I tested Aptare. A problem with the 'portal' caused all of our backup jobs
to hang, as it couldn't complete bpend.
Also, it only does netbackup, whereas bocada does many platforms. Bocada
is also agentless, so installing in an environment across many sites
doesn't actually take any work.
On the real-time, dpends whether you actually need that. For 'real time'
we just look at netbackup and trap failures via snmp.
regards
Mark
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004, Brzozowski, Dwayne wrote:
> I am using Storage Profiler by Tek-Tools. Very sweet backup reporting tool,
> as well as server monitoring. I just finished testing Bocada and didn't
> like it at all.
>
>
> Dwayne J. Brzozowski
> Department of Veterans Affairs
> Austin Automation center
> (512)326-6728 work
> dwayne.brzozowski AT mail.va DOT gov
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ckstehman AT pepco DOT com [mailto:ckstehman AT pepco DOT com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 3:02 PM
> To: Ed Wilts
> Cc: Loyless, Maureen; List Veritas List;
> veritas-bu-admin AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advanced Reporter vs. Command Central
>
>
>
> We have looked at both Bocada and Aptare.
>
> Aptare won hands down.
>
> It has several advantages that made our choice much easier. Here were the
> two main
>
> 1. Aptare allows user access to be controlled by policies. You can create a
> user profile such that that
> user can see only the clients of interest to that particular user.
>
> 2. Users can do restores (if privileges are granted)
>
> 3. The data is posted close to "real time"
> When a backup or restore completes, the endbackup process on the master
> server calls a script that sends
> data to the portal immediately. You don't need to wait until the data is
> collected from the master.
>
> It has the capability to run many different types of reports.
>
> In our case we are running it on a Linux system with an Oracle 9i database.
>
> It has been running without problem since last October.
>
> The price was slightly less
> than Bocada
>
> =============================
> Carl Stehman
> PHI Services Company
> 202-331-6619
> Pager 301-765-2703
> ckstehman AT pepco DOT com
>
>
>
>
> Ed Wilts <ewilts AT ewilts DOT org>
> Sent by: veritas-bu-admin AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
>
>
> 03/16/2004 01:42 PM
>
>
>
> To: "Loyless, Maureen" <LoylessM AT pcaobus DOT org>
> cc: List Veritas List <veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT
> edu>
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advanced Reporter vs. Command
> Central
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 11:12:59AM -0500, Loyless, Maureen wrote:
> > Has anyone had experience working with the Advanced Reporter option
> > and/or Command Central? I was curious on your thoughts of either or
> > both. We are looking at both of these products and wanted to gather
> > some thoughts on functionality, differences, usefulness, etc.
>
> There are 2 other commercial products that you should consider if you're
> looking at Advanced Reporter:
> BackupReport from Bocada (http://www.bocada.com)
> StorageConsole from Aptare (http://www.aptare.com)
>
> I've started the evaluation for our purposes here and am running a demo
> of BackupReport now. I haven't started the eval for StorageConsole yet.
> The products take rather different approaches to try and accomplish the
> same thing, for better and for worse. BackupReport also supports data
> from multiple backup products, not just NetBackup. StorageConsole
> appears to be NetBackup only.
>
> If anybody out there has done a side-by-side comparison of the two, I'd
> love to see the results and compare them with what I'm working with.
>
> --
> Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA
> mailto:ewilts AT ewilts DOT org
> _______________________________________________
> Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>
>
>
>
>
>
|
