Bacula Enterprise is a data center backup, restore, and recovery solution from Swiss, Dracula-themed software company Bacula Systems.
N/A
Quest QoreStor
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
QoreStor facilitates the adoption of most storage types, uniquely including cloud object storage like native object storage. QoreStor’s advanced compression and deduplication algorithms aim to slash storage requirements and costs anywhere QoreStor is deployed, even in the cloud. QoreStor includes ransomware protection capabilities to protect backup data.
QoreStor replaces the Quest DR Series the former Dell / Quest backup and recovery solution, featuring data deduplication.
Well suited: - I use it for on premise and cloud backup and recovery and it is excellent for this job. - I also experiment with different hypervisors and till now Bacula seems to work with all of them - Security is really important for me as I had many bad experiences in the past and Bacula solution makes me totally confident. Less appropriate - You need to be experienced Linux user, I had to learn few more things in system to make the best use of it. - It's definitely designed for scalability and bigger companies than mine
The product can be run on-premises or in the cloud. It is a fantastic option to reduce the size and storage requirements of backup jobs. If your backup system can already produce a reliable reduction in storage up to 75% then I would say the QoreStor appliance would be irrelevant in your case. It does not perform backups itself. It is simply an extra step to reduce size, encrypt and offload backups to the cloud. this reduces the load on a backup system to handle other tasks while the QoreStor takes over.
Our team always points out the same problems, I believe that, today, is our biggest complaint: The interface (both graphical and the CLI) still needs improvement.
There is no mobile app to manage backups and restores from smartphones
Easy to use, proactive and effective customer support, and simple deployment method. The high configurability is what makes this tool so effective for my organization - at no point do I have any issues of trust as to the restorability of a fileset. The GUI provided gives clear actionable reports as to the effectivity of the jobs performed.
This is a hard question. Usability for whom? For someone who is very comfortable at the command line and willing to put in the time to learn Bacula Enterprise's configuration syntax, it's very usable. Just don't expect to be an expert immediately.
Operation in the Bacula system has a light and fast interface and reports are generated almost instantly. Perhaps if Bacula is integrated with other solutions it may lose some performance
They're excellent, fast to respond and knowledgeable. I can't fault the support provided at all. On every occasion that we've had a need to contact them during our evaluation, installation, and use of Bacula Enterprise, they've always given us the help that we required. The responses they provide are detailed and we always feel that they've taken the time to read and understand our issue and give a full and personalized answer.
The support team is the main reason I am sticking to Quest/KACE products. They are stellar to work with and always responsive when I need help. The team listens to the user's recommendations for added features and tends to add the ones that really have merit. Support is everything when it comes to working with such a company
The professor understood the tool very well, it was a fact that he had mastery over the system and knew what he was talking about, clearing up all doubts and passing on all the necessary knowledge so that we could handle Bacula Enterprise in our organization.
I used CTERA almost from the time they started up. In short, it was very easy to use but configuration was limited; and in the end the agents were troublesome and I could not restore files. They had one person on staff who was terrific with tech support, when he left support became difficult and I lost confidence. Acronis was my first experience with a bare-metal recovery operation and it was terrific. Really saved the day. I would still be using it except the licensing was difficult and expensive and the software wasn't Linux friendly.
When I evaluated the Dell system it was an entirely new server on-site, with licensed levels of inlocking the storage it had on board. For a smaller organization, the Dell system was not cost-effective with a large upfront payment, and additional hardware to manage on-site. The QoreStor system was a virtual machine that could pop into my current system and just use allocated storage already in place. In addition, the upfront cost was dramatically less than the Dell option and no additional hardware
Our Disaster Recovery policy in regards to backups and archiving is made possible because of our use of Bacula Enterprise.
TCO is very low as the yearly subscription is very competitively priced. Management of the software is very low so we don't have to spend hours maintaining our backups.
