IBM Workload Automation Reviews

The API is a valuable feature as it allowed us to integrate the inventory, change and ticketing systems to fully automate most of the monitoring processes for new devices, decommissioned devices and during approved changes.

The new servers automatically get monitored with the alerts going to the server administrator or application developers, without the need for someone to submit a request.

The alerts automatically go to a command center, when a server is classified as production in the inventory system. The alerts get automatically suppressed during an approved change.

A lot of the automation that we added to the product should come built into it, so that every customer doesn't have to reinvent the wheel. This will eliminate the need for us to modify our code, in order to make it compatible with each future release.

Below are examples of automation that we developed which should be built into the product:

• Integration with the inventory system, so that alerts go to the proper teams. For example, alerts for servers classified as development would go to the apps support team or alerts for servers classified as production would go to the monitoring center. Also, alerts would stop when a server is marked as decommissioned.

• Integration with the change management system so that alerts would be suppressed during the change window for approved changes. Thus, alerts would begin for approved changes adding new servers.

I have used this solution for five years.

There were some stability issues but we lit a fire under IBM's feet and they corrected them.

There were no scalability issues; we managed to deploy over 85,000 server with no issues.

The level of technical support is top notch. If the support team can't fix an issue, they don't hesitate to engage the product development team.

Initially, we were using a home-grown product that didn't scale as well and had no ability for cross-product automation.

The setup was very complex and required on-site support, mostly due to the cross-product automation that we implemented.

Talk to your IBM sales representative to see what they can offer you.

We did not evaluate other solutions.

Talk to other customers using this product, who are similar in size and configuration, so as to get feedback, ideas and what to watch out for.

The introduction of the TDWC (Tivoli Dynamic Workload Console) was nice to have, preventing additional code installs for the JSC.

It gives end users the ability to monitor their jobs/workflows in real time, which helps with MTR when they experience issues.

When deleting jobs from the database that have interdependencies within other job streams, there is no warning about those dependencies, which could cause other job streams to have issues later on.

We starting using it back when it was named Maestro 5.X.

I did not encounter any stability issues. It’s been a very stable and reliable product.

We have not had any scalability issues.

I rate technical support 9.5/10. I have not opened any cases over the past 1.5 years. They have always been very supportive and helpful in the past.

Initial setup was fairly straightforward. However, configuring and setting up the TDWC was somewhat of a challenge; we had to consult with Level 3 support several times to get things working properly.

Consult with a third-party vendor to assist with price discounts.

I did not evaluate other products before choosing this one. However, they are asking us to look at other solutions, due to cost for licensing the TWS product.

I would have to recommend installing the TWS Master/Backup Masters on a Linux platform, not Windows.

Automation capabilities with dependencies, long-term plan and modifying current plan, and ease of use are the product's most valuable features to me.

When there is a holiday or emergency closing, we query the Long-Term Plan to identify what will or will not be running during the closure. Application owners review and sign off of the plan, making everyone aware of the scheduled jobs for that time frame.

We are using an outdated version. We had issues with the file dependencies. We are uncertain if it was due to application setup or the product itself.

I have used this solution for 6.5 years.

This has been a dependable product for us.

We did not encounter any scalability issues.

We have not utilized technical support in six years.

As with any new application/utility, make sure you have good training; if possible, request a trial version to become familiar with product; and ensure it meets your needs.

Real-time database updating: With other schedulers, you have to upload and download changes. Updating in real-time is less time consuming. You do not have to turn the job on; you can simply leave it off the schedule if it is not needed until a certain date, and you can give it a first-run date. In Control-M, there are a lot of extra steps (uploading or downloading to the database). You have to repeat those steps for turning the job off or on.

I like the layout of Tivoli, it almost functions like an Excel sheet. I like the "tree" to the side and also you can set up different views. If I only have to monitor certain applications, it makes that easier. I also like the filters and views within the scheduling console.

Setting an alternate plan is a good tool when you would like to go to a previous day to see how long a job took to process. I use that a lot.

I wish I had more training. I'm kind of on my own, we are one person per shift right now. I have the user guides that came with the product and wish I had more time to read through. Right now, I use them if I have issues. Because I "get it" when it comes to scheduling (I've been doing it since 1999), I didn't need too much training to pick it up.

Right-clicking options such as reruns and also dependencies come in handy. (I do wish it had the "why" option as I mention below.) But it isn't difficult to find why a job is not running.

Maybe a better way to see what a job is waiting on. (Control-M has a "why" function that would be good here). With Tivoli, you have to investigate for what the job is waiting for, i.e., files, prompts, predecessors.

I have been using it for 1.5 years.

I have not encountered any stability issues.

I have not encountered any stability issues.

I have not used technical support.

It is very good scheduling software.