NetWorker does an outstanding job of fully utilizing the configured backup
resources to protect the configured clients, in an automated way. It
intelligently allocates backup streams to available devices on the fly
allowing you to configure how many parallel streams each device should
accept, which is a powerful paradigm and in my experience with the same
environment will run faster and use less production resources than any other
enterprise tape backup product. You're welcome to disagree but I've seen
some compelling bake-offs.
It is also highly scalable.
The drawback has been that it has a steep learning curve on how to configure
it properly and the GUI was pretty ugly and lacked functionality. In the
past it also had major reliability issues but it is much more stable and
reliable now and the architecture/database structure is well-designed and
robust. Once it is configured correctly it does the job very well. And the
GUI issues in my opinion have been largely addressed.
Disclaimer: I don't work for EMC but I used to.
-----Original Message-----
From: EMC NetWorker discussion [mailto:NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU] On
Behalf Of Joe N. Wallace
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 12:58 PM
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [Networker] Other back-up products besides NetWorker
One quiestion I think is relevant here:
Why choose EMC Networker?
Where is Networker stronger thant the competetors mentioned (Netbackup,
Commvault, Dataprotector, TSM)
Where are the weak sides of Networker?
Is any one superiour to another?
>From my experience Networker is not a champion in any field. Sometimes I
think it's EMC's excuse for making a backup product, being such a data
protection company and all.
2008/12/18 Fazil Saiyed <Fazil.Saiyed AT anixter DOT com>
> Hello,
> I think HP, Commvault are worthy competitors, when evaluating backup
> products , existing OS expertise at hand, hardware requirement, DR
> capabilities, ability to effectively manage hardware, Tapes, reporting
> & config changes should be paramount.Backup environment is highly
> criticized upon failures and it would be prudent to have workaround,
> procedures to correct issues on the spot and recovery failed backups,
> this means even not so backup savvy operations staff may need to
> intervene as its 24X7 availability, the software which allows
> workaround, fixes with minimum admin intervention may just win out.
> To Networkers defense, i have seen more improvement in last year then
> within last 10, but it still needs to be enhanced much more,
> specifically in Tape,reporting & DR.Networker VCB backups have
> improved with subsequent versions above 7.3.
> Meanwhile, not much enhancement in NDMP support is forthcoming from
> any vendor.
> To my knowledge only Netbackup can do one shot VCB backups &
> deduplication support is good.
> Commvault is an excellent designed product, I have not seen actual
> performance but has very comprehensive tool set & is well integrated,
> Licensing can be challenging & confusing, for everyone i have talked
> to they are pleased with Commvault ( Uses SQL server for it's dB) HP
> Dataprotector finished second by narrow margin compared to Commvault
> recently in one of the study and may be worth looking into.
> I think some form of Dedupe, weather it's Data Domain\Avamar or other
> integration and support for FC within Dedupe environment may be highly
> desirable, as there are promising results from VCB dedupe as well as
> what dedupe in general can do to enhance backup & replication
capabilities.
> HTH
>
>
>
>
>
> Bruce Breidall <Bruce.Breidall AT CONCUR DOT COM> Sent by: EMC NetWorker
> discussion <NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU>
> 12/18/2008 09:42 AM
> Please respond to
> EMC NetWorker discussion <NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU>; Please
> respond to Bruce Breidall <Bruce.Breidall AT CONCUR DOT COM>
>
>
> To
> NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: Other back-up products besides NetWorker
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Define expensive...
>
> Keeping NW running is a lot harder and painful than any of those other
> products mentioned.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: EMC NetWorker discussion [mailto:NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU]
> On Behalf Of Conrad Macina
> Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 4:15 AM
> To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: [Networker] Other back-up products besides NetWorker
>
> This question comes up from time to time. I don't know anything about
> DataProtector and Commvault, but you can search the list archives and
> you'll find references.
>
> NetBackup appears to be more complete than NetWorker. A lot of things
> that are licensed separately in NetWorker are included "out of the
> box" in NetBackup. For example, open file management and tape drive
> sharing. But the impression I've received from other posts (again,
> search the archives) is that for most users, NetBackup ends up being
> more expensive. I would imagine that if you actually used all the
> features it might end up being competitive.
>
> Conrad Macina
> Pfizer, Inc.
>
>
>
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 09:52:41 +0000, Murphy, Brendan (DBO)
> <Brendan.P.Murphy AT HP DOT COM> wrote:
>
> >DataProtector ... it's cheap, licensing isn't complicated & it does
> everything Networker can. I suspect this is a key reason why EMC have
> been attempting to simplify their licensing & adjust pricing.
> >http://www.hp.com/go/dataprotector
> >
> >Veritas NetBackup .... Now owned by Symantec. Don't really know about
> price, but again it does everything Networker does.
> >http://www.symantec.com/business/netbackup
> >
> >CommVault Galaxy .. Again pricing & liecensing unknown but does the
> >job http://www.commvault.com/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Kind Regards,
> >Brendan Murphy,
> >HP Services Software Consultant | Tru64 ASE, ITIL, RHCE | Mob: +353
> >87
> 2361778 | Email : Brendan.P.Murphy AT hp DOT com
> >Postal Address: Hewlett-Packard Ireland Limited, Liffey Park
> >Technology
> Campus, Barnhall Road, Leixlip, County Kildare.
> >Registered Office: Hewlett-Packard Ireland Limited 63-74 Sir John
> Rogerson's Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 34508
> >The contents of this message and any attachments to it are
> >confidential
> and
> may be legally privileged. If you have received this message in error,
> you should delete it from your system immediately and advise the
> sender.
> To
> any recipient of this message within HP, unless otherwise stated you
> should consider this message and attachments as "HP CONFIDENTIAL".
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: EMC NetWorker discussion [mailto:NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU]
> On
> Behalf Of tcassid AT kimball DOT com
> >Sent: 17 December 2008 16:20
> >To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
> >Subject: [Networker] Other back-up products besides NetWorker
> >
> >We use NetWorker as our back-up produce but was wondering if there
> >are
> any
> >other back-up products out there in the market that are pretty equal
> but
> >cost less to use.
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
> type
> "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
> networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with
> this list. You can access the archives at
> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
> >via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
> >
> >To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
> type
> "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
> networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with
> this list. You can access the archives at
> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
> >via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
>
> To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
> type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
> networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with
> this list. You can access the archives at
> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or via RSS at
> http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
>
> To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
> type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
> networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with
> this list. You can access the archives at
> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or via RSS at
> http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
>
>
> To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
> type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
> networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with
> this list. You can access the archives at
> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or via RSS at
> http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
>
To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
type
"signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this
list. You can access the archives at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or via RSS at
http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this
list. You can access the archives at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
|
