CA Service Virtualization Review

One of the main reasons we decided to go with CA SV was because of the various protocols supported.


Valuable Features

The CAI aka Pathfinder is a great capability and will help the organization to achieve SV goals and expand the SV to different systems without many firewall changes or changes in the existing environment setup.

The financial industries have tight firewall security where introducing a new product among their existing infrastructure is not a hot cake or getting new MQs created for SV. At high-Level CAI looks like any agent-broker architecture but it does a lot in terms of Virtualization and Application Delivery Lifecycle where Dev or QA do not need to worry and do not need to depend on the environment teams to get the systems logs for triage or fix it.

Finally, last but not least CAI can also help the architects/designers to understand/generate the application flow diagram and analyse any abnormal behaviour.

Improvements to My Organization

The major ones for our organization are MQ and SOA Middleware.

We had a lot of dependency on MQ message, where CAI helped to get the MQ details and create VS out of it.

Room for Improvement

I feel a few areas can be improved, but I'm not sure if CA has already fixed these in the latest version:

1. Agents for different systems. I am not sure if existing agents can support all types of servers or systems.

2. Along with application details, can we capture network details to simulate network behavior?

3. Can we separate utility to monitor the CAI details rather than the portal, because Portal is accessible to all.

Use of Solution

More Than 2 years now.

Deployment Issues

Yes, we had issues when we deployed into Oracle WebLogic server. .

Customer Service and Technical Support

Customer Service:

I'd say 8 out of 10. Service is great in terms of community forms, pulse etc.

Technical documentation needs some more improvements by explaining live scenarios.

Technical Support:

The technical support team we had for our engagement was really great, we are able to reach them and get everything done on time.

Previous Solutions

For SV no. We have not switched from any other solution, we started with LISA. The main factors why we decided to go with this tool was the capability towards virtualization and protocols supported.

Initial Setup

It was not simple nor was is complex. To set up CA DevTest, you should know the tool and architecture very well along with his installation skills on the particular server you choose - like Unix or Linux. Firewalls and other areas are also very important.

ROI

We haven't yet measured ROI with the current implementation.

Other Solutions Considered

The tool was evaluated by an architect team. Yes, they had compared it with some competitive vendors such as HP and then purchased the CA license.

Other Advice

I'd like to see more features integrate with the CICD pipeline via APIs or command line etc.

I'd also like better ocumentation on live scenarios with more examples etc. as mentioned earlier.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
2 Comments
Luke ClarkVendor

I wonder if you could expand on the main point of your statement? What about the "various protocols" actually made the CA solution stand out? I don't think you have addressed that point and in fairness to the possible alternative solutions they too support "various protocols". You seem to focus on the MQ support which suggests that was very important to you but again there are alternatives with arguably better MQ support.

21 April 15
Service Virtualization Lead at a tech services company with 10,001+ employeesConsultant

The opinion I mentioned here is about CAI. I don't understand what exactly you want to know here about only MQ..
can you drop what exactly you want to know to stand out ?
I am experienced in multiple tools, I can try to answer my best !

30 April 15
Guest
Sign Up with Email