Thoughts on moving Zerto to all appliance based?

Hi Ron!

Thanks for your feedback. This is certainly up for consideration as we continue to build on the offering. We do understand the majority of time deploying ZVM is actually in installing and configuring Windows! 🙂

Would you prefer only an appliance over a Windows-based installation, or do you think both offerings should still be available?

Do you have an opinion on an included internal database within an appliance? With the option to connect to an external DB if desired?

Please keep the feedback coming! Also, there is a “Feature Request” option within the ZVM interface as well. Just go to the menu in the top-right corner, select “Submit Support Ticket,” and under “Type of ticket” select “Feature Request.”

Thanks,

Harry

Hi Harry,

+1 for me on making Zerto 100% virtual appliance based. I think you can look at the vCenter Appliance development over the past years. It’s pretty much where you want it to be regarding configuration management, database usage/scalability etc. External database is often not a requirement for my customers. They are more interested in good configuration backup/restore functionality and a stable management platform which is not impacted by windows OS. Even further reduced deploy times are an advantage as well off course. Also, i came across a few VMware environments which were almost 100% *NIX based. In those cases, faces go in unhappy-mode when told that windows is needed for a solution.

I have to agree with Jeffrey. The ZVM as a OVA/OVF appliance would be great. The VMware vCenter VCSA is a good example of how moving from a Windows server/Application installation to a Linux appliance can be successful. We have moved to the vCenter Appliance exclusively and have been very happy. Along with not eating a windows licenses for every customer and every site we have, it would also simplify deployments. In a dream world, the ZVM, ZCM, ZSSP, and Z-VRA would all be appliances. I know some of them are already. For me, I can say that if a virtual appliance was available, I would move to it exclusively.

Embedded vPostgress seems to be the go-to database for things like this. However, other options are definitely available depending on the type of DB.

Hi, is there any traction to this?  A ZVM Appliance would provide customers with a far more efficient setup.

I’ll throw my name in the hat for the appliance.  It would streamline deployment and who doesn’t want to reduce their Windows license footprint?

Here’s another vote for an appliance with a built in database.  Fewer moving parts, fewer patches (and easier when they do come out), and better uptime.

I was thinking the same thing as well

it would let us to implement even faster and also avoid windows licenses I do in fact have a couple of customer who did not know about a new Windows for ZVM was needed so they used an existing Windows with a couple of roles… of course I said to them that’s now supported but let’s install it and a user still using a Windows 2008 R2 VM as ZVM