We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

DX Performance Management OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

What is DX Performance Management?

CA Performance Management is a comprehensive and highly scalable network performance monitoring and analytics platform. It was built to meet the unique demands of big data and modern networks architectures, including highly dynamic and complex hybrid cloud and software-defined networks (SDN).

The platform is design to reduce complexity inherent in modern networks built across numerous technology stacks through advanced network performance monitoring and relationship mapping for improved operational assurance.

Combined with CA Virtual Network Assurance, the platform extends operator visibility through advanced discovery and network performance monitoring of highly sensitive cloud and multi-layered SDN networks and service chains.

DX Performance Management is also known as CA Performance Management .

DX Performance Management Customers

Jack Henry & Assoc, Target, CenturyLink, Bell Canada, BrightHouse Networks, Telus, Unisys, Verizon, Southern California Edison, GEICO, Fidelity Investments, Wells Fargo, American Family Insurance Group, Deutsche Telekom AG 

DX Performance Management Video

Archived DX Performance Management Reviews (more than two years old)

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
MD
ITSM consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Consultant
Leaderboard
Very functional but not suitable for small or medium size customers

Pros and Cons

  • "One feature I like about CA Performance Management is the certification of the devices."
  • "This solution is not very scalable."

How has it helped my organization?

The CA Performance Management solution wasn't suitable for our small company and it was not easy to install. The requirements you need to install it are really high and many customers are complaining about it. After using it for a while, we've decided not to continue using it and moved to a different solution.

What is most valuable?

One feature I like about CA Performance Management is the certification of the devices. This solution is very functional, but it's not suitable for medium and small customers, which is the case in most of the markets in Europe. There are a few huge customers, but most of them are taken directly by the provider.

What needs improvement?

It is a very good tool but I don't think it is suitable for the European market right now. Huge customers might benefit from using it as most of their customers are directly managed by the vendor and not by partners or freelancers. An improvement would be to reduce the footprint of the installation of the solution. I believe there is room for improvement. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using CA Performance Management for three years, but I have stopped using it.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This solution is not very scalable. For example, a case manager in another company was able to handle a thousand devices with only one server. If the same customer with the other company logs into CA Performance Manager and needs to do the same, he will need seven servers. How can you explain that? Even if the customer has free access, it's not possible. It's not reasonable.
The investment you have to put into strong enough software is high. So we've lost many customers because they didn't like the replacement even though it was free for them.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support from CA Performance Management was very good. 

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was really complex. You can probably set it up online in one week and it will start working and collect data right away. So that is one good thing I can say about the performance. Most of the devices that you find in companies and enterprises can be incorporated in the database of the product so that can be monitored correctly. 

What other advice do I have?

CA Performance Management is a solution with different models but the requirements for the basics that you need to install it, are huge. This is not a good solution for small or medium-sized customers. I rate this product a six out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
it_user489675
Senior Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Consultant
Operators can easily see if a problem is related to a customer location or the entire network

Pros and Cons

  • "The capability where not only the traditional SNMP information is captured but also the netflow data; who is consuming the data on the WAN, and voice-related information, is helpful. The voice quality makes it very easy for first- and second-line operators to see where the issue is, and who is impacted."
  • "It could be a little easier to integrate new metrics."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is for network operations. We use it for customer information, as well as for information for our operations team. We are a service provider and we give our customers access to the Performance Center interface because it gives them information about the health of their network in different locations.

For example, for a large customer with, say, 100 locations, each of the customer's employees can see the network health in his area. That means that they provide them, for example, the WAN bandwidth and DNS requests and network-related metrics.

How has it helped my organization?

The first-line operators, who are sitting in front of the monitoring consoles can easily see if a problem is related to a customer location or to the complete customer network. It's very easy to see because you have the top-20 views of metrics. It can highlight where the problem is. It's very easy for them to see.

Also, the capability where not only the traditional SNMP information is captured but also the netflow data; who is consuming the data on the WAN, and voice-related information, is helpful. The voice quality makes it very easy for first- and second-line operators to see where the issue is, and who is impacted.

What is most valuable?

For us, the multi-tenancy is very important, of course. 

The scalability is also important because we have customers in the system with only a small number of devices, say, 50, but we also have customers with more than 10,000 devices. The scalability is very good, amazing.

There have been a lot of changes which were very good in the last few years of development. One of them is that they brought together Spectrum and the performance data, since Performance Management 3.6. They also have the alarm information in Performance Center which is very helpful to have in one tool.

What needs improvement?

Every product has room for improvement. It could be a little easier to integrate new metrics.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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.

How are customer service and technical support?

Especially for the issue with the Vertica database, we contacted the support, of course, and it was okay, it was good. It was not negative. The response is typically very good, especially in this area. Of course, because it was the database behind the issue - it's an HPE database -
it took a little time until it was fixed. But that had nothing to do with the support guys.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Before this solution, CA didn't have an equivalent solution and we used open-source solutions. But the capabilities weren't there in the open-source solutions. With this solution, we reduced about 15 performance management to only five machines. The open-source tools were not able to deliver this performance.

How was the initial setup?

It was quite easy. The setup was done in a couple of hours.

Not in the first version, but since, the integration with Spectrum has been quite good. It's more or less fully automated, which means that we get new devices into the network monitoring. It's also synched into the Performance Center. Similarly, if there are new routers sending natural data, it's automatically be coming in, which means that it reduces our administration costs.

With the capabilities of the open API and the web service interface, we're able to automate some other things. For example, we have one customer, with more than 1,000 devices, and there are a lot of changes in infrastructure every day. We automate the menus and the groupings of the devices. We can automate that via RESTful web services. That capability is quite good so in this case, it's all more or less automated.

The deployment, for new customers, takes less than a day. Typically, the products are not the problem. Usually the problems exist in the network by itself: They don't have access to the devices or the like. In the case that the infrastructure is ready, so that you can run your setup, it's quite easy. After a couple of hours, you see the first data.

My colleague does the deployment. Just one person does it.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I like the licensing model because it's device-based. It makes it easier for us, as a managed service provider, to bill our customers. We are paid per device and the license per device makes it easy for us.

What other advice do I have?

You have to think about what you want to capture. You can capture a lot of things, but you have to make sure you capture only the things you need. We have had situations where a customer has said, "We need this, this, and this," - hundreds of parameters. But that would mean their infrastructure needs are growing massively. You have to think about the metrics you really want to capture. You can capture everything, but it doesn't make sense because then you pay a lot for hardware.

For our customer with 10,000 devices, there are more than 700 registered users. That doesn't mean 700 users at the same time, but we see 700 registered users using the tool regularly. On the other systems, there are around 200 users, including networking guys, first-line guys, second-line guys, etc.

The maintenance for Performance Management is quite easy. You have to do one to two releases a year. Testing it on a test environment takes one to two days. And then we'd need about five to ten days a year for maintenance.

We aren't using it as extensively as we could. It could be used more. It's a process to bring it to customers and show them the improvements, especially in the last versions.

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. It could be a little bit easier in the administration or in the creating of new metrics. The really deep-dive administration could be a little bit easier.

Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Platinum Partner.
DB
Network Specialist
Real User
Leaderboard
The reporting helps me monitor root drives that are nearing critical capacity

Pros and Cons

  • "The ability to very quickly and graphically navigate around, being able to zoom in to a timeframe, apply it to all the other panels... are all very intuitive."
  • "I can get it to run a report showing, for instance, what root drives are in the critical range in terms of being full, like 90 percent full, and disseminate that information to the other areas of the organization."
  • "The feature that is inherent to its core, of being able to graphically represent a trend and status, is nice."
  • "This may be available by now but for server space, when it comes to the disk file system, I'd like to see that graphically represented, or the trend, rather than what I'm seeing now."

What is our primary use case?

We use it for monitoring up/down, fault management, and trending.

Although it's a really good tool, it very much needs to be rebuilt so that it can be updated on a regular basis.

How has it helped my organization?

One of the ways this product has improved things would be disk space. Since it is monitoring a lot of our infrastructure, I can get it to run a report showing, for instance, what root drives are in the critical range in terms of being full, like 90 percent full, and disseminate that information to the other areas of the organization. I can let them know that there is not a problem now, but there will be in the near future and that if you run out of drive on your root drive for your OS, bad things happen. It's not a pretty picture, when that kind of thing happens, to recover from. Running that report showing which servers and file systems are almost to the critical level is a good, proactive use.

Also, the ability to very quickly and graphically navigate around, being able to zoom in to a timeframe, apply it to all the other panels - things of that nature - are all very intuitive. When I give someone access to the system, the learning curve is pretty short and they very quickly start to discover how easily, with a few clicks, they can get to what they're looking at and understand how the system works with minimal effort, unlike some other systems where you would need some training to know what you're looking at.

What is most valuable?

The metrics that it's able to track and that it's able to trend,

Keep in mind, because we have not updated, it's to the point where I've got to build a complete separate system with the latest version, and then map over all the users and customization, etc, then swap IPs to bring the previous system down so that we'll be on the latest. There are about two years worth of updates that I'm missing out on at the moment. I'm hoping that there are a lot of updates and nice, new features that have been added. So, really, I've been in the dark ages as far as running for a while now, but the feature that is inherent to its core, of being able to graphically represent a trend and status, is nice.

What needs improvement?

This may be available by now but for server space, when it comes to the disk file system, I'd like to see that graphically represented, or the trend, rather than what I'm seeing now. I don't know what the latest version has, all the nice, new features, until I get that project underway.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have never had a problem with scalability. We've always been quite well under what it can do.

How are customer service and technical support?

Tech support has always been good. A lot of the people that I've known for many years working on the Spectrum side of things have moved into the Performance Management side of things. So tech support has been good.

The response time is good, and typically, with any case with CA, I am sent surveys that I fill out on a regular basis to evaluate performance, how it was handled.

They will come by and visit occasionally, and they're really good about being available when I need help with looking at new systems, to show us what they have to offer.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We did not have anything previously, except maybe something along the lines of the free MRTG. But previous to that, we were on a Unix-based system. The biggest thing is trying to tie them all into a centralized database, or a CMDB, which is a project that we're still working on, making progress on, so that everything feeds from a centralized database and is aware of configuration items. That way we can interconnect all these applications so that we can add automation and things of that nature.

How was the initial setup?

It was a bit complex to set up. I don't know how much that has changed. But it was fairly complex to set up.

I didn't get any training or have assistance setting up and it did take a while to do. I followed the directions. It was straightforward but there were a lot of steps to set things up at the time. Keep in mind, again, it was quite a long time ago that we set the system up.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I believe the product's pricing is a good value at this point. We're currently trying to internally evaluate everything that we use. It's moot in that it falls under the same umbrella that Spectrum does, and Spectrum is an integral part of the tool. It is used by a lot of departments within our agency to monitor the network up/down. So, it's a part of that umbrella, they're included together. With that, the pricing is fine.

Many years back they changed the way that they did licensing and that was good. Since then, everything has been just fine.

What other advice do I have?

I would give Performance Management an eight out of 10, and I might even move that to a nine after I've had a chance to upgrade it to the two or more years' worth of features that have probably been added.

It's quite usable. It's quite good to see something graphically, it's a very graphical application.

Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
it_user850410
Consultant at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
Reseller
Intelligent alerts give us time to replace a router or interface before it's full

Pros and Cons

  • "You can create intelligent alerts so you have enough time to replace the router or interface before it's full. The same is applicable for CBQoS channels.​"
  • "The quantity of views which are tied to specific metric families is too high. Also, the problem is the view doesn't tell you which metric family it uses, so you don't know why you don't see data."

What is our primary use case?

The primary use case is to report on performance metrics of routers and switches.

How has it helped my organization?

We used eHealth beforehand, so the improvement was mainly within the GUI.

What is most valuable?

  • Dashboards - They look nice and fancy and are pretty impressive.
  • Alerting - This helps the admin save time.

It's not only interesting to know if routers and switches are up or down at the moment, but also when a specific interface is filled to the max. You can create intelligent alerts so you have enough time to replace the router or interface before it's full. The same is applicable for CBQoS channels.

What needs improvement?

The quantity of views which are tied to specific metric families is too high. Also, the problem is the view doesn't tell you which metric family it uses, so you don't know why you don't see data.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

No issues with stability.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

No issues with scalability, and we even worked with a customer with more than 20K devices within the system.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is good.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Yes, CA eHealth. We switched because eHealth went EOL.

How was the initial setup?

Initial setup was straightforward and pretty easy.

What other advice do I have?

My advice would be start today. The tool is great and is pretty flexible, also for integration in other tools using OpenAPI.

I rate it at nine out of 10. It's pretty good in doing the things needed, but there are some small pitfalls which are not necessary.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Reseller.
it_user814434
Global Network Operations | Infrastructure Services at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Gives us consolidated network infrastructure monitoring and reporting

Pros and Cons

    • "For CA PM, there should be a way of easily migrating the reports coming from eHealth going to CA Performance Center, since CA PC is replacing eHealth."

    What is our primary use case?

    Most of of our CA suite is for network infrastructure monitoring, reporting, and fault management.

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable of CA Performance Management is consolidated network infrastructure monitoring and reporting.

    What needs improvement?

    For CA PM, there should be a way of easily migrating the reports coming from eHealth going to CA Performance Center, since CA PC is replacing eHealth.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I haven’t encountered any scalability issues.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    The CA support team has been very helpful, including chat and engineering support.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We haven’t used a different solution.

    How was the initial setup?

    Initial setup is complex.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I do not handle the pricing, but they should provide more scalable licensing for the product.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    Since I inherited CA products in this job, choosing CA PM was the first choice for compatibility.

    What other advice do I have?

    You need to have a CA support representative on the call during implementation and upgrade to eliminate issues.

    Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
    it_user797961
    Distinguished Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
    Video Review
    MSP
    You can have thousands of devices inside and hundreds of thousands of interphases without a problem

    Pros and Cons

    • "It is the gathering of the whole performance data in our environment and our network environment, for us and our customers."
    • "You can have thousands of devices inside and hundreds of thousands of interphases without a problem."
    • "It needs role-based administration."

    How has it helped my organization?

    The benefit is bringing all the performance-related data and gathering of our environment with the customer's environment together. Therefore, we can analyze it over all the tenants and the tenants can also analyze the performance data by themselves.

    What is most valuable?

    It is the gathering of the whole performance data in our environment and our network environment, for us and our customers. Also, a multi-tendency insight, SCN, and Cisco ACI implementation, which we need very urgently.

    What needs improvement?

     What we want to see:

    1. More integration inside of Spectrum and integration of role-based access.
    2. Our admins must be able, not only, to analyze the data, but combine the data.
    3. Admins must be in a role-based administration feature. 
    4. That is looking at the site under administration, and saying, "What is the daily job if an alert is coming on?"

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    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.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It has high scalability. You can have thousands of devices inside and hundreds of thousands of interphases without a problem.

    How is customer service and technical support?

    We have some premium support, which was created to talk to the technical support and the product management when we have a challenge. I don't want to say an issue, when we have a challenge inside of the product, like an enhancement. It is great to see that the product management hears us, too. We have received more out-of-the-box solutions inside the product.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    On our side, it depends on the customers' needs. We test on one customer to be honest, as a solution. However, we are thinking pricing, scaling, and so on. Also, to use PM for all other customers.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would say a seven to eight out of 10, because it needs role-based administration. They ceased integrations. That is why I say a seven to eight.

    Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
    it_user683997
    Senior Network Engineer at Jack Henry & Associates
    Video Review
    Real User
    We're able to present data from multiple back-end sources into a single dashboard for users

    Pros and Cons

    • "We're able to present data from multiple back-end collection sources into a single dashboard for the users. So they don't have to go to multiple locations to get data about a particular item, or device."
    • "It gave us one location, one place to do all of group administration, and to build dashboards, and device administration, inventory counts... it really reduced our overall administrative overhead."
    • "Scalability is the reason we bought the product to begin with. It was designed from the ground up for carrier-grade services, and we are in effect a MSP ourselves. So we were really interested in looking at something to be able to handle the multi-tenancy and scale as large as possible. This was the only solution that we really considered at that level."

      What is most valuable?

      Probably the most valuable feature is the integration that the tool provides for us. We're able to present data from multiple back-end collection sources into a single dashboard for the users. So they don't have to go to multiple locations to get data about a particular item, or device.

      What do I think about the stability of the solution?

      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.

      What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

      Scalability is the reason we bought the product to begin with. It was designed from the ground up for carrier-grade services, and we are in effect a MSP ourselves. So we were really interested in looking at something to be able to handle the multi-tenancy and scale as large as possible. This was the only solution that we really considered at that level.

      How are customer service and technical support?

      Everything has been very responsive to us so far. I've been impressed with the followup that the engineers have as well. Even after we have fixed whatever issue has come up, it's not uncommon to get a followup email a week or so later just checking to make sure everything is still all right, and I appreciate that.

      Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

      Previously we were using multiple products, multiple individual point solutions, and it was getting to the point where it was really difficult to maintain every one of those individual products. That's the reason we looked at Performance Management, because it gave us one location, one place to do all of group administration, and to build dashboards, and device administration, inventory counts, things like that. So it really reduced our overall administrative overhead.

      What other advice do I have?

      At this point I would give it an eight out of 10, but that's only because I know of a lot of really cool new stuff that's coming down the line, that's not available yet. So that number is subject to change.

      Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
      it_user674322
      Consultant Engineer at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
      Consultant
      Multiple groups can quickly obtain near real-time network gear historical performance data

      Pros and Cons

        • "Product has issue collecting IP SLA data."
        • "Install is done as root, which is a security no-no, and the database IO requirements were not stated correctly, which lead to a year of instability."

        What is our primary use case?

        • Troubleshooting
        • Capacity planning
        • Alerting

        How has it helped my organization?

        It gives multiple groups the ability to view dashboards and quickly obtain data about historical performance of network gear, with near real-time data.

        What is most valuable?

        Historical data, to help with trending and capacity planning.

        The dashboards are easy to use and can be viewed on any web browser.

        What needs improvement?

        Product has issue collecting IP SLA data.

        For how long have I used the solution?

        Three to five years.

        What do I think about the stability of the solution?

        No issues yet with stability.

        What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

        No issues with scalability.

        How are customer service and technical support?

        Good.

        Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

        Previously we used eHealth which is a CA-owned product. We moved because they are phasing out eHealth.

        How was the initial setup?

        Complex. Install is done as root, which is a security no-no, and the database IO requirements were not stated correctly, which lead to a year of instability.

        What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

        Do your homework and know how many devices you will be managing out of the gate. Be sure to project what your growth will be each year.

        What other advice do I have?

        I think the product has matured a lot, and I’m impressed with CA when I hear about new features. The product continues to improve and the future is looking bright.

        Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
        it_user760713
        Infrastructure Services Engineer Sr, Enterprise Network at a insurance company
        Real User
        Enables our network teams to be proactive in responding to performance issues

        Pros and Cons

          • "CA PM Business Hours Filtering: I understand that all monitoring systems have defects. The Business Hours Filtering does not always function properly. Sometimes, when applying business hours to CA PM reports that are 30 or more days in duration, the report generation times out and does not display results. We have other CA PM reports that, when we apply Business Hours Filtering, the report results displayed are the same as without the filter. We are not sure if this is a defect in CA PM or if it is a result of our complex configuration (folder structure) and application of business hours."
          • "We would like to be capable of reporting network performance with a report strictly focused on the times outside business hours, which CA PM does not currently support. We have discontinued the use of the Business Hours Filtering until CA engineers are able to resolve or offer guidance."
          • "CA PM can be complex to build and configure. Creating the folders / groups / sites required establishing many rule sets."

          What is our primary use case?

          • Network performance reporting 
          • Incident monitoring

          How has it helped my organization?

          The network teams have transitioned to becoming proactive in responding to network performance issues, rather than being just reactive to outages.

          What is most valuable?

          CA PM is the single pane of glass, providing consolidated views for all of the CA tool sets, for viewing all reports.

          What needs improvement?

          CA PM Business Hours Filtering: I understand that all monitoring systems have defects. The Business Hours Filtering does not always function properly. Sometimes, when applying business hours to CA PM reports that are 30 or more days in duration, the report generation times out and does not display results. 

          We have other CA PM reports that, when we apply Business Hours Filtering, the report results displayed are the same as without the filter. We are not sure if this is a defect in CA PM or if it is a result of our complex configuration (folder structure) and application of business hours.

          We would also like to be capable of reporting network performance with a report strictly focused on the times outside business hours, which CA PM does not currently support. We have discontinued the use of the Business Hours Filtering until CA engineers are able to resolve or offer guidance.

          For how long have I used the solution?

          One to three years.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          No issues with scalability.

          How are customer service and technical support?

          Good.

          Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

          NetQoS was acquired by CA.

          How was the initial setup?

          Complex. CA PM can be complex to build and configure. Creating the folders / groups / sites required establishing many rule sets.

          What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

          I have no experiencing with pricing.

          Which other solutions did I evaluate?

          Netcool, Solarwinds.

          What other advice do I have?

          Instrumentation could take some time, depending how much reporting customization you plan to employ.

          Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
          AB
          Senior Systems Engineer
          Give us QoS metrics from network devices, and Network Flow Analysis analyzes our traffic

          Pros and Cons

          • "It is very easy to add devices; just be aware that it requires SNMP to be enabled."
          • "There is a good amount of vendor certification which comes with the product. That's all factory-loaded, no need to load any custom-made files. Most of the metrics are calibrated and captured from the devices based on the defaults available from vendor certification."
          • "It would be helpful if CA provided online training for its customers."

          What is our primary use case?

          We are gathering the SNMP data from many input devices, especially those which are used to monitor the status of the switches, the routers. It is very helpful to know about any CPU spike, rate of the CPU memory utilization of the network devices, along with interface utilization.

          Also, we are using this product to get some QoS metrics from the network devices within our network. We are also using the Network Flow Analysis, to analyze the traffic, the conversation between the offices.

          We have one more product called SNMP Trap Explorer which we are using to receive the traps from the network devices. The network devices are configured to send these traps to the CA application, which is all set on our internal network. Then we use the traps to send out the notifications to our internal support teams.

          What is most valuable?

          It is very easy to add devices; just be aware that it requires SNMP to be enabled.

          It is very easy to use because most of the administrative tasks through the UI are documented. If I have any doubt, I can just go to the CS support. In the UI itself, you have a lot of helpful information on each administrative task, such as adding a special profile, conferring the vendors' specifications.

          The documentation is very good, they have the documents up to date.

          What needs improvement?

          It would be helpful if CA provided online training for its customers. Whenever a release happens, the latest version, we have meetings with CA meeting and they explain the latest features and enhancements, which is really helpful. But then I'm training my internal support on our tool, if there were any training that CA provided directly, online, that would be good.

          For how long have I used the solution?

          More than five years.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          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.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          Currently we're not facing any issue with our infrastructure. There are around 5000 devices monitored using CA Performance Management. To be frank, I don't have any idea what the capacity of the product is, going forward. But currently, I don't see any issue with the capacity, the amount of devices. 

          The 5000 devices are monitored from data collectors housed in three datacenters.

          How are customer service and technical support?

          Currently we're on version 3.2; we had some issues while upgrading to 3.2, but we received very good support from CA within a short time. They were able to resolve the issues and communicate to us without any delay. We are getting a pretty good amount of good support from CA.

          Normally we submit a case using CA portal, their support website. They'll reach out to us within 24 hours after we submit it. If we need support from the local, India CA support team, they are very flexible and can transfer the case, based on the customer's time zone. Because I'm based out of India, I have some issues with working during US time. They will help me to work with one of the engineers who is based out of India, I think. That kind of flexibility is really very good. 

          Also, documents are very available from support.

          Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

          I wasn't involved in any decision on that. But it's all based on management's decision.

          How was the initial setup?

          It took some time because we could not just upgrade production. We have CA PM on two environments, one is Development, and then we are running on Production. Whatever changes or upgrades need to be made, first we'll perform then on Development. Based on the results, if anything is found, or if the activity goes well, then we'll proceed with the Production system update.

          There is a really good amount of documentation, and whenever we need help, they will set up a WebEx session directly, and they'll help us during the implementation, installation, or upgrade activity. 

          What other advice do I have?

          If I were to talk to others who are considering this product, I would explain the features, that it's easy to use, and its scalability, stability, and about the capacity it has.

          I would also tell them that CA is upgrading the versions to stay current in the market, that is done very frequently. Whenever there are changes made - take the example of a Cisco router - if there is a new series of router, CA will include that in the next release.

          Also, there is a good amount of vendor certification which comes with the product. That's all factory-loaded, no need to load any custom-made files. Most of the metrics are calibrated and captured from the devices based on the defaults available from vendor certification. 

          Considering all these factors, it's really a good and easy product for analyzing your network performance, health status, and the quality of services.

          I rate it a nine out of 10, only because I still need time to explore it more. It has a lot of good features, but I am still in the learning phase.

          Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
          it_user779130
          Manager Network Operations at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees
          Real User
          Enables us to baseline, trend, historically view performance, and see in real time how the infrastructure is performing

          Pros and Cons

          • "When we deployed it, right out of the box we were able to stand up Performance Management within two weeks, in our production environment, with full discovery and relevant information, actual information, that we could use in our command center, our 24/7 operations center."
          • "We have been able to get a little bit better at seeing more things in real time and more just in time, so we're less reactionary."
          • "The out-of-the-box dashboards are valuable, in terms of being able to visualize performance data in ways that we haven't in the past."
          • "I think it would be helpful having a more comprehensive set of certifications so that I could natively deploy devices to my environment and the tool would immediately recognize and immediately be able to provide relevant performance information without a lot of tuning on my part."

          What is our primary use case?

          Our primary use case for Performance Management is the health and performance of our networks. To be able to baseline, trend, historically view performance information, as well as to see in real time how the infrastructure is performing relative to what our expectations are.

          It's performed really well. As a matter of fact, when we deployed it, right out of the box we were able to stand up Performance Management within two weeks, in our production environment, with full discovery and relevant information, actual information, that we could use in our command center, our 24/7 operations center.

          To date we've been very happy with it, and we also use CA's Mediation Manager so that we can bring information in from non-traditional network gear, like layer 1 telecom transport, among others, using various protocols, and translate the legacy protocols to give us performance information for infrastructure that we haven't been able to see before.

          How has it helped my organization?

          The one thing it has helped us with, we're not in a completely predictive state at this point. Everybody wants to get to predictive now - analytics - and be able to stop the problems before they happen. What I will say is that we have been able to get a little bit better at seeing more things in real time and more just in time, so we're less reactionary.

          What is most valuable?

          The out-of-the-box dashboards, in terms of being able to visualize performance data in ways that we haven't in the past. As opposed to lines of threshold alerts or indications of degradation, we're seeing from a graphical perspective this information that's coming in, and visualizing it in a way that helps us to make better decisions.

          What needs improvement?

          I'm still working on consuming all the features that I have today, so ask me this again in a year. I would say right now, we're in the midst of adaptation and adoption with this tool, so everyday it seems like there's something new I'm discovering that helps us in our business.

          I think it would be helpful having a more comprehensive set of certifications, if you will, so that I could natively deploy devices to my environment and the tool would immediately recognize and immediately be able to provide relevant performance information without a lot of tuning on my part. 

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          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.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          Scalability is yet to be determined, as we continue to build out our infrastructure. But so far, as we've been adding new portfolios, new domains, we haven't had any challenges with regard to the performance of the tool as it's managing additional devices in our environment.

          How are customer service and technical support?

          I have not used tech support. I know our teams have, on a couple of occasions, regarding reports that weren't necessarily coming out they way they were expecting, or with some changes to how the application was laid out. From what I've heard the tech support was beneficial. It was quick. It was timely. No issues.

          Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

          Lifecycle came into that. We had an old tool. It was either refresh and get new hardware, update to the current version, or look at alternatives, and other solutions that were in the market. So we took the opportunity, based on our standard lifecycle driver, to look at various tools. We had some other tools that were native in our environment and did a comparison between several different solutions. And ultimately settle with CA. 

          How was the initial setup?

          I think what surprised me the most was how easy it was to implement. This was my third migration for manager's console over the last 20 years in IT, and the previous two iterations made me fearful for this new migration. Just because of the amount of work that goes into tuning the alerts and insuring that the data is visualized in a way that operators and consumers of it are expecting. Quite honestly, within two weeks we had live data, we had actionable information, and our operations were so much easier. 

          That was the most surprising thing to me, was how easy it was, with initial implementation, to get data out of the tool. Now there's optimization, and additional tuning that we're going to do, and continue to do. But, just getting it up and running was very straightforward.

          The complexity was the back office systems, and the compliance, and security points that we have to live under, and finding a way to connect those in a secure way. That was the hardest part. Once we had the back office installed, the discovery and utilization went off very straightforward.

          Which other solutions did I evaluate?

          There were several.We had the IBM product, we had SolarWinds, and we had CA in our environment as well. So we evaluated all of these tools relative to the requirements from our 24/7 operations and for our tier-3 support teams, and made the decision to go with CA.

          One of the key requirements was this notion of off-the-shelf capabilities, and the requirement for us to be able to use the tool, to use dashboards, to use reports, to be able to performance manage our solutions, without having to go in and write scripts, without having to build up reports, without having to search for data. This native capability out of the box was one of our prime requirements.

          We had all of the technical requirements that you need for other tools. Does it speak natively, and standard protocols? Does it have certifications for all of the vendor models that we have in our environment? All those kinds of typical requirements.

          For us, the ability to use the tool immediately, whomever we went with, was one of our main requirements. We wanted to be able to deploy the tool and make good use out of it without having to send teams to two weeks of training, and then go back and try to figure out how to use what Performance Management gives us.

          What other advice do I have?

          In terms of criteria when selecting a vendor, for us, one of the most important is our partnership and their strategic outlook. A tool's a tool. You can buy a hammer that looks like a little different from the other one, but they all effectively do the same thing. Which is not to say that this tool doesn't have its benefits. There was a reason we selected it. But I think having a strategic partnership with a vendor, over the long term, has an interest in making your business successful. We have long-standing relationships, and that was a positive when it came time to make a decision.

          I would say it's a solid eight out of 10 right now.

          Given our success in our presentation and our being able to use it right away, I think that the capabilities that it brought to our business - we were able to replicate the capabilities that we had in our old environment, almost immediately. And then we were able to realize the additional features, the native reporting, the additional baselining in our environment. We started to be able to use enhancements over our previous tool set right away. 

          For any tool to come in and be able to do what the business needs and what it has been using, foundationally, is the requirement for it to be considered successful. For us, it was a little bit more than just successful, because not only did we replicate the capabilities that we had, but we were also able to realize some of those additional features.

          My tenure with the tool probably doesn't give me enough time yet to say it's a 10 out of 10. I do have more expectations for the tool. As it continues to scale, to meet our requirements, as we're able to bring in additional legacy technologies to baseline, with time maybe it could be a 10. But I think today it's very successful and we're getting a lot of use out of it.

          As we continue to bring the new operation technologies that are out there, as we see how long this manager is able to incorporate these new technologies, in addition to the legacy stuff that has been around, then...

          One of the things I mentioned in our discussion earlier, the discussion of certification transparency, I don't want to have to go build a model so that the tool can discover and give me relevant information and then I can take action. The ability for this tool to be able to discover and communicate with those new technologies that are coming is going to be one of the areas we're going to be watching.

          This solution is definitely worth an evaluation, whatever portfolio - whether it's data networks, or telecommunication, wireless - I think that my coaching or recommendation would be: Don't overlook this tool just because it's incumbent, it's a big name, it's a tier-one brand. There is a cost when you try to cut costs. Nothing is free, you get what you pay for, and I think this solution has paid us full dividends. 

          Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
          JD
          Network Engineer at Wells Fargo
          Real User
          Leaderboard
          We have our flow forensics paired with the SNMP polling performance metrics on the same page, however they need to improve on response times for development stuff

          Pros and Cons

          • "The integration with NetFlow, the NFA solution, so that we can have our flow forensics paired with the SNMP polling performance metrics on the same page."
          • "It saves time having it all on one place, so you do not have to jump around from different tools and try to merge the data. It is already done for you.​"
          • "​Global synchronization errors. Sometimes it just doesn't finish in time due to the load."
          • "When it goes through discovery, or whatever it is doing in the back-end that slows it down, sometimes we get some failures with it. ​"
          • "Since we are out of registered IP space, we are moving to ipv6 and we expect our vendors to move with us, and they have not delivered yet."

          What is our primary use case?

          Performance management for capacity monitoring of the Wells Fargo network. 

          Performance-wise so far, so good. We have been ramping up close to the limit of the application: four million polled metrics. We are at approximately 3.6 million. So far, it has been doing alright. A couple of hiccups here and there, but overall we are happy with it.

          How has it helped my organization?

          It saves time having it all on one place, so you do not have to jump around from different tools and try to merge the data. It is already done for you.

          It does not really affect how the company functions, but it gives us insight into  performance slow downs, and if we need more bandwidth and more larger, heavy-duty equipment.

          What is most valuable?

          The integration with NetFlow, the NFA solution, so we can have our flow forensics paired with the SNMP polling performance metrics on the same page. Everybody throws around single pane of glass, but this is really the benefit that we see from it. Have it being able to have everything there in one application UI. 

          What needs improvement?

          • Global synchronization errors. Sometimes it just does not finish in time due to the load. 
          • When it goes through discovery, or whatever it is doing on the back-end that slows it down, sometimes we get some failures with it. 
          • On the NFA ipv6 support, they still have not fully supported it. It is huge for large enterprises. Since we are out of registered IP space, we are moving to ipv6 and we expect our vendors to move with us, and they have not delivered yet. That is a contention point for us. 
          • They need to improve on response times for development stuff, bug fixes and enhancement for the turnaround times.

          For how long have I used the solution?

          Three to five years.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          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. 

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          Scalability is great. We would like more because we are almost at the limit or at least the advertised limit for the system. I know they are working to move their four million data pulled metrics up to 10 million. So, that will be a lot better for us, just because we have such a large enterprise. 

          How is customer service and technical support?

          Technical support is good and very responsive. We have weekly calls with our account team and the staff. The development piece providing what we are asking for, maybe an enhancement request and stuff like that, is a little slow. However, we like to think that we are the most important customer for CA, but I know there are other customers out there.

          How was the initial setup?

          Because of security requirements within our infrastructure, the setup of Vertica was horrendous. It was really a lot of work. Vertica is Micro Focus, but it was really hard. 

          Upgrades are great. They are very easy.

          What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

          We were looking at other vendors in the marketplace for NetFlow, and CA just beat everybody else in price, cost, and the size to implement. The infrastructure investment that you have to put into installing the systems. 

          Which other solutions did I evaluate?

          We looked at InfoVista. We already have InfoVista at the bank, so we looked at them, but their solution just was not viable for us. 

          What other advice do I have?

          Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: For Wells Fargo, it is being able to handle the size and scalability. Most vendors out there cannot for large enterprises, because we are pretty much a small Telco in our size. Therefore, being able to scale up to 40,000 to 50,000 network devices is extremely important for horizontal scalability and the layout. 

          Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
          it_user778722
          Supervisor Of Event Management And Monitoring at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
          Real User
          Since the implementation of the tool, it has cut down on probably 60% of our outages

          Pros and Cons

          • "Since the implementation of the tool, it has cut down on probably 60% of our outages and letting us know what is going on."
          • "There is another component of the tool called Network Flow Analysis. It gives us the ability to troubleshoot issues which do not appear right away."
          • "My sales representative, I would not trade him in for the world. He has done a really good job. I am really happy with him.​"
          • "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."
          • "It seems like we escalate more than I would like to. If anything, they should look at how the tier support goes in place."

          What is our primary use case?

          Our primary use case for the product was to actually monitor the devices in our network. To actually help alert on problems and issues, then do some type of self-healing for the issue. It was also there to find a way to build trends and look at our network to see what we look like now, and where we may have to plan going into the future.

          The tool does pretty well. It is pretty new to us. We are still learning it. It is a broad value. People were a little hesitant when they started using the product. Now, it has become a vital tool for our use in the company, from a network perspective. 

          How has it helped my organization?

          Since the implementation of the tool, it has cut down on probably 60% of our outages and letting us know what is going on. That little component has created significant improvement for us that we were able to put in place. 

          There is another component of the tool called Network Flow Analysis. It gives us the ability to troubleshoot issues which do not appear right away. It was actually an added benefit to the tool for us.

          What is most valuable?

          Its ability to probe the POLAR Network and tell us about a device. That is the most valuable. It is important we are able to alert based on what we find. It has become useful, because we can interact it with another tool, like Splunk, to actually do other parts of alerting.

          What needs improvement?

          Since the direction is more cloud-oriented, I would like to see what modules or functions they are putting out there to say, "Hey, this is what we are doing to monitor your cloud or help monitor that issue." As we move more towards the cloud, we have to monitor what in that space can I do with the CA PC tool in that environment.

          For how long have I used the solution?

          Less than one year.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          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.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          I am happy with the scalability for right now. It is better in the later versions.

          The company is 25,000 employees. Our department consists of two groups that work together. We are broken up into a monitoring group and a network group, both use the tool, probably about 20 of us. Maybe a little more that use the tool to get what we need out of it.

          How is customer service and technical support?

          Customer service: I am quite comfortable with CA and love the people that we talk to about it. They are responsive working with us and made us feel like they really care about the product. I get that from the sales perspective, my representative. I would not trade him in for the world. He has done a really good job. I am really happy with him.

          Technical support: I would give them about a "B" right now, because they do not respond as quickly as we like. They do get around to us with some issues. It seems like we escalate more than I would like to. If anything, they should look at how the tier support goes in place. 

          If I call and it is critical, then I have to wait for someone to call me back with an engineer, I am not too happy about it. Because you only call when you need it, so if I need you, I need you right then. If it was some other issue, such as searching for knowledge, I can understand opening up a ticket.

          We normally would not call unless we are trying to do something with the tool, and it is not performing the way that it is suppose to, and we are trying to find out why. Normally, I call because I need the tool up and working, then I need to know, "Why?" However, first of all, I need the tool up. 

          The issue: There are sometimes they have to go and do research and get somebody to find out why the tool is down for a minute. That could be somewhat of a challenge for us, because we have people that are looking for the tool.

          How was the initial setup?

          The initial setup, I wouldn't say was totally complex. I would give it on a scale of one to 10, it is about a six for the initial setup. Once you have the information, I did not think it was that difficult. The challenge was to find out what platform they were running on.

          I come from a company that does both Windows and Linux. Of course when we asked them, which environment the tool should run on, they said they support both. They still support both. What I would like to know is, what is the most stable environment for the tool? 

          That is where I am looking for them to say. I know no one wants to choose one environment over the other. I do not care what you say. I just need to know your recommended way from experience, which environment has less issues on it. That makes a difference.

          We are using Linux, and I am glad we did. I think it would have been a disaster the other way.

          Which other solutions did I evaluate?

          We looked at SolarWinds. We looked Riverbed. I think we just looked at CA. We did not go looking at a lot of them. CA also came to us, because we had someone working on the other side to say, "Hey, we already had them in-house, take a look at a tool they had in place."

          That helped them, because they were there. Once they could provide the tool that we wanted, and they were able to go through our use cases along with other vendors, that is how they got selected. They fitted with everything that we needed.

          What other advice do I have?

          Kick the tires and get under the hood. Provide your use cases upfront, and tell them exactly what you need. Once you do that, it is fine.

          They will provide you with what you want, and meet your criteria. Lay out everything that you need. Look at the sales person that you are dealing with (the sales engineer). See how knowledgeable they are about their product, and see if it does what they say it will do, and that it is available right now. Do not tell me something is here, then, "Oh, that will be available six months from now." That does me no good. Unless you tell me up front, "We're gonna have this in the future," then I will know.

          We are still learning it, because there are still features that we need to implement. It is a slow learning process. Right away when you get a tool, you want it to be implemented to actually address the issue that you have at that time. Now, we are looking at it to see what else it can do for us. 

          From when we first got the tool, it was there just to look and discover devices, and tell us if they were just available or not. Now, we are looking at it to say, "Well, we can trend on certain things." 

          Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: 

          1. Be able to meet my requirements.
          2. Stability
          3. Price. That makes a difference.
          Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
          it_user779190
          Team Lead at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
          Real User
          Proactively builds dashboards, which allow us to go and do health checks

          Pros and Cons

          • "​The ability to quickly do drag and drop customized reports for dashboards.​"
          • "​When devices are having performance issues, it proactively build dashboards which allow us to go and do health checks, and resolve problems before they become an issue.​"
          • "I have mixed feeling about the scalability. I feel like there are things which are being put into UIM right now that are not being included in Performance Center that we need to see in Performance Center. We are kind of being driven to buy UIM, and I can't justify it.​"
          • "There are some areas in the technology right now, like with VMs, where we are lacking with our abilities to get inside the VM to monitor traffic within the machine."

          What is our primary use case?

          We use the Performance Center to do performance monitoring. It is used throughout the organization by both our engineers, our support staff, and our troubleshooters.

          How has it helped my organization?

          When devices are having performance issues, it proactively build dashboards, which allow us to go and do health checks, and resolve problems before they become an issue.

          What is most valuable?

          The ability to quickly do drag and drop customized reports for dashboards.

          What needs improvement?

          I would like to see open integration with tools like Splunk, ExtraHop, and NetMRI.

          There are some areas in the technology right now, like with VMs, where we are lacking with our abilities to get inside the VM to monitor traffic within the machine.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          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.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          I have mixed feeling about the scalability. I feel like there are things which are being put into UIM right now that are not being included in Performance Center that we need to see in Performance Center. We are kind of being driven to buy UIM, and I can't justify it.

          There are just some charts and views that we can't build in Performance Center right now.

          How is customer service and technical support?

          We have had a couple of instances with one support person that we've had some issues with, but overall I would say it is very good.

          What about the implementation team?

          We brought a CA person on site to help us with the initial setup. They were helpful. They got us up and running.

          What other advice do I have?

          Have an open mind. Look at what it can do for your folks. How fast and how easy it is for them to learn to navigate through the dashboards, and what you can do with the dashboards.

          Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
          it_user760713
          Infrastructure Services Engineer Sr, Enterprise Network at a insurance company
          Real User
          Enabled us to build hundreds of highly instrumented custom reports around multiple data sources

          Pros and Cons

          • "The integration to the other products that we use: NFA, we use ADA, we use Spectrum; and CAPM integrates all those into a single pane of glass."
          • "Some of the individual report views, the way some of the columns sort, there's room for improvement in giving us more flexibility in being able to sort reports based, for example, on what columns the metrics fall under."

          What is most valuable?

          The integration to the other products that we use: NFA, we use ADA, we use Spectrum; and CAPM integrates all those into a single pane of glass, for performance. CAPC is good for developing reports around those multiple data sources and giving us a single vision on what's going on in our environment.

          How has it helped my organization?

          In the past we've had multiple monitoring tools and products being used simultaneously. The goal of the product - and we're still working on eliminating some of the overlap that the other products have - is to allow us to have a single monitoring system, or as close to a single monitoring system as possible on network performance. That way, the network engineers don't have so many places to look for performance data. Prior to using the CA tool suite, we probably had - and I would hate to say this - but we probably had a hundred monitoring tools.

          What needs improvement?

          Some of the individual report views, the way some of the columns sort, there's room for improvement in giving us more flexibility in being able to sort reports based, for example, on what columns the metrics fall under.

          I would say for the most part, most of the improvements I would identify would be on individual reports that are produced by PM, that we instrument to be produced by PM. They may not necessarily do everything we want them to do.

          For how long have I used the solution?

          We've had CAPM deployed a little over two years. I have experience with CA's NetQoS NPC for about five years prior to that. CAPC basically replaced NPC.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          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.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          No issues with PM. We use other products like NFA and ADA. We've had scalability issues in those areas, but with PM we have not. I don't think we've run into a situation where we have too much. We actually designed our system around a million interfaces to monitor, and I think we're probably less than half a million at this point.

          How are customer service and technical support?

          I would probably give them an eight out of 10.

          Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

          We switched because there were multiple other solutions, and we were already using CA Spectrum, so the natural progression was to go to CA and use their performance management tool, also known as CAPC, Performance Center. We used multiple tools. We had NetCool out there, we had SolarWinds out there, CiscoWorks, numerous tools.

          How was the initial setup?

          For us, I would say it was complex. But I think a lot of customers that use the tool rely heavily on the out-of-the-box reporting that CA produces with the tool naturally. For those types of deployments, it might go easier. For our needs, we highly instrumented reports. We have built literally hundreds and hundreds of individual reports ourselves, for our own needs and, I would say that that comes with a level of complexity to accomplish.

          Which other solutions did I evaluate?

          I was not on board at the time that they were doing of the selection of this tool set, with Anthem. I'm aware that they were also looking at NetCool as another option, and I am not sure why CA was ultimately selected. I also don't have any information about pricing. I'm not sure what they spent on it.

          What other advice do I have?

          On the positive, if you can rely on the out-of-the-box reports, it should be a fairly straightforward deployment. If you're looking at instrumenting your own views and stuff, it gets more complex the more views you want, the more complex your views, and the more you want to instrument the tool for your environment, versus using the out-of-the-box solution. My advice would be to understand how you're going to implement this and what you're expecting from it.

          You're going to go one of a couple different ways. You're either going to instrument it to satisfy some specific needs that you have, or you're going to depend heavily on the out-of-the-box reports that only do instrumentation in a few examples that you find you need. When they demonstrate it to you, you should ask those questions about the differences.

          In follow-up to my rating it an eight out of 10 overall, I've used a few other products. There aren't a whole lot of other products I could even give a five to, to be honest. I've used SolarWinds, I've been exposed to NetCool. I've heard horror stories about HPE OpenView. I would give it an eight, which isn't perfect but it's high on my scale.

          Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
          ITCS user
          Consultant
          Vendor
          The auto-certification is a valuable feature.

          What is most valuable?

          The auto-certification is valuable to us. It reduces the time consumed to certify a new device, as in the past with CA eHealth.

          How has it helped my organization?

          CA PM is able to monitor more equipment, or only specific requirements, as necessary.

          What needs improvement?

          The database should have higher availability in case of an incident.

          For how long have I used the solution?

          We have been using the solution for six months.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          It requires higher availability in case of any incidents with any of the servers.

          How are customer service and technical support?

          The technical support is excellent.

          Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

          Previously, we used CA eHealth, which was changed to CA PM.

          How was the initial setup?

          We would welcome some online demos to be available, or something similar to CA UIM Snap.

          What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

          CA's support is 24/7 during the entire year and the tools are guaranteed.

          Which other solutions did I evaluate?

          We looked at some open code tools. However, they don't have any support or guarantees like CA.

          What other advice do I have?

          It's a solution which is highly recommended. It will meet and exceed your expectations.

          Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: We are business partners.
          it_user635463
          Manager at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
          Vendor
          Puts the creating of dashboards and reports into end users' hands.

          What is most valuable?

          It's a pretty complex product. There are a lot of parts to it.

          The biggest selling point is putting the power of creating dashboards and reports into end users' hands. They can create views that are most pertinent to them. That's been the big one for us, and one of the reasons why we went with the product.

          How has it helped my organization?

          From a business standpoint, it's hard to quantify. It's been used in the capacity planning process, as far as our network infrastructure goes. We've been able to utilize data that's been collected by the tool to more accurately predict usages.

          What needs improvement?

          The one area where I think it could be improved is the reporting capability. The dashboard features are very function rich, but the reporting feature is probably not as rich as we'd like it to be. There are some limitations in using it.

          For example, the number of objects that you can simultaneously show or display in a report is limited. The reporting capability needs to scale up a little bit higher.

          Compared to eHealth the reporting is limited. For example the number of graphs in a report is limited to 15. Another limitation is that you cannot copy or duplicate reports.

          The whole non-root installation really needs to be clarified a lot more than they did.

          For how long have I used the solution?

          We've been using it for just under a year.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          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.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          We have not had an issue with scalability other than in reporting. I would not necessarily say that's a scalability issue of the product, but that's scalability with respect to one of the functions of the product.

          How are customer service and technical support?

          I've called technical support on different occasions. Sometimes just for assistance and sometimes to report an issue. They have always been very responsive and quick to call back. I prefer a phone call and I rank them very, very high.

          Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

          We were using a different CA solution. Specifically, we were using a product called eHealth.

          The reason why we migrated was a recommendation from CA. Their focus was going to be on the CA Performance Management product, and less on eHealth. They were trying to migrate users away from eHealth.

          How was the initial setup?

          The setup was complex. There are a lot of components that had to be installed. The biggest issue that I had with the installation is that it's very much geared to a root installation.

          In other words, if you use the root ID to install the product, you're most likely not going to have issues. We just ran into numerous issues because we did not have root access.

          While they made some effort in the documentation to describe how to go about doing that, internally it was less than complete. We kept on getting issues that we could not complete because we didn't have root access.

          It was a collaborative effort. Through support's help, a lot of time spent on this side, and with support personnel over here and on the server side, we were able to figure out what the issue was.

          However, it wasn't a matter of, "Run this script and you're done installing." In no cases were we that fortunate, because we were not doing a root installation.

          What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

          I wouldn't say it's too expensive. I'd say it's comparable to what you're going to find in the marketplace.

          You have to make sure you have an accurate count of the number of devices, and more specifically, managed objects. I'll use that term. It is the devices and the managed objects that you want to put in your CAPM system.

          Which other solutions did I evaluate?

          We evaluated other options in the past when we selected eHealth. We did a full evaluation and we went with the CA solution.

          After we had only been on it for two or three years, we felt comfortable with CA, their approach, and their strategy for handling network performance management. We just decided to stick with CA and migrate to their next generation, the CAPM.

          What other advice do I have?

          I would definitely take advantage of the training that CA offers. Certainly take that training, just prior to, or just after you've done the installation. That will put you in a position to really exploit the features of the product.

          There's so much you can do with the product and not just the dashboard and the reports that users can generate.

          There is more customization that you can do to the product and tweak it to your site's needs.

          Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
          ITCS user
          Technology Architect Consultant at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
          Real User
          Provides user-configurable roles & permissions with granularity.

          What is most valuable?

          • Multi-tenant platform
          • User-configurable roles & permissions with granularity
          • Dashboard-oriented
          • Easy enough to customize

          How has it helped my organization?

          Mainly as an MSP configuration, the multi-tenant model helps us to segment the customer and users, as well as providing our operation the capability to oversee all tenants.

          What needs improvement?

          Today, tenants are bound to a data collector which requires a lot of networking and resources to configure.

          In the context of the multi-service provider and the need to have customer segmentation either for IP overlapping or Security (data protection), multi-tenancy is required. However, in order to do this, the tenant (IP Domain) need to be attach to one Data Collector by Tenant. In the MSP context, it is equal to 1 DC per customer and even for small customer (couple device) this is not too scalable or rather expensive.

          For how long have I used the solution?

          I have used the platform since the beginning and in production for at least two years.

          What was my experience with deployment of the solution?

          Our multi-customer configuration is challenging, as well as to have redundancy over two data centers.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          Redundancy over two data centers is one of our challenges, as well as the fact that we use a lot of data collection, even using Docker containers for it.

          How are customer service and technical support?

          Support is OK for the standard use of the product but as our configuration is complex, they often have to refer to engineering.

          Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

          We were previously using eHealth and APG.

          How was the initial setup?

          As we started from the beginning, it has improved a lot since; once again, our solution remains complex due to our usage.

          What about the implementation team?

          Implementation was with a vendor team; at the beginning, with CA Service, and then with CA engineering, as we do DevOps.

          Which other solutions did I evaluate?

          Before choosing we also evaluated SevONE, APG, and InfoVista.

          What other advice do I have?

          This is coming along; great progress. The "3 series" looks promising.

          Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
          it_user558384
          Network Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
          Consultant
          It has valuable alerting, reporting and integration features.

          What is most valuable?

          The most valuable features to date are the alerts, reports, and integration with other CA products:

          • The alerting feature allows us to quickly identify and begin remediation on network devices that are experiencing performance/capacity issues.
          • The reporting feature has allowed us to quickly share information with customers, keeping them up to date on critical devices that are being monitored.
          • The integration aspect is also important, as it allows us to feed inventory to the system from tools designed to walk our networks, and also pull in flow data for additional troubleshooting in one place.

          How has it helped my organization?

          Utilizing the capacity/performance data alongside the flow we are able to quickly determine the root cause of impact. This allows us to reduce mean time to resolution on network impacting events due to capacity/performance.

          What needs improvement?

          There is always room for improvement, which CA continues to do based upon community feedback.

          One of the greatest challenges we have encountered are the polling cycles. We currently poll at 5-minute intervals, but at times need to have up-to-the-minute data. Products we have leveraged from other vendors allow us at the click of a button to turn on up-to-the-minute polling for up to an hour. CA Performance Management does not have a similar feature. It may be emulated, however, by setting up a new group for one-minute polling cycles; however, leaving this rate on will impact data storage, so only administrators are provided this feature in our organization.

          For how long have I used the solution?

          The solution has been in place for 15 months, and has already provided information helpful in network cleanup.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          To date, we have not encountered any stability issues.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          To date, we have not encountered any scalability issues.

          How are customer service and technical support?

          I have not been required to work directly with technical support. However, based on feedback from the team that does, support often starts with the standard runbook, even after we have described similar troubleshooting steps to them. This results in lost time in resolving issues. Once we have moved beyond the basics, support has been handled well.

          Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

          Our prior solution was dated and in need of refresh. We switched to the CA solution after going through a proof of concept and rating it against two other competitors.

          How was the initial setup?

          The initial setup was mostly straightforward, with assistance from onsite technical resources from CA. The majority of issues we encountered were with our corporate requirements on server configurations and not the tools themselves.

          What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

          Regarding pricing and licensing, keep in mind that bundling will provide the best value. As a result, doing your best to anticipate growth and future needs may save you money in the long run.

          Which other solutions did I evaluate?

          We did evaluate two competing options from HPE and Alcatel Lucent.

          What other advice do I have?

          Take advantage of the professional services and leverage your solution experts from CA. They will help you define the right solution keeping in mind current utilization and future growth.

          Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
          it_user629940
          Consultant at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
          Vendor
          The metrics are helping us to know our network better.

          What is most valuable?

          It is easy to use, and the performance metrics are helping us to know our network better.

          How has it helped my organization?

          It provides metrics to users.

          What needs improvement?

          The certificates are not complete. CA needs to provide more support for the product through certificates. They need to discuss this with their product team.

          Certs are the drivers to support the devices. Some of the vendors are not fully covered. An example of this is Brocade. Certain types of Brocade used in our company is not in certs published. There are others as well.

          For how long have I used the solution?

          I have used this solution for two years.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          There was a big problem with HPE Vertica.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          There were no scalability issues.

          Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

          We always use CA.

          How was the initial setup?

          The setup was straightforward.

          What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

          The price is too expensive.

          Which other solutions did I evaluate?

          We looked at other solutions such as IBM, HPE, etc.

          What other advice do I have?

          It is important to know what you need.

          Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
          it_user558399
          Lead Network Performance Engineer at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
          Vendor
          It integrates all of our CA products into one dashboard. Everybody's using the same data to correlate what is happening.

          What is most valuable?

          The benefit is having the one-stop shop where we can integrate all of our CA products into one dashboard. They can use that one dashboard as a portal to click around to wherever they need to go. The dashboard integrates our data from Spectrum and CA PC, like the data collectors.

          How has it helped my organization?

          It has improved efficiency because now there is the one-stop shop where you can view all your data, instead of needing to click around in four different tools. Everybody's looking at the same data. You don't have people using their own tools, or using a different tool. Everybody's using the same data to correlate what is happening.

          What needs improvement?

          I would like to see it integrated with UIM. That is the one tool that is not in there. Then I would like to see log analytics, which I know are coming; but are still not included.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          At our company, we have a large implementation, and we have not had any issues with scale. We just scale horizontally.

          How is customer service and technical support?

          Technical support is pretty good. I would say that we always get to the bottom of the problem. The only reason it is not perfect is that sometimes it takes a couple of days; but we do get to the bottom of it.

          How was the initial setup?

          I would say the initial setup is complex. CA does make it easy, but you need to have the right architecture for it to be successful. You have to design it correctly from the start.

          Which other solutions did I evaluate?

          Currently we have an issue where, if the store goes down, we get 20 tickets spread across different tools. We knew we needed to scale it back to only one actionable item. We needed to use one tool that would encompass everything and scale out, and be able to provide the flexibility to let us narrow it down to what we need.

          Our most important criteria when selecting a vendor are scale, stability, and support. We evaluated CA, HPE, Riverbed, and BMC. We went with CA because of our partnership with that vendor. We are most confident in that partnership.

          What other advice do I have?

          It is a good product that will meet their needs.

          Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
          BH
          Information Technology System Administrator at Jack Henry and associats
          Real User
          Leaderboard
          Upfront dashboard view of our multiple data centers helps catch problems before they impact the customer.

          What is most valuable?

          It allows us to have a quick, upfront view of our multiple data centers. We have multiple connections to hundreds of customers; and it provides us with a quick dashboard look at issues we might be having; bottlenecks we might be having; and things that might go wrong in our network without us needing to dig through endless screens of issues to get to the root of the problem.

          How has it helped my organization?

          It makes things faster when we have our network operations center. They can look at their dashboards that we've created for them, and they can see problems immediately. We can catch a problem before it really starts impacting the customer. It enables our network engineers to look deeper into the source of the problem after alerts are raised. So it's quick, it's fast, and it gets things done. We can get past a problem before it becomes a real problem.

          What needs improvement?

          What's missing is stuff that they're already putting on the roadmap: the quick dashboards that they're building; the ability to create dashboard quickly; for example, with ADA and NFA, has been pretty amazing.

          They are starting to support additional products and every time we come out here, and every time there is a product release, something new is added to it. Honestly, CA should just keep doing what they're doing. I'm sure there's going to be stuff out there we haven't thought of; and I hope they figure it out first.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          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.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          We have multiple large data centers and we've never had any issue getting those data centers hooked into CA. If we have to connect to something with our ADA or NFA products, we find it: it's there. We don't have any problems with size or scalability. It's quick, and if we need to bump it up a little bit, we can do that as well.

          How is customer service and technical support?

          We use technical support all the time. In fact, they just resolved an issue for us this week with a name tag for IP SLA products in Cisco. The nice thing about them is that they're so quick and responsive. When we have a problem, they will get on it, and they will find us an answer, usually quickly. They come back and fix problems and bugs, so that it worked great. Their technical support has always been fantastic.

          How was the initial setup?

          Actually, I was not involved in the initial setup. I inherited an old mature system. It seems to be straightforward. I worked with a guy who did set the product up initially, and he had no issues with it. But again, I'm now working on a mature system, so I haven't done that yet.

          What other advice do I have?

          Get CA involved up front. Let them help you. CA has done this for years. Let them help you with the things that you might not even realize that you don't know. Let them help implement it with you because they're going to know some of the bumps and hassles and pitfalls that are out there. That's what my partner did before I came onboard; and he said it was as smooth as pie. So, that would be my advice.

          Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
          it_user351330
          Network Engineer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
          Vendor
          It allows us to see historical data that shows what type of traffic is going across the circuit. And although there were some issues when we started supporting UTA, we're able to get support for them.

          What is most valuable?

          The most valuable feature to us is that it provides us with NetFlow data, which is essential to our business.

          How has it helped my organization?

          It allows us to see historical data that shows what type of traffic is going across the circuit. When we have capacity issues, we can isolate those issue and we can block when we get high traffic.

          What needs improvement?

          There are some issues. We started supporting UTA and began to see both major and minor problems. We're able to get support for these problems, though.

          What was my experience with deployment of the solution?

          We've had no issues with deployment since implementation.

          What do I think about the stability of the solution?

          It seems stable. We're using NetQoS.

          What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

          This is the scalable option, and it's why we need it and have it.

          How are customer service and technical support?

          Technical support is very responsive and knowledgeable. We get tier-one support.

          Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

          We had InfoVista when NetFlow was an emerging technology. CA really stood out and that’s why we brought them in.

          How was the initial setup?

          Initial setup was pretty complex, but we were familiar with it and got help from CA.

          What other advice do I have?

          Not too many companies would implement this. If you're a large organization, make sure you staff correctly. It’s a large application and you need a group of people who know Linux and NetFlow. Have the right skill sets.

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