AutoSys Workload Automation Reviews

We are using AutoSys Workload Automation for parent jobs and can create scripts for automation.

The most valuable feature of AutoSys Workload Automation is user-friendliness. If someone has some knowledge of the tool they can use it.

It would be helpful to be able to monitor and manage workload windows so we could minimize downstream applications. This would allow us easier access to the applications.

I have been using AutoSys Workload Automation for approximately seven years.

The solution is stable. 

We are able to view reports at any point in time

AutoSys Workload Automation is scalable.

We plan to increase our usage of the solution.

I have used the support from the vendor.

I have used other solutions similar to AutoSys Workload Automation. 

We can do the process with a script and it does not take more than 10 minutes. The environment can play a role in how long it will take and what type of script we need to use.

We paid to use the solution monthly.

When comparing this tool to others it is far better.

I recommend this solution to others. 

I rate AutoSys Workload Automation an eight out of ten. 

We use it for batch processing. We're a service bureau, so a number of our customers contract with us to use it for mainframe batch processing.

There are certain batch jobs that need to run on a regular basis in order for our customers to receive reports and updates, and CA-7 provides that for us. So that improves the function of our agencies.

The ability to create calendars, calendaring for batch jobs to run on a scheduled frequency.

The cross-platform arena, where you can run work on multiple platforms, needs improvement.

Stability is a 10 out of 10.

Scalability is a nine out of 10.

Technical support is a 10 out of 10.

We used punch cards back in 70s and 80s. This is the solution that took over from IBM punch cards.

I did not do the initial setup.

I certainly think the pricing is worth the value.

Evaluate whether it performs all the functions you need for batch processing.

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. 

CA Workload Automation AutoSys Edition is one of the most powerful schedulers that you have on the open systems, or going between Window servers; to be able to schedule and take advantage of the different powers that the automation has with it.

I've taken advantage of not only the normal command jobs and stuff like that, but I've turned them into using the proper plugins, the job types. One of the things that I have found out is that I'm the one that's using most of the job types, because I've taken away the need for writing or scripting processes. When somebody knows the database and knows how to write SQL code, or they know how to write a stored procedure, they don't need to know how to write scripting in order to run their scripts.

It's a little bit of a cost savings thing by using a plugin and using the different job types that AutoSys has. It goes the same thing when you're running a web service and you want to update stuff.

Taking care of the customers is the number one thing for any client; the client that I'm with, it's the same thing. They want to make sure that the customers are happy.

The benefit of using this product is the fact that your return on investment is major. When you don't have to teach people how to script or how to write different codes because of the way they connect to stuff, you're saving money, because you're able to put stuff into a production environment in a much faster solution.

We're also able to update our customers and let them know via apps to be able to see from using a web service to run and they log in to see what their activity is or what the status is on their stuff. It's updated immediately.

Cost benefits are amazing because somebody doesn't have to call a customer service person and sit on the phone for 30 minutes to find out the same thing they can find out in two seconds on the internet.

To make it a lot more user-friendly, in order to make it so other people can use it without having to do much training with it; the more user-friendly it is, the easier it is to work with.

The product has been out since 2.0 which is when I started working with this Workload Automation and, have seen it grow to a more powerful system that has been able to resolve all types of different automation appliances.

Customer Service is as always a high quality and, have had great success with getting any issues resolved.

Great working with the Tech team.

I think it's one of the most powerful workload automation processes that are out there. It is able to reach across platforms. It's able to reach across appliances. It's able to update.

It's a matter of your return on investment. It goes right back to that. How much do you want to spend, but how much are you going to save?

• Top-notch scheduling features and functionality
• Reliability, performance and stability
• Advanced GUI to manage the batch, flexibility to schedule jobs on various business needs

• Improved batch processing with PROD monitoring to take corrective actions on batch issues
• Implemented scheduling predecessors/successors conditions

I would like to see advancement in predictive analysis, trending and reporting.

I have used it for 20+ years.

I have not encountered any stability issues.

I have not encountered any scalability issues.

Technical support is excellent.

We previously used a different solution. We consolidated into a strategic scheduling product because it is easier to manage and operate.

Initial setup is complex. It requires technical skills in various flavors of distributed/enterprise H/W, S/W, databases to implement, configure and develop high-availability options.

Review licensing calculation is based on criteria. I recommend not to license based on the number of jobs.

We evaluated other options, including Maestro, CA7, and Control M, to name a few.

Look for industry trends, overall deployment, scale and scope, features and functionality and vendor support structure/relationship.

I have a lot of jobs that run using CA 7. So I work with my production analysts to set up processes that helps me do things that I don't have to do manually.

One of the things I do is that I am in charge of replication. We replicate from Livingston, New Jersey through Fort Worth, Texas, and replication from time to time will drop because people do things that cause links go down. So when they fail, there is a manual way to recover them, but I have to type out all these commands. Because I know what I need to do I put stuff in jobs and using CA Process Automation and CA 7 together to bring over my replication without ever doing anything manually.

I've used this product for a long time, but the GUI to me feels outdated. I know how to use it well, but it feels old.

We've used it for over 20 years.

Deployment is not an issue.

CA 7 is stable all the time.

It's very scalable. There's no problem there.

I haven't had to use technical support.

I wasn't involved in the setup.

I'm sure 90% of the world uses CA 7, so it's a known product.

We schedule overnight and daily jobs, mainly on a Cc&B system. We do file transfers from outside agencies, things like financial pledges and meter readings.

It performs very well. As far as the product is concerned, all of our issues are really with the system that we call rather than with the AE product itself. 

We were able to eliminate an overnight operator job, for one thing. He just left, but we did not replace him.  We get better reports than we use to have. Basically it runs jobs on a schedule, but we already had the jobs. It also eliminates manual job starting.

Its scheduling and its notification to us. We need to know when things are taking too long and when it fails, but we really need to schedule jobs to run. We need to have things run in a very sequential order, so it is very useful that we can schedule the work flows.

There is a difference between a web interface and the thick client interface. We particularly like a thick client interface, and it has gone away. I am finding that is disappointing to me. Now, it looks like the web interface is where all the development is going, which means it will become more full-featured than any thick clients that might be compatible with the new version. I would hate to see the thick client be left behind. I would really like to see that thick client come along.

I would really like to see a feature where if you have a variable object and you reference it anywhere, in any object or script, that you could somehow click on it and resolve the value and display it.

This is one thing I would really like to see in a new release of it. I have no idea if that has already been implemented or not, because we do not have the latest version, but I would really like to see something like that.

As far as I can tell, it is stable. We are just transferring to the AE version, but we were using Automation Manager for two years before that. 

I can't recall the actual product failing in any way. 

The tool can probably handle way bigger stuff than what we are doing. 

We are a gas distribution company, but we also own other companies. We are only using this at one of our locations where there are several million customers. We are firing off jobs that are billing those customers, managing meter readings, and various other billing-related financials and lettering processes. We are not at a Netflix or American Airlines level. I am pretty sure we have way more capacity in the product then what we are using. 

I do not think that I called technical support, though I think we have reported a software bug. There is one bug that we noticed, which is kind of annoying. So, aside from that, I do not think we used technical support at all.

I have looked up stuff on the CA Community. I might have gone into some of the Community pages to look for a solution. Nothing really memorable though.

Since we are still using the AE product and we are just transferring into it, we are still talking to the consultants, the people who actually came in and sold it to us, installed it, and trained us. So, we still have those as resources at this time. We have not really needed the Community.

As I recall, there is a transfer application from our AM to our AE. That went very well. Any problems that we had with that we probably caused ourselves, because we wanted to rename a lot of stuff, which was probably a bad idea, but I could not control that. 

I think it was relatively smooth. It could have been smoother. I do not think it was a fault of the program. I think it was more our fault. 

I would recommend it. Actually I do not even know another automation product. I would not know what else to recommend.

I appreciate training and support from a vendor. They should come in, train us on the product, and be around for a while, or at least available, to help us with anything we should have learned or did not. Or, things we discover we need. Training and early on support are really important and we really would like to see, like the same person providing it. 

I would like to be able to contact him and say, "Hey, how do I do such and such? How do I attach this report to this thing? How do I filter this?" And he would reply with, "Here are some codes you might find useful." I know these would be available out in the community, but I should not have to look it up because I am still in training. That is just one thing I would like.