AutoSys Workload Automation Review

Facilitates secure communication between our host and other platforms

What is our primary use case?

Enterprise job scheduling.

How has it helped my organization?

We have worked with CA to better understand all of the security points, the ability to lock the product down so that it's not being abused or exploited in any fashion.

What is most valuable?

  • Flexibility
  • Ease of use
  • The capabilities of the product to schedule on multiple platforms, multiple operating systems.

Also, over time the CA workload agent has gotten much better. For our organization it's important for us to communicate in a secure fashion between the host and the other platforms, and we are able to do that with our CA product, with ESP.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I would rate it a nine out of 10.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is a 10 out of 10.

How are customer service and technical support?

We've completely turned over our scheduling area, and a lot of questions go to CA support. The people in the CA support for ESP have been there for a long time. I know some of them from the time when they worked for Cybermation, and they are very good. I trust their answers.

Tech support is a 10 out of 10.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Back in 2006, we were using CA-7 and we were looking for a product that would do better for scheduling off-platform. We found ESP, which was at that time owned by Cybermation, and we completed migration from CA-7 to ESP, and then shortly after that CA bought ESP. It had to do with scheduling on the distributed platform.

CA-7 was expensive and didn't do distributive work load very well. It was not that flexible. It didn't do everything we needed it to do.

How was the initial setup?

We had Professional Services help us, and it wasn't really that difficult.

We did have onsite training and migration services and we paid for them. It wasn't hard to understand for our people.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I don't really get involved in that part of it. The one thing I would say is that people need to pay attention to how they use their ESP agents on the distributed platform. That's where some of the cost comes in, based on how many you need or how many you use.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

At that time CA owned three schedulers and CA-7 was the one we were using. The other two did not necessarily apply to our environment. And there weren't too many others out there. I think we might still have taken a cheap route. We might not of actively compared with other products that were on the market at the time, other than comparing it to CA, and we thought we were getting a good deal.

What other advice do I have?

I believe CA had been actively developing it, enhancing it, and attempting to make it easier to use. I think it's been a good product for us, and I think others would find that to be true as well.

**Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
More AutoSys Workload Automation reviews from users
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, BMC, IBM and others in Workload Automation. Updated: June 2021.
511,307 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Add a Comment
ITCS user