ActiveBatch automation is one of the best automation tools for managing the workload of an organization.

The solution is very stable and dependable.

The most valuable feature is its stability. We've only had very minor issues and generally they have happened because someone has applied a patch on a Windows operating system and it has caused some grief. We've actually been able to resolve those issues quite quickly with ActiveBatch. In all the time that I've had use of ActiveBatch, it hasn't failed completely once. Uptime is almost 100 percent.

With those 8,000 jobs that run in a 16-hour period, the majority of the time we're spending about an hour of the day with ActiveBatch, repairing problems. There are issues where we have to re-run a job because of it exceeding its runtime. Or when a job fails, even though the alert goes out to the end user, we still have to tap the user on the shoulder and say, "Did you look at this alert? We've got a problem here, can you please fix it?" Other than that, it pretty much runs itself. Overall, ActiveBatch saves us a huge amount of time, being as stable as it is.

If we were having to repair everything, on an ongoing basis, we would be spending more than five or six hours a day, so we are saving at least five to six hours a day by using this tool. The improvement to the business is quite substantial. People aren't having to manually do anything that would normally take them two or three hours to do. Those things are being done within a matter of minutes and then passed on. And those five or six hours are just for us in our department. You can multiply that by the number of people who would normally have done something manually and who now have it done through ActiveBatch in minutes.

We're looking at more than a 98 percent success rate for uptime and for running jobs. The only time that something falls over is not to do with ActiveBatch itself, rather it's to do with problems with either the network, the database, or developers.

I find the solution very stable. 

Overall it is a stable, great solution.

Stability-wise, there is only one function that we have had trouble with. We haven't even reached out to ActiveBatch to try and figure it out because we're trying to figure out what is causing it. There is one DLL within the system that gets the current date, but will just stop working from time to time. The rest of the system is very stable. On occasion, we will have to reboot a server to release some locks on things, but that's once a month where we have to do anything like that.

I maintain all the jobs in production. There is nothing out of the ordinary that needs to be done. It does its own self-cleanup. It also deletes history periodically on its own.

The stability is great.

It is pretty stable. Now that we have worked through the details and ensured that we can do a failover to let the process do what it needs to do, we haven't seen any problems with it.

We are about 90 percent done migrating our processes.

The stability is rock solid. The four failures that we have had are related to issues we've done to our server or environment. Mostly, they are self-inflicted failures. There was a bit of cross pollination for what we were doing with security procedures where we experienced interruption. ActiveBatch hadn't updated itself directly to handle that situation.

We use the solution’s API extensibility. It has helped with the stability. It allows us to know when a job fails. If there's a problem connecting to a server or a job fails because something has gone wrong with a server, then we know very quickly. 

Four people are needed for development and maintenance of this solution. I am the primary admin but I don't support the solution on a day-to-day basis. I have a secondary gentleman, who like me, is also an admin. There are two others who primarily deal with the database. There's not a lot to it, except for the log stuff. When it comes to individual job failures, that's not our domain. That's the domain of each group maintaining their space. We also manage security issues.

The stability is good.

I've not had any major issues with ActiveBatch at all. It seems extremely stable. We've not had any downtime. We've had issues here and there with different processes, but nothing that has affected the overall environment. Granted, we don't have very many users on it; it's mostly processing at this point.

The stability is good.

As of now, the product looks stable, and it works well in all environments. This is a go-to product for all organizations.

It's very stable. Any of the issues that we tend to see are related to the product that ActiveBatch is trying to talk to. For example, we use the web service for our Informatica tool, and issues we see are on the PowerCenter side, not the ActiveBatch side.

It's pretty reliable. If it's organized and configured in an optimal way it works pretty well, but it requires a lot of planning. For example, you have to make sure that end-users don't have too many privileges because they can mess things up. It's very important to plan carefully before implementing.

We have had some issues in one of our installations in Germany, but they are still on version 10, which is quite an old implementation. They will replace that with the new version 12 in the near future.

ActiveBatch Workload Automation has very good stability.

ActiveBatch Workload Automation is scalable.

Stability has been excellent. In the four or five years I can't even think of a time when the scheduler went down. We use two agents for production, and a scheduler and two agents for tests, and I can think of maybe three times that we had to reboot one of the agents. But I can't think of a time when the scheduler actually went down.

The product is very mature. There are a few bugs however, none of them are roadblocks. It can be resolved by some workaround.

Overall, it is quite stable. Over the years, we have had very few issues with stability.

I have a great impression of the stability. We just keep adding to it, and this thing never fails. It just runs. Comparing that to our back-end systems where there are always problems, ActiveBatch just continually runs. That's what I've told our executive team. I said, "The only time there's a failure in this company is when your back-end systems screw up."

Yes, it is a stable solution but there are ongoing legacy issues that have carried through over the last few versions and which haven't yet been resolved. If there is too much batch processing happening some processes don't run properly. It doesn't happen all the time and we're able to manage it.