JAMS Scheduler Reviews

My main use case for JAMS is to install, set up, and configure for customers working with JD Edwards application.

A specific example of how I use JAMS during an install or setup for a customer includes setting it up on a JD Edwards system with the JD Edwards batch server agent and using the run UBE command to submit the jobs remotely from JAMS. I then set up jobs in JAMS and configure sequences.

I also add some high availability options to provide solutions for having redundancy with multiple batch servers, including leveraging JD Edwards virtual batch functionality.

Implement at customer sites rather than for ourselves however it improves on management of JDE batch processing and overall management at customer sites.

In my opinion, the best feature JAMS offers is enterprise-level scheduling.

What stands out to me about the enterprise-level scheduling is that it's relatively straightforward to set up, straightforward to copy and create new jobs, and I can easily understand how all my jobs are set up and configured, monitor them, look at their history, check the logs, and track what's going on across the system while also building in dependencies.

JAMS positively impacts my organisation because it helps make it easier to manage JD Edwards scheduled jobs and fills the gap that the JD Edwards application has with scheduling, resolving a lot of those issues.

To improve JAMS, it should resolve the issues with the JD Edwards application and the need for the SSH client connection in the current version, which has been a problem for a while. I suggest implementing tighter integration with JD Edwards virtual batch, catering for multiple batch servers in production versus non-production and different server maps.

Getting bug fixes pushed through into the product has been quite difficult, which has been challenging.

I have been using JAMS for over 7.5 years.

JAMS is very stable and we've seen minimal issues with the applications stability.

JAMS has some scalability even without the enterprise scalable options. We have been able to leverage the agents and hook into the JD Edwards virtual batch and that configuration, performing quite well.

The customer support is very good, reasonably quick, and very personal.

We have worked with other business partners and looked at other solutions, but JAMS was the recommendation solution based upon our analysis and the features and functionality of the production. I have worked with Tidal previously and had some exposure to RevSoft. Tidal was very good but very expensive, and JAMS looks like the best product that works with JD Edwards and also had some local contacts who I've worked directly with and this has helped with the relationship.

We were more of a business partner. However, as I mentioned before, we have looked at Tidal and RevSoft and some other solutions we have seen out there, but for any kind of enterprise scheduler with JD Edwards for any of our customers, we mainly look at JAMS first.

Relatively straight forward but need to leverage the knowledge base for additional support or client specific requirements.

I probably do not have visibility regarding a return on investment. Obviously, the expectation is that there will be a return based on the product and the benefits it has.

I was not really involved in the pricing, setup cost, and licensing at that level. I am more involved in the technical side rather than the commercial side.

Considered other products however costs and local support were a big factor after comparing technically

JAMS helps notify and handle common issues that prevent my jobs from running. The notifications help to a certain extent, although it could possibly add further details in the email, which would also help.

I have not had experience with the code-driven automation, although I have heard of it. I am predominantly working with the JD Edwards application, which is fairly straightforward.

JAMS does help centralize the management of jobs across all my platforms and applications. It is very important because I predominantly work with the JD Edwards application, but I have customers who leverage it centrally, making it a lot easier to manage and also have dependencies on different types of jobs, maybe hooking into third-party integrations.

JAMS helps eliminate monitoring tools regarding the status of JD Edwards jobs, which are not very good at all built into the application. Thus, we have to set up custom scripting and jobs to capture that information. JAMS provides all of that and access to the JD Edwards logs as well as the JAMS logs, all in a central location.

My advice to others looking into using JAMS would be to review some of the documentation on JAMS, look at what it can do, consider the AI capabilities in the newer version, and evaluate how many agents they actually might need versus what they might have sold to ensure the correct number of agents based on the number of environments they want to set up.

I would rate this product an eight out of ten.

Private Cloud

My main use case for JAMS is scheduling, which is the primary usage. I am mainly using JAMS for scheduling various jobs of all kinds.

I onboarded JAMS when I developed our custom framework of components, and I was not relying on JAMS capacities at that time. Since then, I have primarily utilized JAMS for scheduling a variety of jobs.

The best features JAMS offers in my opinion allow me to create dependencies to set very complex sets of jobs to run them in a particular manner. This is what I love JAMS for.

This feature helps my team day-to-day by running hundreds and hundreds of jobs on JAMS in a timely fashion, which is extremely important and sensitive, providing a lot of reporting to the entire firm and beyond.

JAMS definitely centralizes the management of jobs on all my platforms and applications, and it is extremely important because it helps to run a variety of jobs on different platforms and applications. That is why I value JAMS.

I appreciate the constant improvements in JAMS, its reliability, and it is a very powerful engine. I JAMS for that.

JAMS has greatly improved my ability to schedule jobs and relieved me from manual execution by approximately 50%.

I am fine with what JAMS offers and have nothing to suggest for improvement.

JAMS' code-driven automation is not widely used in the present environment, because I use my internally built framework components. As such, JAMS' provided code-driven automation has not been used.

I have been using JAMS for more than 10 years.

JAMS is stable.

JAMS is scalable.

If I come across any potential or real issues, JAMS support always addresses them, which definitely helps.

JAMS was a great improvement over what we used to have before. We had a scheduler called 24/7, and it had a lot of issues, but JAMS runs seamlessly and very efficiently.

Prior to JAMS, I had a different scheduler which was not satisfactory. It was 24/7, and it was not running smoothly. JAMS helped me a lot.

The overall migration process was easy because JAMS' support team provided all necessary documentation.

I have already shared the metrics that it saved IT time by 50%, and I think that is the most important improvement.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the pricing was acceptable. I have gone with JAMS licensing for years now, and I am happy to have it.

Before choosing JAMS, I evaluated other options. I looked around at what is presently employed in the industry and identified JAMS as my best solution.

JAMS has positively impacted my organization in all of the above aspects. I give this review an overall rating of 9.

On-premises

Other

JAMS is used in my company for scheduling jobs like copying files from other customers to my company and to other databases or other systems.

My company has been using JAMS for quite a few years now, and I think it's really good for running long running jobs.

We exchange data files with customers every day, so we have critical, mission-critical jobs involving customer personal data and accounting transactions being in a finance industry.

We haven't gone that far yet. It's pretty much a very basic job, collecting information and transferring files.

I wouldn't say we've implemented advanced features yet because currently it's still very basic, just data transfers and storing locally on disk. We have other tooling for that.

I think what is good about this product is that it's a very well-consolidated tool that is on-premise, which includes scheduling jobs with support for Python. It also supports making API calls to cloud services like Azure, which is pretty much the main use case in my company. JAMS also has built-in SQL command lines, which attracted my attention as well.

The major benefits I see are the ease of management and having no scattered jobs around using different tooling. If this is an environment where you don't need a DevOps engineer or it's too expensive to operate with a DevOps engineer building custom pipelines, this tool is amazing. The best use case is usually for data engineers and data analysts who are not full-time or hardcore specialized developers. This tool will definitely help them a lot.

We have our own banking regulations in Australia, and we definitely have our own custom regulations and auditing involved. What I see as good about JAMS here is that it has all the trails of logs for each job run. That's very important.

Generally, with the audit logs and trace downs and email alerting, I think that's very handy to have for a non-developer centric kind of environment to run jobs.

The key benefits about JAMS is having the ability to run long running jobs on-premise as compared to products like Azure Data Factory. Azure Data Factory probably costs a few thousand per run depending on how parallel the job is. However, JAMS is different. It's licensed using a per license model.

I would definitely love to see a GitHub integration so that all the code written by developers is integrated with it. The jobs could be running the latest source code rather than the custom way we're doing it at the moment.

Not directly at the moment, but I'm looking forward to GitHub integration. I think a JAMS partner or sales manager that contacted my head of department mentioned that there's a GitHub integration coming in September, so I'm really looking forward to that.

Monitoring is not heavily used in my company.

Most of our services are in the cloud, such as Azure, which have their own monitoring in place, so we don't use any of the monitoring in JAMS.

Unfortunately, the monitoring features are not used as extensively as I think the tool is capable of. That's where I'm looking at hopefully having my colleagues venture deeper into all the other components, maybe the SQL server and Python integration.

Right now there's not much of an Azure integration with JAMS at the moment directly because we run separate pipelines. We were trying to revamp everything to use Azure Data Factory, but it's not cost-effective, and there's also data governance requirements that I foresee. Having JAMS is much more feasible with on-premise data needing to be on-premise.

I just started using JAMS about two months ago, from last month onwards and this month.

I contacted the customer service team when I requested a license key for the developer edition. There's a sales representative locally in Perth from JAMS that reached out to me. I also raised a ticket to the support team in JAMS scheduler, and I think they are very helpful and amazing.

We partially use another product called SAS as a scheduler. However, what I envision is to have SAS run everything because it's a simpler platform environment and it's much more open, having support for other programming languages like Shell, PowerShell, and Python scripts.

There's a mixture of SAS product, Azure Data Factory, and also Microsoft Fabric being used in our organization.

I think I will probably recommend others looking at JAMS for a hybrid architecture integration to run jobs with Azure cloud services or AWS or GCP or any cloud provider that they have. I think this is the bridge to all these services. Looking at the roadmap of JAMS scheduler, I see they are introducing more cloud integration. It's moving in the right direction, so having Git integration in the September release is very exciting. JAMS is really forward thinking.

On-premises

Microsoft Azure

We mainly use JAMS for monitoring purposes, to schedule, unschedule, and properly time the jobs at specific times they need to run.

From my project perspective, there are numerous setups and jobs that we run on a regular basis. For example, a setup name would be SYSCFG, and under that setup, there are numerous jobs again.

I can describe the bifurcation with an example. There are thousands of jobs, and within those thousands, there will be hundreds of jobs under one setup. As mentioned, SYSCFG is one setup name, and under that setup, we have around 200 to 300 jobs. Another setup name is METOP, which follows our naming conventions in JAMS scheduler, and we have defined the resources with the setup name.

The main expectation from our project is timely delivery, where we schedule jobs at specific times, and the jobs get triggered accordingly. Once completed, the data is delivered automatically into the tables, and users can access the data from the database.

JAMS offers features that stand out, especially when compared with Control-M monitoring tool, where JAMS is easily accessible and simple to understand regarding the setups and jobs being bifurcated, and we can bifurcate accordingly.

JAMS has been a beneficial monitoring tool for our project in terms of being able to deliver data that is essential for users. The jobs we trigger run on JAMS, but in the backend, they run in Informatica or in SAP. From this perspective, we have been able to deliver goods and services in a timely manner using JAMS.

As far as we are using JAMS version 6, it looks good and there is nothing major to add about it. Everything is functioning properly.

From the past three years, it has remained the same, but sometimes we face issues. If around 5,000 or more jobs run at a time, JAMS slows down, and we have to wait around five to 10 minutes or restart JAMS scheduler services. After restart, the services will be up and running, and we do not observe any delay.

There is scope for improvement, specifically when there are a larger number of jobs running, as JAMS becomes slower. That is one area where it can be improved. Apart from that, creating resources, adding resources, creating setups, adding setups, or adding jobs, everything functions properly.

I have been using JAMS for the past three years.

Sometimes we experience crashes or downtime, but JAMS remains stable as far as I know.

JAMS can handle jobs effectively, with the only issue being occasional slowdown during heavy loads.

I have interacted with the support team regarding an issue where we canceled a setup but were unable to cancel it in JAMS. It was showing as canceling, but the status was not being updated. We contacted JAMS vendor, who guided us through the necessary steps, and after following their guidance, everything was resolved.

Positive

The project requirements determine the solution used. Previously in our project, we used Control-M as the scheduling tool, and after my project changed, I have been using JAMS monitoring tool for the past three years.

The setup primarily focuses on smoother scheduling, with jobs running at particular times. I did not observe any return on investment because access to pricing, setup cost, and licensing information is limited to higher management levels.

If anyone asks for advice about using JAMS, I would recommend it as a monitoring tool where everything operates smoothly and effectively, and it is a reliable product that we can use.

The factors which I have shared would suffice to summarize what JAMS offers. On a scale of 1-10, I rate JAMS a 10.

We use Fortra's JAMS as our orchestration and scheduling platform to manage workloads executed on various timelines, from daily to every few minutes. Additionally, we incorporate ad hoc workloads, manually scheduled by individuals as needed.

JAMS support has been among the most helpful and knowledgeable we've ever worked with. They're always eager to assist and quickly find solutions. While a few minor issues required escalation, we've been able to resolve them all within the current version of JAMS. 

After initial misuse, we have optimized the use of several agents deployed in our environment. This improvement was made possible through collaboration with internal stakeholders and guidance on JAMS best practices. While agents might appear to directly solve user problems due to their ability to perform custom tasks on machines, in our cases, they operate behind the scenes, unseen by users.

JAMS handles exceptions well, especially when calling PowerShell scripts, successfully bubbling up errors.

It centralized our job and orchestration management functionalities into a single control plane, providing visibility into previously siloed work. This consolidation streamlined operations and enhanced oversight through a unified dashboard. Additionally, JAMS empowered us to build advanced processes by effectively managing retries, workflows, and sequences. Without JAMS, replicating this functionality would have been manual and inefficient, lacking the comprehensive visibility and control JAMS provides.

Data Slack refers to delays in data pipelines caused by disparate and siloed processes. Using JAMS, while powerful for scheduling and orchestration, can exacerbate this issue if teams break down processes into isolated tasks within different tools. This fragmentation leads to data sitting in queues and folders, awaiting processing. To improve efficiency and timeliness, it's recommended to consolidate these fragmented processes entirely under JAMS. This allows JAMS to execute the entire workflow from start to finish within a single execution, eliminating data slack and ensuring timely data delivery.

JAMS has helped save IT staff time by automating tasks previously performed with scripts, and its scheduling feature has been particularly useful.

I appreciate JAMS for its readily available templates that allow me to create and deliver stand-up presentations within minutes quickly. This efficient feature has been invaluable, enabling us to streamline our workflow and enhance productivity.

JAMS' flexibility by allowing the use of PowerShell scripts adds to its value.

The monitoring of the JAMS product and its performance is an area of concern for me. I also need better tools to adopt version seven. Another area for improvement would be the addition of source control for jobs internally, as this feature would solve several problems for me.

JAMS has some quirks. It has a bit of a learning curve.

Some exceptions are not intuitive, such as when a job is terminated due to exceeding its defined runaway time limit. This generates a misleading exception message that is difficult for new users to understand and requires experience to interpret correctly.

Stalled jobs present a unique challenge, particularly when pushing a system like JAMS version six to its limits. While rare, these instances occur when jobs become unresponsive despite appearing in API queries but not in the monitoring console. Although workarounds exist, they highlight the need for improved native monitoring capabilities within JAMS. Currently, the system assumes flawless operation, necessitating supplemental monitoring tools to detect issues like excessive pending or stalled jobs, ensuring timely intervention by our teams.

I've been the platform owner of Fortra's JAMS for four years now. Before that, I used JAMS at Fortra for several years.

Through our outdated JAMS version 6 installations, we process approximately half a million executions per hour, significantly exceeding the supported capacity. Despite surpassing the rated limits by five times, we generally maintain stability. However, we experience periods of major incidents annually due to capacity constraints, which result in job failures. These performance concerns are attributed to the high execution volume. Conversely, our version 7 environment, which handles fewer jobs, has proven to be much more stable.

If I am below those capacity issues, JAMS scales very well. However, at higher capacities, like over three hundred thousand executions, there are significant performance issues.

The customer service is of high quality, and their response is prompt, exemplifying how support should be.

Neutral

The initial deployment of JAMS is deceptively easy. However, there are some caveats, particularly regarding SQL permissions when setting up the database, which my team encountered. Beyond the permissions aspect, the process is straightforward; my team completed the initial setup in less than a week, with most of that time spent resolving permission issues. 

I have experience with Ansible, which can handle similar workloads as JAMS. Both have their pros and cons.

I would rate JAMS a six out of ten. It is a solid platform with caveats in scalability.

First, understand the inheritance system in JAMS, as it is not apparent. Then, consider using execution methods to streamline processes and reduce variance between jobs. 

On-premises

We use JAMS to replace manual scheduled tasks on our server environment. It serves as a centralized environment to manage scheduled tasks for around 1200 jobs that perform various functions. I'm one of the administrators, and we also use it for smaller tasks on our end as engineers. JAMS handles SFTP uploads and data copying, among other things.

The most valuable feature of JAMS is its user-friendly interface, especially after upgrading from version six to seven. The monitoring tab allows easy monitoring of various jobs, showing where they might be stuck and their progress percentage. The overall audit trail makes it simple to find jobs that didn't run as expected. The user-friendly logging system includes more in-depth logs if needed. Their support is also excellent.

A major improvement would be the integration of AI to help us accomplish various tasks. AI could assist in simplifying operations and could potentially enhance the tool's capabilities.

I have been using JAMS for approximately eight to ten years.

The initial setup was easy and took about four to eight hours to establish the base environment, excluding job migration. We went through a migration with JAMS's professional services. I installed the environment myself, while they helped migrate the jobs and users.

Being on the new version, there's been zero downtime. We have a DR server for emergency use, but using it once a year is rare. JAMS is very stable.

The scalability is adequate. We might be underutilizing it, but as more jobs require processing, additional servers would be necessary. It meets the current needs effectively.

The support is top-tier. They are responsive, even for generic issues, and are very quick to respond depending on the issue's severity. Support is a significant factor for us.

Positive

We previously used Windows scheduled tasks, which were unorganized and lacked management and alerting on failures. Switching to JAMS was a significant improvement.

The initial setup was easy, taking around four to eight hours for the base setup. Recently, in a migration, JAMS's professional services helped migrate jobs, while I set up the environment.

The implementation was carried out in-house with help from JAMS's professional services. It was primarily done by one person, though I have a counterpart as backup.

They recently switched to subscription-based pricing, which increased. The price is fair considering the functionality and importance of the tool, although the increase did unsettle our management.

During our transition from Windows scheduler, we did not evaluate other solutions; we were focused solely on JAMS.

I would rate JAMS an 8 out of 10, providing room for improvement. It's very user-friendly and powerful, and for new users, there's not much advice needed due to its straightforward nature.

On-premises

We primarily use JAMS to coordinate jobs between our JD Edwards environment and SSIS packages that we had built to process packages through our SQL server. 

JAMS enables us to organize all these jobs. We have so many jobs that need to run in a specific order, and it's nice to have one place to put them instead of having to look in 18 different places. I still have jobs that aren't in JAMS, so we must go to each machine to find which jobs are running.

Before we had JAMS, we had a set of jobs running in JD Edwards' scheduling system and SQL jobs in its scheduling system. Those two sets of jobs were constantly interrupting each other. If the SQL jobs stopped running, the JD Edwards jobs would stop, so we had to troubleshoot and restart them. It was the same for JD Edwards jobs. JAMS allows us to coordinate the timing between them so the JD Edward jobs finish before the SSIS package runs or vice versa. 

JAMS has improved our productivity immensely because everything flows. I don't think we could operate at our current staffing levels without it. While we haven't eliminated monitoring tools, JAMS has freed up staff who were previously responsible for monitoring the systems. It's hard to estimate how much staff time has been saved, but we've been running JAMS for so long that we've probably saved years.  

The solution eliminated data slack because we can rerun some of these jobs as soon as they are completed, making the data more flexible and available to the end user. 

JAMS can save time when troubleshooting jobs. It depends on the case. Usually, it's an issue in the database, where someone entered an incorrect value. JAMS can't fix that because it's a human problem, but it brings the issue to our attention much faster because we get a failure report. It helps us solve the problem quicker once we notice something is broken. 

The JAMS agents are extremely important because we use them to run most of the jobs for the SSIS packages and anything coming out of our JD Edwards environment. It helps our users focus more on their business processes because they don't need to worry about figuring out what's working and what isn't. 

The solution's code-driven automation is pretty good. We've had a lot of success with it. 

They recently made changes to JAMS global search feature that I don't like. The search function helps locate jobs. I enter a query, and it gives me a general idea of where it might be instead of having to click the jobs folder and look for it. They changed this with the last update. 

We used to do a thing called "setups." I inherited the system, so maybe this is just how they did it before me, but in the old days, they built a setup for each job. The setup would manage the job in case you wanted to add more jobs. Now, the setups are only good if you want to run multiple jobs in a chain or in parallel. If you are running one job, you should schedule the individual job. 

We still haven't cleaned that mess up. I'm unsure if that's an issue for anyone else, but we have lots of single-setup jobs running in JAMS. JAMS sees that as two instances, assigning the same amount of resources and memory to the setup and the jobs running under it. If a setup fails, it doubles up the resources. That has almost brought us to our knees a few times when multiple jobs fail. We're using twice as many resources when all the setup is doing is ensuring that the jobs launch. 

On the one hand, it's our fault because we need to change how we do things. On the other hand, the older version focused on using setups for everything. It would be nice if they had a tool to convert the old single-job setups into one job.  

The JAMS automation code isn't so clean. 

The error handling is good overall. Sometimes when there is an exception, the error messages are a little vague, but not nearly as vague as Windows. However, I'm not sure it's a JAMS issue. It may depend on the system it's talking to, such as JD Edwards, SQL, or SSIS. JAMS will tell you that a job broke and you may want to look into it. I generally don't have any issues with its internal reporting, which is straightforward. 

I have used JAMS for about six or seven years.

The downtime has been minimal. Sometimes, we manually kill off jobs and the machine runs slowly because all the memory and CPU resources are at capacity. I would love to have a command line tool that just resets everything. Our biggest issue wasn't JAMS' fault. We didn't pick up where other people were. Now, I watch it. I check the nonproduction server once weekly to see if any jobs are hung and kill them. I report the issues to the appropriate people, but it's a nonproduction server, so it isn't life or death. 

It has been extremely stable aside from that. The only time it breaks is when we let it go too long. It's like a 5-year-old with a box of crayons. You can't leave it in a room too long or it will start throwing them at the walls. It does a great job as long as you keep an eye on it. 

JAMS scales well. It has a little scheduling screen you can open to see what's running. We have around 12,000 jobs a day, and we're a small company. I can only imagine what larger enterprises are doing. The scalability is only limited by the amount of memory you have and your servers' performance. That's the only thing holding us back at this point. 

I rate Fortra support eight out of 10. I talked to support yesterday. Typically, I'm not calling them about something critical, but I had a few serious cases. I can usually get them on the phone immediately in an emergency. They respond quickly, and I've been pleased with them overall. 

Positive

I wasn't involved in deploying JAMS, but I understand it was a significant mindset change for us. It took about six months to integrate JAMS with our ERP and SSL. From what I've heard, they loved it. We keep using it and just upgraded to the newer version of JD Edwards. Upgrading was a somewhat painful process because it involved a lot of conversions. JAMS doesn't require much maintenance aside from the occasional upgrade and checking on the jobs once weekly.

All licensing models are a little overpriced, but JAMS offers a good value, especially given their support response times and ability to handle unforeseen issues like the SFTP transfers. I hope to find more use cases to get a better bang for our buck.  

We looked at another tool when we were upgrading our document management solution OnBase from an on-prem version to the cloud. One of the requirements was that we had to scan the documents through our copy machines and put them on a network. We had to put them into a ZIP file and SFTP it to the cloud API server, and stick it in the right directory. 

They had me look into two companies, and I started researching SFTP automation. One of my searches turned up JAMS, and I called support to ask about transferring SFTP. I also talked to the other company, and their tool was awesome. It was highly intuitive, but it would be another $15,000 to $20,000 for one set of processes. We already had JAMS in-house, so we decided to use what we had. 

I rate Fortra's JAMS eight out of 10. I recommend reading the manual from front to back. I did that when we were preparing to upgrade, and it helped tremendously. It gets you in the right mindset and helps you understand the requirements. For example, we have JD Edwards, which requires a special setup. In addition to deploying the agent, you need to do more work on your enterprise servers to integrate JAMS correctly, so it knows how to talk to JD Edwards correctly. JD Edwards is very temperamental. 

On-premises

JAMS streamlines our programming job scheduling. It handles both C# projects and PowerShell scripts, allowing us to categorize and schedule critical and non-critical tasks. JAMS also alerts us via email of any job failures. While JAMS boasts features for complex, load-balanced environments, our setup is simple. Everything runs on a single production server with a backup, eliminating the need for a client-server structure.

JAMS effectively alerts us to potential job disruptions, enabling us to address issues proactively. We rely on it for timely problem notifications and monitor it daily. The Runaway feature is invaluable for identifying jobs that take too long to complete, preventing backlogs. We can effectively manage and resolve these issues by configuring the runaway limit, ensuring smooth job execution.

JAMS is highly versatile in handling exceptions. We can easily prevent a job from running on specific dates by creating exceptions within the scheduler. For instance, we can configure an exception if we don't want a job to run next Wednesday, July 4th. Additionally, JAMS allows us to skip specific dates and times or even run jobs hourly if needed, providing the flexibility to accommodate various scheduling scenarios.

JAMS centralizes job management across all our platforms and applications. We can install the JAMS client on any machine to manage it directly, and some programmers, including myself, have done so. I have the client installed on my laptop and can access all features from there. Alternatively, users can connect to the JAMS server and run the client remotely, limited to one or two people at a time. I prefer having the client installed for convenient and unrestricted access.

JAMS significantly reduces troubleshooting time for stalled jobs by providing a centralized monitor. Instead of manually checking the status of numerous jobs, we can quickly assess their progress on a single screen. While it's difficult to quantify the exact time savings, it's evident that monitoring hundreds of jobs individually would be far more time-consuming than glancing at a single monitor for a few minutes daily.

JAMS has replaced our previous homegrown program scheduler, which was used to monitor job success. Considering this legacy system, we adopted JAMS as our new monitoring and scheduling tool, eliminating the need to develop and maintain the outdated program further.

JAMS is a scheduler, so setting up a new job is easy. Once we configure it, it doesn't take much time. We create jobs all the time. We have over 200 jobs running. So, if we need a new job, creating it in a few minutes is easy, saving us time. We don't have much time to set up a new job. It's swift to do, saving us time for other projects.

The user-friendly and adaptable scheduler allows us to manage various scheduling scenarios. JAMS offers valuable features such as Runaway job settings, enabling easy pausing and scheduling for maintenance periods. It provides a complete job history and effective notification options. Overall, it is simple to use, versatile, and exceptionally reliable, meeting all our scheduling needs without issue.

JAMS notifications for hung jobs could be improved. A hung job can remain on the monitor for days without a configured Runaway Limit, preventing scheduled resumptions. Ideally, the system should proactively notify users when a daily scheduled job is imminent but the previous day's job is still running and unlikely to be completed. Currently, this information is only available with a Runaway Limit configured. Implementing automatic notifications for Runaway Limits exceeding the scheduled timeframe would be a valuable enhancement.

I have been using Fortra's JAMS for five years.

JAMS is a stable solution with no lagging or crashing that we have experienced.

JAMS is a scalable solution, but our current needs are limited. We only run a few hundred jobs, which JAMS handles without issue. If our workload doubled, we could quickly expand the system by adding more servers and agents. JAMS supports load-balancing and distributed architectures, allowing for seamless growth, but we haven't needed to utilize these features yet.

JAMS's technical support is excellent. They worked with us during our initial set-up, and we will contact them again for another installation on our development servers. They are easy to get a hold of and offer good documentation. The support team is accommodating, which is one of the areas we like about JAMS.  

Positive

We switched from a homegrown solution to JAMS.

The initial deployment is straightforward because JAMS offers excellent support.

While someone unfamiliar with JAMS will likely require assistance with the initial setup, the platform's support system ensures users can obtain the necessary help. Although I didn't handle the original installation, I successfully upgraded JAMS with minimal difficulty thanks to the documentation and support resources provided. While individuals without a technical background might encounter challenges, JAMS' support is designed to guide users through the process, making it accessible to many users.

While I wasn't involved in the initial deployment, it likely took several days due to the extensive decision-making required for the initial structure. We developed a specific framework with defined sections for critical and non-critical jobs, further categorized into nine types such as financial, business intelligence, programming, and database roles. This structure was designed to be flexible and adaptable to various scenarios, requiring careful consideration but ultimately easy to implement by following guidelines.

The pricing is reasonable.

We looked at a couple of different schedulers, and they gave us the free trial software. We tested it out, and we liked JAMS enough to purchase it.

I advocated for Windows Task Scheduler because it was free and met most of our needs. While it lacked monitoring capabilities, I developed a proof-of-concept program to address this. However, the programming team manager preferred a more enterprise-grade solution instead of our homegrown approach using Windows Task Scheduler as a foundation. They aimed to eliminate the perceived custom-built nature of our solution.

I would rate Fortra's JAMS nine out of ten.

We currently do not use agents, though we understand the possibility of deploying them in a client-server environment across multiple servers for job scheduling. However, we've opted against this approach due to the increased complexity, server requirements, and associated costs. Instead, our scheduling agent resides on the same server as the JAMS scheduler, providing a consolidated solution. As a backup, we leverage a development server capable of executing jobs. We have implemented several contingency plans, including scheduling on the development server, manual execution, or utilizing Windows Task Scheduler. After careful consideration, we believe this configuration adequately meets our needs without the overhead of managing additional client servers or agents.

We don't use workflows or similar processes. As developers and programmers, our programs are designed to function independently once initiated at the correct time. Creating a workflow to manage these tasks isn't necessary because our programs are particular in their objectives. We primarily develop in C# but occasionally use PowerShell scripts. We experimented with workflow tools but ultimately determined they weren't essential for our needs.

Migrating from our old solution to JAMS was not a straightforward integration; we moved jobs manually, one by one. This process has been time-consuming due to the many jobs, and some require specific software or configurations that are not easily transferable. Unlike a typical migration, we cannot simply export jobs from the old system to JAMS; we must carefully assess each job's requirements and ensure the necessary conditions are met on the JAMS server before moving it. While this has been a lengthy process, we are steadily progressing and anticipate completing the migration to JAMS soon.

JAMS provides good documentation and support for use. The solution is straightforward, but if users need hand-holding, that is a good place to start. 

On-premises

We use Fortra's JAMS primarily for SFTP file transfer.

The agents are essential because they are the core of the job scheduler process. The scheduler server only schedules the time to run the job, but the agents are the ones that execute it. We only connect to Windows systems, but it can connect to Linux systems and SQL databases. The agents have many features, including remote execution. There is so much possibility with the agents.

Running tasks help our users focus on their business processes more. Before I started using JAMS, I wasn't monitoring the server side, and I had no idea that so many file transfers go on. It's not just file transfers. So many services are running, and they need to be scheduled. There is no way a human can execute scripts, file transfers, or any process on time if we don't have a scheduler. So, the scheduler is like the company's backbone, taking care of all the processes and file transfers that need to run per the scheduled time and date.

The agents help us bridge the gap between structured batch automation and processes that occur on desktops and web browsers. I'm using it not for desktops as it is generally used; it is all about server-to-server. So, the files are created on some server and must be transferred to another server. And outside of our network using SFTP, both in and out. So, again, it's possible to execute any job locally or remotely. It can be a script. So, sitting locally or remotely, we can schedule it to run on demand, assuming it is trigger-based, like when it sees a file, it transfers by itself. Or if I email on demand, I want to run a specific job, I can email it, and then it executes that job. Or it can be time-based, like running this job every Monday at ten a.m. There are so many excellent options.

JAMS handles exceptions easily, and most configurations are straightforward. Over the past three to four years of using the tool to meet company requirements, I've always been able to find answers to my questions. I typically find a solution within the tool if I encounter an issue. The support team is also excellent; they provide clear and helpful responses, often including screenshots to guide me through the process.

It significantly reduces troubleshooting time for stalled jobs, benefiting teams like SAP and payroll that frequently transfer files internally or externally. For instance, payroll's bi-weekly file transfers to and from banks would previously consume hours when handled manually via email or other methods. Now, JAMS automates this process by retrieving files from the payroll application and delivering them to external banks. Similarly, incoming bank files are automatically fetched from their servers at specified times, eliminating manual intervention.

JAMS streamlines file transfers, saving countless hours for teams like SAP and payroll. Traditionally, tasks like sending bi-weekly payroll files to banks involved manual methods like email, consuming significant IT staff time. JAMS automates these transfers, freeing up staff and eliminating manual processes like email, ServiceNow copying, or using Box.net. JAMS recognizes a file and automatically sends or receives it whenever a file is created, saving countless hours for various departments daily.

The most valuable aspect of JAMS is its robustness. We can configure it, and it will keep running without glitches for years. There is no issue regarding the scheduler portion and how it is easy to configure. There are so many tools they will get hung up, but JAMS starts the process once we schedule it, and then it's all good. It just keeps running.

I want JAMS to implement a global search function. Currently, jobs are organized into folders like HR and IT. To find a specific job, such as job number 500, I must navigate to the correct folder to search for it. A global search would allow me to type the job number in the root folder and be directed to the appropriate location. Additionally, the reporting functionality needs improvement, as the current version frequently crashes when generating historical reports.

I have been using Fortra's JAMS for three years.

I have never experienced lag, crashes, or downtime in all the years I have been using JAMS. 

I use only one agent on a single server, so I can't definitively assess JAMS's scalability. However, I've observed reliable failover behavior. When the primary server was rebooted for security patching, the secondary server seamlessly took over without interrupting file transfers, which occurred every five minutes. This suggests that JAMS can handle unexpected disruptions gracefully.

Whenever I contact JAMS technical support with questions, I typically receive answers via online chat the same day. In the last three years, I've only needed to call them two or three times, and those issues were related to Windows system crashes rather than JAMS itself. The support team has always been helpful, offering assistance through Zoom or video calls to resolve problems promptly.

Positive

We previously used a solution that no longer functioned, so we switched to JAMS. As the centralized tool approved by cybersecurity for job scheduling and file transfer, JAMS is the only tool we can use for these purposes.

We are using an SAP system called Maestro Scheduler, and I'm working to migrate its jobs to JAMS. Compared to Maestro, JAMS is significantly more straightforward and reliable. Maestro frequently experiences job failures, requiring extensive troubleshooting efforts. On the other hand, JAMS is straightforward to install and offers clear error messages for issues like FTP or SFTP failures. Day-to-day operations are smoother with JAMS, and problem identification is much quicker.

The initial setup is easy. One week ago, I installed JAMS in my dev environment because that AWS server was somehow decommissioned. So I had to reinstall JAMS, which was easy—like reinstalling any simple Windows application.

Under optimal conditions, JAMS can be deployed within an hour. A previous deployment was delayed due to network security restrictions in an AWS environment, which required creating a security group to allow necessary JAMS ports. With prerequisites, deployment time can be reduced to under an hour, potentially as little as 30 minutes.

The JAMS deployment is straightforward and does not require many people.

Two years ago, the JAMS tool was transferred to a new team focused on IT automation. When I informed my director of approximately ten thousand dollars of the tool's annual cost, she expressed surprise at its affordability. She mentioned that other server-side automation tools typically cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. On the other hand, JAMS is relatively inexpensive, with additional costs only incurred for tags, other services, and optional support renewals.

I would rate Fortra's JAMS nine out of ten. If the global search is added and the reporting is improved, I would rate JAMS a ten out of ten.

We are planning to upgrade JAMS to the latest version this year. Next year, we may demonstrate a demo for SAP integration or other integrations that could benefit the company. If the budget permits, we will implement these integrations. While many integrations are possible, we currently do not utilize any.

We currently use code-driven automation only limitedly and are evaluating its potential. As we utilize JAMS version 7.1.407, an older version compared to the available 7.5, we are exploring demos to determine the best fit for our future needs based on our current system.

I maintain JAMS for our organization.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

We use JAMS for technical and workload automation. It's sometimes used for transfer, but it's mostly for workload automation.

We did a POC for one of our customers recently. Our client had some SSIS packages that were hard to automate. They had to be manually executed periodically. They didn't have any automation. When I introduced JAMS, we learned how to integrate their SSIS packages. The solution made a great impression on the company.

We had a good session with the company and having or upon them having these JAMS. They have 500 different SSIS packages that need to have separate schedules. I showed them how easy it is to convert and store at a large scale. We can use code-driven automation to address complex scheduling requirements. It enables you to integrate multiple applications and API connections. If you need different kinds of schedules, you can accomplish this using the command list. That's helpful to our current and upcoming clients.

JAMS helps centralize job management because I can orchestrate different job types across multiple kinds of operating systems, including Oracle jobs and SQL jobs like the SSIS packages. Multiple types of scripts can be collected into one application. It provides a single pane of glass in its monitoring view. That's another advantage JAMS has over other solutions. The monitoring console provides the administrator with a broad overview of those channels.

When the data is ready to go wherever I need it, JAMS ensures the specific job should be executed on its given schedule. We can provide different notifications or set up recovery in case the job fails. We can always ensure there are other retries. We can configure it to run a set number of retries if needed. If the data still hasn't been transferred after several attempts, we can send an email notification to the administrator to take action. 

JAMS saves us time troubleshooting job failures. The logs are helpful, and you can select the verbose option so JAMS can provide lots of information about the issue.  It also reduces the number of monitoring tools we need. Its ability to integrate with various operating systems using its agents and database connectors eliminates the need for other monitoring tools.  Job scheduling in Linux and Windows can be orchestrated and monitored through a single pane of glass.

I didn't know about JAMS because I don't have a person with any challenges with the purchase administration. The feature or the user interface is user-friendly because of the readable icons or very descriptive icons. Although I'm a beginner user of JAMS, I did not have any issues using it. 

Whenever we propose JAMS to one of our clients, we always highlight its ease of use. The interface for scheduling jobs is user-friendly. I also appreciate its strong integration with Fortra's other tools. You can integrate it with the other products to create a total automation solution. 

I rate JAMS 10 out of 10 for its ability to make us aware of and handle common issues that can prevent jobs from running. I rate JAMS nine out 10 for exception handling. You can configure exceptions to the rules in the scripts. For example, the process might not be executed on specific national holidays or days the offices are closed. 

Our clients are impressed with JAMS's ability to operate across platforms. Most of them use Linux with a combination of SSIS or Oracle packages. If it's a Windows-only solution, the support will be very limited, but most customers do not use Windows anymore. Most of them are on the Oracle and Linux side. The fact that it's a multi-platform system helps us scale up our clients.

JAMS is highly flexible in terms of error recovery and job dependencies. That's something I typically stress in our demos. The use of workflows is easy to understand. While I don't have any experience with other workload automation solutions, I think JAMS can provide this high-end feature, where you can accumulate multiple jobs at the same time with different requisitions. 

I am also supporting and reselling Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT and am interested in Genesys' file-transfer solution of Genesys. Compared to GoAnywhere, Genesys has limited options. The tabs in the JAMS file transfer could be clearer. It would help us demonstrate to our client that JAMS not only automates jobs but also does fast transfers, and it's an alternative that supports and filters different kinds of platforms. Filtering file transfers will be highly beneficial to them.

We have used JAMS for almost a year 

I rate JAMS nine out of 10. The software is stable, but it depends on the resources of the system where it is deployed. 

I rate JAMS 10 out of 10 for scalability. Most of our clients are small or medium-sized businesses, but we have used this for government clients, so we're confident it can scale. 

I rate Fortra support nine out of 10.  The support could be better. I have a favorite support engineer, and I wish the others could be like him. When I send an email, he responds in less than an hour. With some of their other technicians, it may be 24 hours. They are very responsive whenever I send questions or technical issues to their support team.

Positive

JAMS can be installed through Active Directory integration, so it's all straightforward. Any technical team or data center manager would not have any challenges installing JAMS. Typically, we can have it running in under a week. We needed two or three personnel to deploy it. The project manager handles it and there are one or two technical staff to assist. Afterward, we need to train every person who will be working with JAMS. 

I rate Fortra JAMS nine out of 10. We recommend JAMS to all our existing clients. We have 10 to 15 GoAnywhere MFT users, but by the year's end, I expect to demo JAMS to at least half of our current base so they can see how powerful this solution is. They can have GoAnywhere for their file transfers and JAMS for their workflow automation. 

Our GoAnywhere MFT clients need to automate commands, batch file transfers, and PowerShell scripts. JAMS gives you better insights and more options than natively executing commands in Azure MFT. 

On-premises