The solution is stable so stability is rated an eight out of ten. 

The disconnection issue is intermittent and not very frequent. The possibility is that the database cache is not taken care of by the solution itself. We just need to manually fire some queries and run cache removal from the database. 

The stability has been fine. I haven't had any outages. I'd rate it a solid seven out of ten for reliability.

This solution is very stable. It works perfectly in operation without malfunctions.
Upgrade processes are mostly quite stable.

In the case of problems, Broadcom Support usually responds quickly and professionally.

The solution is stable.

Stability is good. There are definitely some areas where you have patching or a planned outage. There is no solution right now to avoid data gaps. I know they are planning on it and that it is in the development life cycle for the next year or two that they are going to be releasing a solution for it. 

Stability is good. It has improved; and we have not had any issues.

It has not been installed for a terribly long time. But, over the last 18 months we haven't really had any issues. The platform is stable, the application is intuitive, the way we use it is very simple, relatively speaking, so no problems with stability.

We haven't really had any significant stability issues. I'd say that maybe we've had one issue in all that time, where there was data corruption. But we were able to solve that with the help of technical support.

One really needs to make sure that you follow their guidelines and recommendations regarding the database size and performance. They give you certain guidelines that you need to follow regarding the database. For example, given your size environment, this is the size of database you need, and this is how it will perform well. If you want to have good performance, you need to meet these specific requirements.

Stability has never been an issue. That's one of the things that's so great about CA products is that we've never had that kind of issue. We don’t have servers crashing on us for CA products. We're not dealing with issues with connections or whatever. CA just works. There are no stability problems whatsoever. So it's fantastic.

Things work. I get up in the morning, I open the console, and it's there. I don't have to worry about it.

The solution is stable but has some issues with synchronization with DX Spectrum that we use.

I rate the stability of DX Performance Management a four out of five.

Stability has been fantastic so far. We've got quite a few different options available to us for business continuity, things like that, and the just inherent stability has been fairly impressive so far.

There are versions that are better. One of my concerns was it did not have a built-in HA component for availability, which was somewhat of a challenge for us. Because as we became more dependent on the tool, we had to find a way for it to be up all the time. So stability, I give it about a 85%, but we are getting there.

They have actually announced other versions that we need to get to. The challenge we find is, because this tool gathers so much data, which makes it hard to convert over. To upgrade it, you really need the solution backed up. That is the issue that we are facing right now.

In the beginning, there were some issues with the Vertica database they were using. There were some issues with stability and memory leaks, more related to memory leaks, but this was fixed in the past. At the moment, it's all very stable.

It has gotten a lot better over the last five years. When it switched from MPC to Performance Center, there were some issues, but it has greatly improved.

Not really stability issues. We've run into bugs but I wouldn't call those stability issues with PM, specifically. We have run into software bugs where certain features weren't working right, in the past, that CA would have to address. I don't think that would fit under stability. Stability's like crashing.

Now, the one thing I will say. When our CA performance management system is on a Linux system, when that Linux system needs to be updated with patches - and this is the server itself - of course PM has to stop. All of our monitoring stops while that patching is going on for those services, while they restart those servers, but I don't know that that's a CA thing. While that reboot is going on for those servers, for those patches to take place, of course the system has to restart.

Initially, we had under-sized the ADA and NFA.

To date, we have not encountered any stability issues.

DX Performance Management is stable. 

It's very much a stable product, because we are running it stand-alone. We have a two-tier architecture we run on. It's a stable product.

We encountered database issues due to the IOS speed requirement of HPE Vertica, as we are on a VMware environment.

It seems stable. We're using NetQoS.

It's fairly stable. This still falls under the issue that the current version I'm running is two years out of date and is less stable, I'm sure, than the very latest version. But stability has been good.

One of the best features about it is that it's a ground-up application from CA. So, there are typically more features added more quickly and there are more updates to the product on a regular basis, unlike some other products.

It is a very stable solution and it works, but the initial footprint it really high. And because you can add extra performance and more servers, you can escalate very quickly. Therefore the initial installation and footprint are huge.

This solution is stable. 

No issues with stability.

In the last three years, it has had a great improvement in its stability. It is great that is works and we have had no outages in this time. That was really great.

No issues yet with stability.

We haven't encountered any issues with stability. So far, it's been working properly.

There was a big problem with HPE Vertica.

With CA PM, I haven’t encountered any stability issues.