Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

More than 60 people use the product in my company.

It is highly and easily scalable.

Scalability has not been an issue.

There were no scalability issues. So far, it has done well.

It's scalable.

The downside for me, as an admin, is that the admins don't have that much of power in the back end/background, i.e., not much power in terms of the access, tweaking and changing the settings. I feel it is not that much scalable.

It has massive scalability.

I did not encounter any scalability issues.

We had issues with scalability, including the need to increase the maximum weight of the files and the limit of the size of the community, but they were quickly handled.

We did not encounter any issues with scalability.

We have not had issues with scalabilily.

We have not had any scalability problems.

Scalability is okay-ish. We are more or less satisfied with the way it works. No major need for fixing it.

Scalability is also very good.

We're a very small company and we have 215 employees worldwide. I know there are sites that are running hundreds or thousands of people in the system so, obviously, it scales up very well.

We have drastically overbuilt our on-premise installation for redundancy purposes - multiple HTTP servers, multiple Apps servers, multiple Docs servers, etc, and aren't really hitting any performance problems with the environment we have, but we can obviously always add more resources- more cores, more
RAM, or even more servers in general if it's needed to better support the
application.

Scalability is a function of CPU and RAM. The file component leverages IBM FileNet under the hood for robust document management.

Until now, we haven't had any challenges in terms of its capability to handle the user base.

None

I am not aware of any issues regarding scalability.

Scalability also seems to be pretty easily accessible. I know our rep seems to be working with us pretty well in licensing if we need to get any more but other than that, I haven't seen any issues with that.

It seems to be capable of scaling. We haven't had to scale it that much, because we did a mass rollout all at once, and our company is not growing that fast. I see where the potential for scalability is very good, because of how we built it.

There's good scalability because there hasn't been any limitations for us as such.

I have not encountered any scalability issues.

I have not encountered any scalability issues.

The scalability within the product is one of the big plusses, because the underlying infra where the applications are running on is IBM WebSphere. It is one of the best application platforms, which can scale easily in a horizontal and vertical way.

Nope, Connections runs over IBM WebSphere Application server so you have only your fantasy as limit, you can cluster Connections in many differents ways

I have not encountered any scalability issues.

The WebSphere middleware allows the number of nodes running the applications to be scaled horizontally and vertically with relative ease. WebSphere has been doing this for many years and is doing it very well.

We haven't run into scalability issues, just because we don't really have high usage, overall.

We did not encounter any issues with scalability.

There were no scalability issues, but the effort to add extra nodes in a running configuration can be cumbersome.

We've got many thousands of users on it, so it's very scalable.

I have absolutely not encountered any scalability issues.

There were no scalability issues.

We have not encountered any scalability issues.

When we went from 1,000 users to 2,000 users, we hit some problems and then it required a lot of retuning and reconfiguration.

Scalability is okay.

The system scales very easily, with the exception of Solr search (search type-ahead), which is only a single server install at this point and cannot be clustered. Currently, implementation only allows for a single search node, so it is a single point of failure when implementing this technology. All of the other components can be scaled and have multiple instances running on multiple physical/virtual machines for better performance and redundancy but Solr cannot.

There were scalability issues. Maximum volume of activity creates a lot of problems. We need more storage.

No, it is very scalable

It isn't so scalable really as we keep changing providers.

When you choose to use it on-prem, you have to decide the scalability based on the usage. It can be easily expanded by adding more servers. The cloud is another story and is always perfect in performance.

Scalability is also very good.

I did not encounter any scalability issues.

The scalability is great within the internal organization.