PeerSpot user
IT Administrator at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Consultant
My experiences using UCMDB with Configuration Manager

With HP UCMDB we bring clarity and order to the surrounding jungle of IT infrastructure components and the myriad ways in which they're interrelated. HP UCMDB brings us a standardized data model and CMDB, which serves as a single source of truth and as a foundation for integrations with other tools in the ITSM sphere, like Service Manager and BSM.

HP UCMDB (Universal Configuration Management Database) usually comes packaged with two other products, the UCMDB Browser and Configuration Manager.

The UCMDB Browser enables us to quickly give access to the CMDB contents for large numbers of users, whereas the Java GUI allows UCMDB admins and analysts to develop Views and Reports which serve to satisfy the organization's CI information needs.

With Configuration Manager, or CM for short, it becomes possible to quickly use the discovered data in UCMDB for comparative purposes, like policy checking. The idea is that you create model, or views, in UCMDB and then use those as a basis in CM. The TQLs created in UCMDB produce CI’s, which are then used in CM to compare with each other (environment segmentation analysis), or with standards (policy checking, state comparison over time). CM can then produce lists/reports alerting you to changes, which you can then authorize. Or not.

Another approach is to quickly select a number of CI’s, like computers, compare them with one another to produce a view on the segmentation, or fragmentation, of hardware standards in IT. Any which way you use CM, it gives a configuration manager a tool to very quickly turn his new CMDB into hard currency.

If the Configuration Manager is the only one working with CM, it requires him (or her) to have an understanding of modeling in UCMDB, since models form the basis of CI checking in CM. So there’s a little ramping of knowledge, but once done, results are produced very quickly. The whole mess of CI’s suddenly comes alive and kicking.

With UCMDB version 10, HP has introduced a large number of improvements and changes. One of the main ones is the addition of inventory based discovery. It is now possible to deploy inventory scanners to target hosts, which inventory installed software using a technique called DDMi, previously found in HP Asset Manager. Now application signature based inventory and license information gathering comes into the domain of UCMDB without the need for integration.

A clear Business Case for UCMDB can be the migration of a Data Center, or the need to increase Configuration Management process credibility by improving IT infrastructure data quality.

ROI may take a little bit, because there's an investment, and it depends on the way the solution is introduced in the organization, it needs leverage by proper upper echelons sponsorship and lower echelon product evangelisation (using demos and bootcamps) how long it will take for the solution to "take", but as soon as it does, information requests will roll in from all corners and the product will prove its worth.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
it_user567681 - PeerSpot reviewer
Itsm Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Consultant
It has a good data model and supports all ITIL processes.

What is most valuable?

It's a governance oriented tool with a very good data model. It supports all the governance, ticketing, service desk, change management, and all the ITIL processes. It supports what we need. In terms of IT governance and IT operation management, it's as good as any centralized management database.

How has it helped my organization?

In terms of data quality and process ticketing, it is helpful. For instance, if you have a number of service desk tickets coming in and you have to refer to a system, a product, or an application interface, it is backed up by information from this database for reference. Everyone references the same thing. It terms of financial management, you can pile up the costs and the value because you have “service trees”. All these configuration items (CIs) are in there and that's the advantage. Everyone is looking at the same platform.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see better reporting and better support of integrations with the other systems. There is an additional tool that they give to you for the end users so that it's easier. It’s called the UCMDB browser, which is like an internet browser so you can browse the data easier. This should be in each and every tool in the suite so that you are referencing the same database. They are doing this step by step, and they are quite far right in the process.

In the reporting, it should be more flexible in terms of data drill downs and dimensional data excerpts, enrichment of data so that you can really use it as a data mart into your service trees.

I would like to see a centralized configuration and administration tool because right now the administration for the tool and the sub-tool, UCMDB browser, is done through different interfaces. For example, on the GUI, you do it on the JMX management interface, and you can sometimes add it from the database directly.

There's always room for improvement in this area. If you want to run a company based on a good referential and integrity, then you want your data to improve all the time.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is quite good. It has some deficiencies in lower level functionality. In terms of what it should deliver, such as reporting and performance, it's the main feature and it is fine. Where it's a little bit lagging is integration. If you have big masses of data going back and forth, it's going to perform better. They promised this with the next version. We are not on the latest version right now. We are expecting additional improvements to be made.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I think the scalability is okay. As we are running in a cluster environment and having lots of different "probes" that are collecting data from systems. We have between 50-100 probes.

How is customer service and technical support?

They have three levels of support. The third level is close to R&D. You are lucky to get over the first level, then you are happy with the support. At the first level, they sometimes ask you the same things that you have told them before. It could also be because of the high level way that they are now deploying. They should brush up the skills of the first level.

How was the initial setup?

Years ago, it was very complex setup because there was close to no knowledge in this area. Even professional services were learning by doing. But today, setup is easier. Just this year, they announced that they have a containerized version of all these tools that we're using and you can configure it from the start. This should be easier moving forward.

What other advice do I have?

They have an ear for the customer; they listen to you. I'm personally very active with them, they have conference calls where you can give feedback or ask them for advice, in addition to the normal support. They have lots of knowledgeable guys now moving to Micro Focus which I hope continues. I'm looking forward to that as they are more of a software company. The problem with support is they have a process, or an organizational structure, that is not leaning to software support.

There is a very steep learning curve. Once you are at the summit, you have a very good oversight and the tool is leaning toward workflows you should be adopting. It's hard to learn all of this, in the beginning.

It is good to you have an expert at the site, somebody in the company already, or someone to train you on the job. I don't think that the training courses have much value. We had training for the tools but we learn more from experiencing it on our own, than from the courses themselves.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
OpenText Universal Discovery and Universal CMDB
April 2024
Learn what your peers think about OpenText Universal Discovery and Universal CMDB. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2024.
768,857 professionals have used our research since 2012.
PeerSpot user
Service Management Consultant with 10,001+ employees
Real User
It can feed in from multiple sources and upload into various Service Management toolsets

What is our primary use case?

Mainly, it is used as a central repository to store our CMS data from various sources. We use it to store data from collection points as well as upload them into tools, such as Service Manager.

What is most valuable?

The ability to use it as our single source of truth. It can feed in from multiple sources and upload into various Service Management toolsets, not just Micro Focus ones.

How has it helped my organization?

It has allowed us to centralise the feeds and sources. Previously, like many companies, we stored CMS data in various places and various systems, and they did not always match.

What needs improvement?

Some of the UI could always be improved, but that is personal taste. I am a big fan of removing thick clients and thick servers and making everything Web UI.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

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

Perhaps, we used various Service Management toolsets to store data.

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