The stability is generally pretty good. We used the first version we installed and we just left it, which is where this aspect of then not doing reviews of the current technical solution came in and tripped us up a couple of times.

The new version is very stable. We haven't had any issues at all. At one point our database disappeared for ten minutes and it didn't notice. The system stayed up, which was rather nice. It didn't cause any major outage, which it should have done. It's a well-thought-out and implemented system, from what we can see.

The solution is stable. We've had no issues so far. I'd rate it eight out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches. 

The stability is good. For example, it is far more cost-effective than OpenText and better, far more reliable, and has very high availability. It's good overall. 

I rate the solution ten out of ten for stability.

It's quite robust. We haven't seen any memory leaks or performance impact with the product. We assess the system and continuously monitor the JVM and the application for performance. When we think that there's a need, we scale out. But if the load remains constant, there is no question about the performance or the robustness of the tool.

The stability depends on what you need. We are operating a module so called Active-Active, together with the DataStore. The Active-Active component takes care of allowing multiple machines to work as a type of cluster and they can replace each other. If you have multiple machines or multiple nodes on which Active-Active is running, you can distribute the traffic to all of them. Say you have two machines with the Active-Active extension, and you have to restart one because of operating system updates. The other machine can completely take over.

The interesting thing is that this is done based on the transaction level of your processing. While operating system-based mirroring or database or storage-based mirroring are always done on a purely technical level, with the SEEBURGER Active-Active, a transaction coming in will be registered initially on all nodes. If one node goes down while your file or data is being processed, the other side can make use of the data and continue processing. This way, you can have up to almost 100 percent uptime.

You can even do SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) updates. You can take one site offline, do a service pack update, hotfixes, or configuration changes, and that newer version with the new service pack will be compatible to continue processing with the other node. You can bring it up, wait until processing is distributed to both sides again, and do the service pack update on the other side. You can ensure that you have zero downtime.

I don't think since I have been involved with SEEBURGER BIS that it has been down. We do have a backup. So, if one server goes down, then it kicks over.

With our on-premises implementation, we never had any issues with uptime or stability.

At the moment, there has not been a single problem. We haven't had any issues after going live; 100 percent uptime. They've met all of the SLAs. The message-processing time in the SLA is up to one hour; in reality, it's been about 10 seconds.

There have been no performance issues and no outages. And if they do have an outage, then they've got disaster recovery plans to mitigate.

It's stable. They're always improving it. Their next release, coming out next year, has a lot of improvements. In terms of stability, they're moving in the direction of selling a standard. That's the right way to go.

It's pretty stable. We haven't had an outage. Once you have the connection up and running, it seems to work. SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) 5 is more stable than our previous version.

We had some incidents during the first year but it seems to have become more stable every year, as we've learned something, or figured out something. During this last year-and-a-half we've had almost zero incidents.

In five years, we have never had an unplanned outage that was caused by the software. Every company has outages, but in our case, they have always been caused by our own infrastructure, e.g., a router went down, a cable went bad, or a switch had a problem. It was not caused by the software layer; it was always caused by the infrastructure and things that are under our control, not the vendor's. There is a peace of mind as a developer with not having to worry about having to be up in the middle of the night with software not working like it is supposed to. The stability of this software is by far so much better than other software solutions that I have used in the past.

I have come from a place where other software was up and down all the time. I would have to be up at night, burning sleep, and trying to support outages. To be in a place where we have no unplanned outages is great, you get a lot more sleep, which is good.

The stability is good, as long as you have the database sized correctly and your server sized with the right amount of processors. It's been very good for us.

We did run into a situation where at one point we didn't have enough memory on our servers. It became slow and we had some issues there. But once we recognized what the issue was and made a correction, it was resolved quite quickly.

So, it's very stable. Of course, we're really dependent on the Windows environment and SQL Server environment. It's only going to be as stable as those platforms are.

It's an extremely stable platform. It has no flakiness. We don't have to baby it.

It's very stable. We have not had too many issues with the stability of the system. During the year there may be one or two out outages, but in the last year we haven't had any big issues.

Our company is always growing, so we will need a more robust system and, eventually, we will have to go to the cloud. We are very close to having to grow our SAP system. SAP will definitely go to the cloud at some point, so we will need to grow our system, hardware, and architecture in our data center, and BIC 6 for sure.

It's a very stable solution. We do not see much of a problem with it. We may have to re-start the solution once a year at the most, but that's part of our regular maintenance cycle. The solution is very robust and stable.

The stability is perfect. I sleep well.

It is stable. We haven't faced any major issues since the implementation of this software.

It is very stable. It has 99.9 percent uptime.

The stability is pretty good. It is rare that we have any stability issues.

The performance and operating efficiency are pretty good. We don't have any major issues in terms of operating efficiency, uptime, any failed transactions. If we do, they are generally not on SEEBURGER's end. They are usually on the other party's end. The service is pretty reliable.

We have about three people (an ICP analyst and two business analysts) who work on SEEBURGER BIS, but they don't work on it full-time.

The stability is world-class. It is as good as any of the other options out there. They have addressed hiccups quickly, professionally, and with an excellent response.

Besides for mistakes of our own, we've never had downtime from Seeburger's process.

We had issues with stability. The system is not always stable and you could have a problem at any time without notice. I think they develop it more for Linux based platforms which I hear are stable. However, we are an AIX shop, unfortunately.

The solution is pretty stable compared to what we used to have. We used to have a lot of memory-related issues, and we would have to restart the application multiple times. But SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) is pretty stable.

There are regular production support issues, but other than those system-related issues, we don't really have that many.

It has been quite stable. We haven't had any issues after getting the system up and running. It has run very well. Maintenance is also very good and support is also okay. They've got a lot of screens and other things which help. There are proactive error notifications so we can see what's happening. It has a nice front-end screen which monitors all the adapters. If there are any issues on anything, we can see them on one screen. 

We never have problems, as such, with SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS), but we had issues which were related to the network or the machine or the database not working, getting full, or going down. But as far as the software is concerned, we haven't had any major issues. We have had minor issues which were immediately looked at and rectified by SEEBURGER.

We have a DR system for SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS). It's all saved if something goes wrong. We have multiple data centers so it's not been an issue. We have never had any major downtime.

The solution is very stable.

We had no stability issues.

It doesn't happen that often at all, but occasionally we get a message, such as this one from a few weeks ago: "SEEBURGER Cloud and Managed Services operation team has recognized a critical incident, which delayed the message processing within the SEEBURGER Cloud Service. We are handling this as Priority-One." But this was the first such message in a very long time.

I don't think there's a stability problem. I really don't tend to get many issues. The agreement we have with them is 99.5 percent uptime.

We did have stability issues in the previous version of the software, BIS 6.3.5 Q4. But the newer platform hasn’t shown any issues so far.

It's a stable solution. In the year-and-a-half that we've been live, we've had one or two tiny blips. But you get the warning right away and you can reissue it. And it never repeats itself. Those are pretty good stats.

It is very stable.

There were no stability issues.

There were no stability issues, as such. Since this is a software solution, it may have bugs that get fixed, i.e., when we raise the necessary concern with the vendor.