Our main use case for AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is to ensure business continuity by replicating critical workloads on AWS. It allows us to continuously replicate on-premises cloud servers and quickly recover them in AWS in case of system failures or any outages. This helps minimize downtime and data loss while providing a reliable disaster recovery solution.

In addition to disaster recovery, AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery plays an important role in our overall architecture and operational resilience strategy. It allows us to continuously replicate critical workloads to AWS and perform regular recovery testing without disrupting production systems. This helps us ensure that our recovery procedures are reliable and that we can quickly restore services during unexpected failures, infrastructure outages, and cyber incidents. Overall, it provides a scalable and cost-effective way to maintain business continuity.

In our setup, we used AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery to replicate a critical web application server and its database from our on-premises environment to Amazon AWS. During a planned maintenance window, we simulated a failure scenario where the primary server became unavailable. Using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery, we quickly launched the replicated server in AWS, which restored the application within minutes. This ensured users could still access the service without significant downtime and prevented any data loss because the replication was continuous.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery offers many best features including continuous data replication, fast failover and recovery, non-disruptive testing and disaster recovery drills, automated failover and orchestration, cost-efficient staging environment, and integration with AWS ecosystem.

The automated failover and orchestration features of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery have made our recovery process much more efficient. Instead of manually rebuilding servers or configuring environments during a failure, the platform allows us to quickly launch recovery instances with predefined settings. This automation reduces the chance of human error and significantly shortens our recovery time. It has also made disaster recovery testing easier because we can simulate failure scenarios and verify that our system can be restored quickly without disrupting production workloads.

The features of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery reduce manual work, lower human error, enable faster recovery, and allow for better disaster recovery testing.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery has positively impacted our organization by improving our overall resilience and reducing downtime risk. With continuous data replication and fast system recovery, it reduces downtime risk and simplifies disaster recovery operations through automation and easy testing. The key positive impacts include reduced downtime, improved business continuity, and simplified recovery operations.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery could be improved by simplifying the management interface, enhancing monitoring and reporting features, and providing clear documentation and setup guidance for new users.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery provides reliable continuous replication, fast recovery times, and strong integration with AWS. The platform significantly simplifies disaster recovery planning and testing. However, the user interface and monitoring features could be improved to make the overall experience better.

I have been using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery for approximately one year, and over the past few months, we have been working on cloud infrastructure and disaster recovery setups.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is generally considered stable and reliable for enterprise disaster recovery environments because it provides reliable continuous replication and automated failover.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is scalable because it can protect and replicate multiple servers and workloads, and it runs on AWS infrastructure. We can easily scale recovery environments as our workload grows.

Customer support is the same as with AWS since we actually use this in our AWS account. AWS provides support through the AWS support plan, which includes basic plan, developer plan, business plan, and enterprise plan, with higher tiers offering faster response time and more direct technical help.

We previously used traditional backup and snapshot-based recovery methods through AWS, but we switched to AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery because it offers continuous replication, faster recovery, and more automated disaster recovery processes.

Pricing is pay-as-you-go and generally cost-effective since most costs come from replication, storage, and staging resources. Setup costs were minimal because it integrates directly with AWS. The licensing model is simple and usage-based.

Although I cannot give a specific example, we have seen a return on investment mainly through reduced infrastructure costs and faster recovery times. Instead of maintaining a full secondary disaster recovery site, we rely on AWS replication, and recovery testing that used to take hours now takes approximately 15 to 20 minutes.

With AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery, we were able to reduce recovery time from several hours to around 10 to 15 minutes during testing. Continuous replication minimizes data loss and the cost-efficient staging environment helps reduce infrastructure expenses compared to maintaining a full secondary disaster recovery site.

We chose AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery because we previously were using the snapshot process. We evaluated solutions including site recovery and Veeam backup and replication. We selected AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery because of its native AWS integration, continuous replication, and simpler disaster recovery management. The main factor is that our application is hosted on AWS, so AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery suited us best.

My advice would be to clearly define your RTO and RPO goals (recovery time objective and recovery point objective) before implementing AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery and to regularly test your recovery process. Proper planning of networking, security, and recovery scenarios will help ensure a smooth disaster recovery strategy. AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery helps with disaster recovery in a better way than any other solutions. I would rate this product an 8 out of 10.

My main use case for AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is for any databases or applications when they go down on a cross-region. For instance, when an application is spinning up into multiple regions, we lost one, and AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery helped us recover. In that situation, when there was an event that happened in the cloud stack, AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery helped us get things back up and running. Although this happened only once, we would like to have this multi-region, multi-data center level recovery for disaster recovery, so we are incorporating this technology.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery has positively impacted my organization. We have a priority one application that was recently deployed, and it was important for us to recover the data when the cloud stack went down. Since deploying AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery, we have mostly seen an improvement in uptime, which contributes to reducing downtime.

The best features AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery offers are the insights and alerting, which inform developers or application developers about what's going on and how the system is running.

The insights and alerting features help my team day-to-day by allowing SREs to know when an event has happened and how we are supposed to be doing recovery. They provide alerts to the SREs and groups that are subscribed, and they are alerted early. I am currently exploring the features, but for now, I find it very useful in the event of the disaster that happened.

I think insights are an area for improvement. It would be beneficial to get some insights when a disaster happens, including identification and probable solutions to ensure effective recovery. That insight and solution suggestion area is the main thing I would want to see improved.

We believe that customer support for AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery needs to be improved because although we do raise tickets, the response can take some time.

I have been using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery for two years.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is stable. It is definitely a stable application.

The scalability of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is good. We can expand it to multiple data centers or different areas such as EMEA and APAC.

I would rate the customer support an eight, as it often takes a lot of time to engage and get a solution. About eighty percent of the time, I think it will be resolved quickly.

Positive

Previously, we were using a homegrown application that tracks these systems before switching to AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery.

We did purchase AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery through the AWS Marketplace, but it's mostly the procurement team that has handled that. The management, particularly the procurement team, looks at pricing and setup costs, so I know a little about pricing, but I'm not directly involved in it.

We are just customers and consume a lot of AWS services, and do not have another business relationship with this vendor.

We have seen a return on investment by needing fewer employees for maintenance and related matters. We no longer have to schedule employees on weekends since the system automatically triggers alerts, allowing engineers to respond as needed.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery.

My advice for others looking into using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is to definitely consider it if you are scaling your applications significantly, especially if your applications are spanned across different regions. I would give this product an eight out of ten because it's a fair score. The education of our technology and operations or SRE teams is needed since most people don't know, only a few do. I suggest that improvement in customer service for disaster recovery and the alerting system would be great.

Neutral

I use the solution to deploy a Docker image application. It is hosted on GitHub, and the servers we run on are not ECR.

What I like about ECR AWS is that it is a fully managed service, so I don't need to manage the underlying infrastructure or worry about scalability in AWS concerning building, maintenance, security, and high availability. 

It offers seamless integration with services like ACL, EKS, and Fargate for deploying containerized applications. It works great with AWS, and it is flexible to use a public repository for open-source projects or a private repository for secure storage.

In its current state, ECL integrates with CloudWatch for basic logging and monitoring, yet improvements could include more detailed logs for specific actions, like when I perform actions such as push or pull. This would detail user activity directly in the ACL console for easier debugging and auditing. 

Additionally, an improved AWS pricing model is needed. AWS charges for storage and data transfer, which can add up, especially with large images or frequent pulls. Improvement should focus on offering more storage or better volume discounts for long-term use. It would also be beneficial to allow free pulls within the AWS account and vision. 

Moreover, image scanning for vulnerabilities can sometimes be slow, especially for large images. Speeding up the scanning process or providing optimized scanning for critical workflows would be welcome advancements.

I have used it for about seven months now.

Since the time I have been using ECL, my application on AWS has not broken down. I have not had any issues with it for now. It is working well. It is very good and very reliable.

I never had to contact the support team.

I didn't really use Azure. However, that was in my last organization before I joined this new one. 

I would rate AWS nine out of ten.

Our human resources solution is used by higher management competency. This is critical to the organization since it is used by higher management. ITM is really essential for the organization.

For the past year, I have been using AWS, as there was previously no native replication service available. Initially, they offered services like CloudEndure, which was a third-party service. This caused problems with integrations with existing servers. However, with AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery Service being a native service, integration is seamless. Moreover, since it is a managed service, I reduce my time to manage infrastructure and applications, which adds another benefit.

Since I have to view everything on the console, the previous application solutions like IBM and Sanavi showed the RPO and RTO status directly. In AWS Disaster Recovery Service, these details are not available, making it difficult to check my replication status. I have to calculate whether my data is replicated to the Adarabad region or not. These features, if available in AWS, would be beneficial.

I have been using it since 2019.

AWS is not difficult, but the cost associated with replicating data to another region can be significant. This is due to services like the duplication server, which continuously runs in AWS. I have more than 200 hosts, including email solutions and others, which contribute to the high cost. Cost is a concern. Otherwise, the service is reliable.

Customer service is quite helpful. I have AWS enterprise-level support, which is very beneficial. In case of any issue, they are ready to provide support within the defined SLA timeline.

Positive

Earlier, I worked with IBM Sonavi. I stopped using it since we moved from on-premise to cloud. It's not in use right now.

There were no issues during the initial setup.

The implementation is actually managed by our partner. I have taken a rate per user storage. The licensing part is completely managed by the partner.

For the past year, I have been using AWS, as there was previously no native replication service available. Initially, they offered services like CloudEndure, which was a third-party service. This caused problems with integrations with existing servers. However, with AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery Service being a native service, integration is seamless, highlighting the return on investment.

The setup is actually managed by our partner. I have taken a rate of per user. Licensing is completely managed by the partner. I am paying per user and per GB storage cost, while the infrastructure cost is separate.

Although no financial benefit from using it has been observed, I recommend the solution. The overall product rating is eight out of ten.

Positive

We are using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery for backup purposes in our company.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is convenient because it is cloud-based technology.

The strong points are the stability and scalability of the solution, as well as the convenience of it being cloud-based.

The cost of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is seen as expensive.

We have been using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery for five or six years.

I rate the stability of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery as nine out of ten.

I rate the scalability of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery as nine out of ten.

The customer service and technical support for AWS are very good and helpful. I rate it ten out of ten.

Positive

We did not work with any other products before AWS.

We use a third-party consultant company to help with integration.

The pricing of AWS is considered expensive compared to other options.

We have also used Microsoft Azure as an alternate solution.

I would recommend AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery to other users.