AutoSys Workload Automation Reviews

Without this product we would have to manually submit jobs and it would take longer. There would also be a much greater possibility of jobs running wrong and/or not at the right time.

The scheduling feature allows us to know when jobs are going to run and makes sure they run in the order needed.

Because this product only computes processing days, it is hard when things need to be scheduled according to non-processing days. 

Some of the reports are either a bit hard to understand or don’t give you what you might expect to see.

No issues.

No issues.

Tech support is excellent, especially if you have a problem that gets bumped to level-two people. The level-two people are great at figuring out what happened and what you do next.

We switched from Burroughs to IBM, previously.

Complex, but we have a complex schedule.

I’m not involved in this aspect.

Yes, IBM’s solution.

Get on the community. Ask questions.

We run Automator processes and applications, so we use AutoSys for batch processes. This is pretty much it.

It works well. It has its issues, but we work with support to resolve our issues and get them taken care of in a timely manner.

We are able to process hundreds of thousands of jobs a month. It is pretty good. We have failover, so we maintain continuous uptime. 

Probably WCC. The aggregator reporting utility which tells us our throughput in lag and latency. 

• A better graphical user interface. We have a lot of people using the client utility, and we want to get them away from that. It needs to be easier to use, quicker, and more user-friendly.
• Ease of implementation for upgrades. 
• Some support issues need to be addressed. Not through email, but through personal contact via phone or WebEx.

It seems pretty stable. We have had issues in the past and we have worked through support to minimize any downtime. Again, with the failover solution, we are able to stay working 24/7. 

It seems to be there. I think we have some issues that we need to address with lag and latency. We have two instances of production AutoSys and we want to collapse that into one, so we want to work with CA to figure out a better solution of how to use the single instance to process all our workload.

Technical support has been very responsive to our needs and helped where we have needed help.

I was not involved in the initial setup. We did do a migration recently, which I worked on. That included setting up a new environment to move our workload from an older, unsupported version to the newer version. The sales and support team and technical teams were responsive and answered every question when I needed assistance.

It is stable, it works, and it does what it is supposed to. I would recommend this solution.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: support. Providing knowledge and giving us the ability to address any issues or problems of the software.

Batch operations. Running our insurance systems.

It is wonderful. It's been everything we expected it to be.

• It gives us higher accuracy rates and faster performance of our batch processes.
• Higher reliability of our business processes. 

Reliability is a big one. When I go home at night I sleep well because I trust that the product will perform its design.

It has allowed us to automate many of the functions of our operations staff. 

For instance, we had production control staff spending two hours a day entering date parms into our daily business processes. And now, CA Workload Automation does it for us.

I am looking forward to more of their dashboard features. I think it would be very valuable for us to have dashboard features that could be delivered to our customers in the form of a URL, and they could refresh that URL whenever they wanted to get up to date performance metrics out of our systems. 

There have been a couple hiccups along the way, but then I call support and we always iron out any stability issues. It is a 24 x 7 operation product and it's highly stable.

We're currently crossing over into another insurance underwriting software product, and I see no problems with it being able to scale into this new product area.

I love those guys at tech support. In fact, I recently had a call where someone was concerned that I was upset, so they even had someone else call me to discuss with me how I felt about my call. I was not upset, but I appreciated their follow-through.

They are highly knowledgeable. They seem to be product experts.

Our old solution was losing its ability to scale. As our organization was changing, we needed a product that could change with us, and CA Workload Automation seems to be the right tool.

We chose this product for its scalability and its reliability, and the fact that it can run our business solutions on multiple platforms, in concert with one another. It can run an object on our Windows systems or our Unix systems, and then send messages to the other system when they are complete.

It was complex, but we also hired Automic business support staff to come and assist, and they helped us get through all the complexities, very easily.

We evaluated other products, but it was several years ago.

When selecting a vendor it really centers around the product reliability for us, and we saw that in this product.

I actually sat by several people today, here at the CA World conference, that were saying they were here just to evaluate this product. I mostly told them some of my personal success stories and shared with them, that it has been a wonderful tool for automating our business needs, and that they should really consider this product.

It's a cross-platform scheduler. Any kind of automation that we actually do is over different platforms.

Automation in general. You need to do less manually.

Scheduling in general. Running anything in crontab, you need to put a lot of logic into it to make it work. With this product, you don't have to worry about it. You have the schedule object where you put all the dates or holidays in it, and it does it for you. 

I would like to see two-factor authentication, since you see a lot of companies in the news for security breaches. That is a really big thing for us.

Stability is great. We generally have no outages.

We're actually going to be upgrading to version 12, so we're looking forward to it.

This is probably something you don't want to hear, but support seems to be getting worse over the years. For some reason the technical knowledge is missing. Occasionally, you actually have to get all the way to Austria to actually get a resolution, which is where the product is originally from.

I wasn't involved in the initial setup but I do the upgrades. They're straightforward.

We've been using the product for 12, 13 years, so it's been a while.

My most important criterion when selecting a vendor is stability. in general. We want to make sure our customers who use the system never have any downtime.

Give it a try. Test it out. Set up a system, play around with it. It's very easy to work with. The learning curve is not that steep.

Cross-platform functionality.

Inherit Dependencies. Reduces scheduling errors for holiday processing.

Documentation and cross-application externals.

No issues.

No issues.

Excellent.

Jobtrac. We switched because of a contractual dispute.

Changing scheduling tools will never be a simple process, but the conversion tools and specialist assigned to us made it a smoother transition.

Pricing model for distributed should have an Enterprise option.

Yes.  IBM TWS/OPC, BMC Control-M and ASG-Zeke.

I recommend using the conversion services provided by CA.

The product does all of our enterprise scheduling. 

We use it for a number of our clients. So far, we have had great success with it. It works constantly and is pretty seamless. You do not have to open up many support tickets. The product works very well for us.

Ease of use.

I am more interested in converting more schedulers over to this particular solution, so the ease of the conversion tools.

We have not pushed it to its limit.

We were being pushed by BMC, and CA came forth and gave us a lower cost solution.

The system programmer who worked on the project, he actually set it up within a week. There was a couple of tweaking, turning, and configurations that had to be done after that, but it was up and running in about 10 days. We were able to convert another scheduler over to it without an issue.

LRS, Rocket Software, and CA. We chose CA because of the support of the products and the relationship.

As far as I know, the product is just doing its job for us at this point.

If researching this solution and on an existing scheduler, just make sure you can convert over to this particular solution without risk. 

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: How we work together. I have to trust them. Also, their overall support. 

We run millions of jobs through it every day using it for financial transactions, banking, credit cards, PeopleSoft, payroll, etc. We use it for everything.

It has just been in use in this organization for many years. It is just a standard go-to tool for scheduling.

It works.

I do not have any features that I need to see, but there is a lot of stuff coming out and the tools that attach to AutoSys. That will be very helpful in making it easier for our customers to view and see how their jobs are performing. 

It is very stable.

We are huge, so it is very scalable. We are probably one of their biggest customers.

The issues that we do have, they solve very quickly. Right now, we do not have any outstanding ones that I am aware of. Support from them has always been fantastic.

CA installation processes are never anything but complex.

It has been my go-to tool for 28 something years, and it has not failed me yet. There are all kinds of schools of thought as to what is the best scheduler to choose. I am an AutoSys proponent. I prefer AutoSys over the other ones out there for ease of use, ease of understanding, and getting people to understand how the tool works. Other schedulers do things differently than AutoSys. So, it really depends on what it is you need your scheduler to do in order for you to be able to choose which one to use.

I use the scheduling product to support the Home Depot stores here in the United States and Canada, as well as Mexico. It works wonderfully as it is very robust.

• Durability
• The secure database itself
• Usability of it

In a billion dollar company, you want a scheduling product that is very robust, which can handle the magnitude of schedules that we run through it.

The security of it. It is a very secure product. As well as the scalability of it. You can really scale it across systems.

It helps us to be more agile as far as the business use.

I would like to see iDASH be a packaged part of Workload Automation as opposed of being two separate packages. I would like to see iDASH be incorporated with the release of CA Workload Automation. For it to be all a complete package instead of two separate packages that I would install to enhance one another. So, we use iDASH for the recording purposes of the batch jobs that CA7 actually runs. I would like to see iDASH and CA7 become one product instead of two separate products, too. 

The agent is also a different installation as well as the scheduling packages. To see all of that incorporated under one umbrella would be ideal. 

The stability is awesome. We have not had issues in twenty years. It is just that robust, with the exception of new product/new version releases.

The scalability is awesome because we use it for the mainframe schedule as well as distributive schedule.

The support also is great from the CA company itself.

I have a CA rep that always contacts me on a quarterly basis. Also, I have support that I can reach out to 24/7.

My company has been using the CA products for years, since the start of the company itself. As our company grows, we have been growing with CA as well.

I was involved with the upgrades. They were very streamlined.

We received support from CA during upgrades which made it very streamlined. 

They do a really good job for us with their improvements and new releases, especially the agents.

When you are looking for at this product, you are not looking just for at the product itself, you are looking at the total package: The support for the product, the durability of the product, and the scalability of the product.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: support. By far, CA has the best support.