CA Workload Automation Review

Helps us monitor critical work, track service levels, and meet crucial deadlines


What is our primary use case?

We use CA Workload Automation ESP Edition to monitor our batch jobs and workload, to process data, and in that processing of data, we make sure that we complete the jobs in a timely manner so that we meet our service levels. 

We also use the alerts within ESP to detect if there's a failure, if there's a long running job or, if there's an issue with the job, within the scheduler, that didn't trigger correctly, and things like that. So that's primarily what we use ESP for.

It performs, it definitely does the job because it's an enterprise type of software, so it's used throughout our whole company. We really liked it, and we applied it throughout the whole company.

What is most valuable?

The ability to

  • monitor your critical work 
  • track the service levels 
  • recover the work and predict the work, if it's late or not.

How has it helped my organization?

It hasn't really improved things because, before that, we had something similar. It hasn't not improved, but it's just necessary to use for the type of work we do.

It's definitely helped us meet our critical deadlines and things like that.

What needs improvement?

Easier user options with the web browser part of it because it's not very friendly and you can't do as much as you can on the native software. They already know that.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's very stable. It's highly redundant. It's, like I said, very recoverable, within the batch work and it's easy to use.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability, it's all based on the agents, so we have to place all these agents on different servers. That seems to be doable, so we haven't had any problems with scalability.

How is customer service and technical support?

We have used technical support. We have small use cases that we need their help on, and we're able to reach out to CA. Tech support is good. We get a good response.

Which solutions did we use previously?

We were using a similar product before 2008, BMC Control-M. We know that's the way we need to manage the work.

How was the initial setup?

I was involved in the initial setup and it's complex because you have to convert from the old software that's not CA to the new software. That was back in 2008 so it's been awhile.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I think there was a list of different types of companies. I can't remember the names because, like I said, it's been a while.

What other advice do I have?

I would say the most important criteria to us when selecting a vendor are

  • usability
  • operational friendliness
  • cost, obviously
  • and scalability, because we have a global footprint around the world in different datacenters. 

And it needs to be something that's maintainable or the maintenance is robust. That's something with which we've had good luck, and a good experience, with CA.

I would just say, based on your use case, to see what flavor of ESP you wanted, whether it's the mainframe, or distributed systems, and then understand what kind of functionality you want to achieve from it. Get users' suggestions, if they already have it set up, so you can get past some of those stumbling blocks at the beginning.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Add a Comment
Guest
Sign Up with Email