We performed a comparison between Actian Pervasive Data Integrator [EOL] and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Informatica, Oracle and others in Data Integration."There were no concerns with the stability. This product is very good from a stability perspective."
"The MFT component of webMethods, for example, is easy to set up and convenient to use. It handles files very efficiently and it is easy to automate tasks with complex schedules. Monitoring is centralized to MWS which can be used to monitor other products as well (Trading Networks, BPM, MFT, etc.)"
"One of the most important features is that it gives you the possibility to do low-level integration. It provides a lot of features out of the box, and over the years, it has matured so much that any problem that is there in the market can be solved with this product. We can meet any requirements through customizations, transformations, or the logic that needs to be put in. Some of the other products struggle in this aspect. They cannot do things in a certain way, or they have a product limitation, whereas, with webMethods, I have never faced this kind of problem."
"It’s fairly easy to view, move, and mange access across different components. Different component types are categorized and can be viewed in a web based administration console."
"Broker and UM are the best features."
"The tool supports gRPC."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"We can arrange data caching and look at the solid state. Also, the API gateway is a very good component that can handle relevant cachings and integrations, as well as and also load permitting."
"One [of the most valuable features] is the webMethods Designer. That helps our developers develop on their own. It's very intuitive for design. It helps our developers to speed the development of services for the integrations."
"I am not sure if there are various connectors available in the recent version of Pervasive DI to support the wide range of sources available (e.g., big data, cloud, EME)."
"It is quite expensive."
"The installation process should be simplified for first time users and be made more user-friendly."
"This is a great solution and the vendor could improve the marketing of the solution to be able to reach more clients."
"This solution could be improved by offering subscription based licensing."
"The UI for the admin console is very old. It hasn't been updated for years and is pretty much the same one that we started with. This is something that could be refreshed and made more modern."
"For code version control, you need to use some external software."
"Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools."
"Technical support is an area where they can improve."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Actian Pervasive Data Integrator [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Data Integration while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. Actian Pervasive Data Integrator [EOL] is rated 5.8, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Actian Pervasive Data Integrator [EOL] writes "You can use it to send data back and forth between Salesforce.com and JD Edwards". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". Actian Pervasive Data Integrator [EOL] is most compared with , whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi AtomSphere Integration.
We monitor all Data Integration reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
