Asigra vs. Red Hat Gluster Storage

If implemented as a Cloud Service provider (Public Cloud), In House Solution (Private Cloud) or a mixture of both (Hybrid Cloud):

• The Agentless Architecture means there are less support burdens.
• Encryption at Source gives the customer confidence their data is secure.
• WAN Optimisation (Compression & Block Level Incremential Forever and De-deupe of Data), enables a large amount of Data to be protected offsite.
• One step Backup to both Local and Offsite storage enables LAN speed restores with offsite peace of mind.
• Asigra Replication from DS-System to DS-System enables another geographically separate copy of the data.

GFS is well suited for DEVOPS type environments where organizations prefer to invest in servers and DAS (direct attached storage) versus purchasing storage solutions/appliances. GFS allows organizations to scale their storage capacity at a fraction of the price using DAS HDDs versus committing to purchase licenses and hardware from a dedicated storage manufacturer (e.g. NetApp, Dell/EMC, HP, etc.).

Incentivized

• Provides capability of local backups while maintaining remote copies on cloud to ensure faster recoveries of recent data and remote protection of all data.
• Helps reduce cost of long term retention by leveraging the BLM functionality.
• It does not need specialized hardware for it to work. Customers and Service Providers can choose their own infrastructure and do not need to rely on any OS or storage based replication even for deploying replication of backups.
• Supports wide range of environments including virtual environments with remarkable features like remote VDR with incremental restores.

• Scales; bricks can be easily added to increase storage capacity
• Performs; I/O is spread across multiple spindles (HDDs), thereby increasing read and write performance
• Integrates well with RHEL/CentOS 7; if your organization is using RHEL 7, Gluster (GFS) integrates extremely well with that baseline, especially since it's come under the Red Hat portfolio of tools.

Incentivized

• We would like to see Asigra come out with a Replication Model for quick Recovery of systems upon Disaster. We can have quicker recovery, DR, with Virtual Machines but we would like to have Physical Machine recovery in less than 2 hours. Replication can accomplish this...
• We would like to see Geolocation and remote wipe for endpoint devices
• We would like to see the solution provide easy "roll back" after a disaster.

• Documentation; using readthedocs demonstrates that the Gluster project isn't always kept up-to-date as far as documentation is concerned. Many of the guides are for previous versions of the product and can be cumbersome to follow at times.
• Self-healing; our use of GFS required the administrator to trigger an auto-heal operation manually whenever bricks were added/removed from the pool. This would be a great feature to incorporate using autonomous self-healing whenever a brick is added/removed from the pool.
• Performance metrics are scarce; our team received feedback that online RDBMS transactions did not perform well on distributed file systems (such as GFS), however this could not be substantiated via any online research or white papers.

Incentivized

• Asigra is a great entry way into the cloud.

• Compliance is a tricky thing. Jumping backup software means having to deal with previous copies somehow. Asigra is built for the long haul.
• Asigra is continuing to increase their feature stack. They have made huge steps in the VM backup in the last 3 years and continue to implement features there.
• As far as cloud backup software goes, there are many that can do it, but none that do it as well as Asigra.

Incentivized

It is a bit rough around the edges and the GUI feels like a wrap around of a CLI but it is simple to use. The problem comes in when there is an error code you are usually chasing down the error code in the specific vendor's forums rather than Asigra's

Incentivized

Over 6 consecutive years our Asigra Backend had 99.99% uptime and provided 7x24 data restore availability.
Software is robust in operations, provides N+1 node architecture to protect against failure of half of the nodes (majority of the nodes still up) and software based replication to protect against data loss across two geographically independent datacenter locations. Why not 10 points? Some major upgrades still require short downtime within a planned maintenance windows.

They respond quickly on your request. They ask for details at the time of logging the support request itself ensuring the first response is not for collecting the basic details only. They refund you the support request if they find it as a functionality issue. They follow up on you to ensure you are satisfied and happy with the response and resolution that they have provided.

Anything training past level 1 and level 2 is a waste of time. They do not offer training, just an exam and require you to read 2500 pages of their documentation as their training. They are selling you something which you already have. Training exams are far fetched and cover topics hidden within the documentation. A lot of their documentation does not match across itself. They don't even follow the standard versions Major.Minor.ServicePack.Hotfix. They use the MAJOR.MAJOR.MAJOR.Hotfix method, which doesn't match their documentation. They require you to take training in order to keep your engaged hybrid partnership. If you ask me personally, their training is a scam to make more money.

Quick to install, easy to create jobs, schedules and retention policies. No large cycles of setting up backup volumes or trash volumes. Retention job itself configures the BLM functionality so you don't need an expertise to handle the BLM module separately.

I would say that it has the same functionality as the three mentioned above in their respective fields (might have a bit less than some of them) but Asigra offers all of this and more so if you are looking for a single backup solution across the entire firm then Asigra is the much better choice

Incentivized

Gluster is a lot lower cost than the storage industry leaders. However, NetApp and Dell/EMC's product documentation is (IMHO) more mature and hardened against usage in operational scenarios and environments. Using Gluster avoids "vendor lock-in" from the perspective on now having to purchase dedicated hardware and licenses to run it. Albeit, should an organization choose to pay for support for Gluster, they would be paying licensing costs to Red Hat instead of NetApp, Dell, EMC, HP, or VMware. It could be assumed, however, that if an organization wanted to use Gluster, that they were already a Linux shop and potentially already paying Red Hat or Canonical (Debian) for product support, thereby the use of GFS would be a nominal cost adder from a maintenance/training perspective.

Incentivized

• Our entire Asigra environment can be easily monitored through one plane of glass thanks to their DS-Operator and Asigra Management Console.
• It's quite simple to use and navigate.
• Never has restoration fallen short.
• Data from several generations can be saved and retrieved.
• After a hardware failure, an edge server can be easily and quickly rebuilt.

Incentivized

• Positive - Alignment with the open source community and being able to stay abreast of the latest trending products available.
• Positive - Reduced procurement and maintenance costs.
• Negative - Impacts user/system maintainer training in order to teach them how to utilize and troubleshoot the product.

Incentivized