit better. 

There is another Dell EMC tool called NetWorker, which is a bit centralized tool. If you deploy a storage node locally, you can use the same UI tool for central management, but in the case of Avamar, it needs to be deployed individually on a site, irrespective of whether it's small or big. So, if I have 10 sites, I have to manage 10 Avamar. That's a bit of a headache. The Dell EMC solution professionals who connect with the clients should suggest NetWorker to clients with multiple sites rather than Avamar. That's because NetWorker gives more centralized control, but they keep recommending Avamar, which isn't the best practice.

There are no free or cheaper training plans. Unless your company is a partner with Dell, you don't get the student guide training, etc. Their administrator guide does not have all the information required for a new person. It doesn't cover the basics. The student guide is good, but it's not free. If you are a partner, only then it's free. Otherwise, there is a cost of $2,000 to $3,000. For people who are new to Avamar, there should be some resources to enable them to study on their own at least 50% of the basics. If I want to study Commvault, I get so many documents and resources to study, but in the case of Dell EMC products, there aren't any free resources. Only if you're a partner, the resources are available for you to learn. The user manuals and administrator guides are just for deployment. They aren't good for learning the basics for a fresher.

I've been working with Dell Avamar for 10 years. 

Its stability is good. If I'm using the latest minus one version, it's pretty stable.

Scalability-wise, it's good. They're constantly increasing their backup size, as well as total storage size. So, we can scale it whenever we want.

We've about 1800 to 2200 servers for which we take backups. I'm not aware of the number of users, but it's an insurance company. It's an enterprise with multiple locations and businesses in most of the top countries.

I'd rate their L1 support a three out of ten. Their L2 and L3 support is good, but in the case of L1 support, for everything they have a single copy-paste response. It's like talking to a chatbot. They should improve that. Even though they're L1, they should try to understand the issue rather than just going through the SOP. There should be some SLA for L1 so that if they are not sure, they should directly transfer to L2 support rather than spending time on it. If you are stuck in a critical issue, it's painful to wait and let three or four hours pass before being transferred to L2.

Negative

We use both Avamar and native Azure Backup. The native Azure Backup has a lot of limitations, and it's still not developed, whereas Avamar is good, but it's not the best for the Azure cloud. So, we have Azure Backup for the cloud as well as Avamar for on-prem. For the VM backup, we have to use only Azure Backup. For file backup or any other backup that Azure Backup doesn't support, we use Dell Avamar.

Its initial setup is of medium complexity. It's neither too difficult nor too easy.

Usually, I'm the only one doing the deployment all the time. It takes half a day for the virtual backup.

Its ROI is good. I'd rate it a nine out of ten in terms of ROI.

I'm not involved in its pricing. My involvement is purely technical.

There is no free training. I'd recommend this solution if the company is giving great training. Otherwise, if you have to learn it on your own, I won't recommend it.

Overall, I'd rate Dell Avamar a seven out of ten. 

We use Avamar for all of our backup and data management solutions in our co-location facility. I have two co-location facilities with one in Carrollton, Texas, and one in Austin. 

I have data domains, Avamar platforms, and Avamar software that we use across our enterprise. 

I manage a global technology team and a global infrastructure team. We use those platforms across all of our data centers, as well as on our sites where we have on-premises storage for either our Burrtec solutions or Isilon solutions that we have in territories, where we have to have data remain in the country due to the compliance requirements. We use it globally.

The most valuable features are scalability and integration.

The problems are, that it has issues with support. Dell has issues in that area.

I think the other problem is, that when we've had to do upgrades, it's a bit problematic. Dell hasn't done a good job at handling these upgrades, or the way EMC used to handle them. 

EMC was very thorough and if you got a piece of software that you had to upgrade, you knew that it had been thoroughly tested and it was going to work well. 

We have had issues with the consistency and the reliability of the code that is coming out for upgrades and enhancements.

I have been working with Dell EMC Avamar since 2017.

We are working with the most recent version. We recently updated it.

The stability has been okay. It hasn't been on par with what we would have expected, based on the fact that this would have been considered an EMC solution. 

With Dell purchasing EMC, there has been some degrading in their capabilities in that area.

The scalability of this solution is one of the best features.

I manage the global infrastructure team. My team is responsible for all the storage and backup infrastructure globally. It's my team that uses it, all around the world.

The technical support needs improvement.

I last used Commvault in 2017.

Dell EMC solution is much more scalable. It is built for an enterprise environment where you have high-end requirements for the movement of data. 

Commvault is not as advanced. It doesn't have all of the features and functionality.

When you talk about data management, storage management, comparably you're talking about companies like Rubrik, Cohesity, and Dell EMC, who are the major players out there.

The Avamar solution has a lot of the same features and functionality that Cohesity and Rubrik have, and is a very high-end enterprise solution for data management, data recovery, and  Commvault isn't quite at that level.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is a true enterprise solution. It has a lot of configurable options that you may or may not use based on your environment.

I have engineers that are all over the world, and I have those that are global to manage this solution, and a storage and backup team.

We have 10 people globally. There is a director who manages that group as well as a principal storage lead or principal storage engineer who does a lot of design and architectural work.

It's a very high-end solution and comparable to Rubrik and Cohesity.

You have to be really concerned about the Dell support model, the quality of their upgrades, and their support team's knowledge because they have issues in that area.

When you consider rating this solution, there are two parts to consider. There is the physical platform, the data domain, and the Avamar software. There is support for both of those. 

The physical platform is pretty reliable. I would rate it an eight, and for the support and the software, I would give it a six because of the issues that we've experienced with it.

Overall, I would rate Dell EMC Avamar a seven out of ten.