Broadcom DX Application Performance Management Reviews

I like the Transaction Trace Viewer and stalls feature on the front end/back end within the investigator.

It has helped to stabilize the environments and also quickly identify issues some while they are occurring and some proactively.

The extensive monitoring alert gave the ability to act quickly before an outage happens.

We haven't implemented the latest released version yet but I do believe there's a lot of improvement needed.

There's a lot of room for improvement in administration which I believe CA APM is slowly getting there, with their Agent Command Center. However, the interface and management of the entire APM infrastructure should exist via GUI.

I have used this solution for five years.

We have scaled CA APM a lot over the last few years. As time goes by, there is an increased demand for monitoring leads to underperforming enterprise managers and/or other memory issues. We are running on VM. However, CA recommends to run on a physical machine with lot of compute resources, which wouldn't be applicable to all companies with their standard environments and also in terms of the budget/funding that it requires.

The customer service is good but not excellent. I would rate it a 7 out of 10.

I personally didn't use any other solution, but my company did use the IBM APM tool.

The setup is complex. It takes some reading and understanding of the architecture along with some prior skills.

We have implemented it in-house. My advice is to install a PoC environment and familiarize yourself with all the components.

Compared to other competitors, this product is a little flexible with its pricing/licensing and is somewhat less than the other APMs in the market, with negotiations.

My advice is to implement the product and leverage all of the add-on free components. You should also compare it to other APMs in the market.

In many organizations I've seen this product working in, SEV1s have been reduced quite a bit. One particular organization, within the first 12 months, reduced their SEV1s by 90% just by introducing this product. They had previously been using a competing product, so it really speaks to the value provided by this one that they weren't getting out of the other products they were using.

Suddenly, we were able to evaluate based off how code was being traced. In one incident, it saved us 18 hours in finding the actual problem in the logic for that application once we had a problem.

The most valuable features I believe would actually be two things I would go into: The insight it gives into the applications that it's actually applied to, and the flexibility to do many things with those metrics, and also feed your own metrics from external sources.

I think as we're all moving forward to automated deployments, it'd be nice to have that out-of-the-box with this product.

Also, scaling it, the data nodes writing automatically would be a very nice feature.

We have had large environments, many millions of metrics feeding in, and never have we had to dedicate a single resource to maintaining it.

Actually coming in once in a while for maintenance, we do have to put some work into it once in a while, but there is nothing to the magnitude of having to have somebody dedicated to it.

It is scalable. We can keep adding collectors that store the data, as needed. We haven't had any issues with that so far.

Technical support has always been very happy to help us. They offer a community, which is often very helpful, where one can go to find their own answers if they'd like.

We already had a competing solution. We weren't getting the value we needed out of it. We were still having problems. We couldn't find the actual root cause very easily with that solution, so we started evaluating others.

We looked at many others and this seemed to be the best fit for our organization.

Really, the most important criteria when selecting a vendor is value for dollar. As any business, we're looking for values and it's not just, "Is it better?" But, "Is it better enough to be worth the cost?" Or, if it's cheaper, that's also great.

The initial setup is actually pretty straightforward. The install is very easy. I don't think one would even need a document for it. It's pretty straightforward and the questions it's asking are kind of self-explanatory.

My rating just reflects some of the features we'd like to see. I don't think I'd ever give anybody a perfect rating. There's always room for improvement, but my rating is definitely higher than any other competing products that I've used, against it.

• Isolating issues, the dashboards, and the customization are the most valuable for us because they enable this tool to be used by multiple tiers. Let's say we don't know what the problem is when one occurs, we just know that we have multiple tickets generated, and there are customer groups down or experiencing slowness. These tools help us identify the issue quickly. That saves us a tremendous amount of money. That's the number one value.
• It is easy to use. That's a big one.
• The fact that it is a suite solution, rather than using just one technology.
• There are multiple offerings. That's nice as well.
• The agents are low-profile, and there is not a whole lot of overhead with the agents.

It sounds kind of corny, but it helps bring us together because when a problem strikes and it’s happening, there's the tendency to start finger-pointing at different groups. With this tool in the hands of a tier-one or a tier-two technical individual, or small group, they can identify the issues without needing to go back and forth between different departments, who are all saying "Oh, that's not our problem." It then turns out to be their problem in the end. That's the main benefit.

There are a lot of improvements to be done. One particular area is in the area of automation. That's a big thing for me.

• In my personal opinion, it's a bit of a weak point. I believe that they know that, and that they're working towards it. I would love to see that. I think they are heading down the right road. It’s a sound product.
• In APM, in triage, it's all about time and less effort. If an outage bridge or a severity breaks out, I want less people on the phone. I want a small group of individuals. I don't want every head of department on that bridge for hours on end. There are a whole lot of ways. That's a soft cost; but it's a cost: absolutely.
• I want to see more automation out of these products, especially in identity management. As we virtualize, and as we become more mobile, I want identity management to seamlessly move with the user and applications and systems. That's a hard nut to crack.

I have very high expectations for these tools. If it takes me more than a matter of minutes to identify a problem, it's not good enough. There's still a lot of growing to do. A lot of it is internal growth, too. It’s not just CA. It's not their fault; but our own company needs to adopt certain practices and change our ways. We need to be more open too, I guess, with more internal collaboration to use the tool to its full potential.

It is stable; and, more so, I like CA's direction. I am very inspired by it. It gives us hope.

The product has absolutely been scalable.

My team doesn't deal with technical support directly. We work with internal groups who are the actual customers of the product.

I was not involved in the decision process to purchase APM or in the setup. They have actually been in-house for quite some time, before my time; but I've learned to know them. I've learned their products. I've met with vendors, as well as other vendors and competitors. CA seemed to beat out everyone for our company.

Never be satisfied. Always ask for more, and always look for the next step. As long as the company's vision is really the future, then I think we're in good hands.

The most valuable feature of APM is gaining insight into the application performance so we can proactively take actions before the customer calls to report an issue.

We have used CEM to get insights into what the user is actually experiencing.

There needs to be more ability to report on the performance of the applications, so you could easily have a report run and give you all your performance stats for an application at the end of the month, or week, or after a release. This currently is not easily done, and you can’t schedule it.

In the beginning, there were issues operationalizing CA APM to work with our company. I wasn't involved at the time, though.

We have encountered issues with stability when best practices were not followed. It became more stable after using best practices.

We haven't had issues scaling it.

I'd rate customer service an 8 out of 10.

Technical support is an 8 out of 10.

I was not working in APM when we brought it in, so I don’t know for sure if it replaced anything.

I wasn't involved in the setup.

It was implemented with a vendor team.

We have an ELA with CA APM and it is very competitive with their competitors from that perspective.

Our company did evaluate another option, but I was not involved at that time.

Make sure to test as many application types as you can in your POC phase so you can work out issues early in your implementation. Also, make sure load tests are included in that testing.

We look at the load patterns and server health by looking at server health parameters. Heap memory is of prime importance as well as how the heap is behaving and how the memory is behaving under load, as well as the CPU utilization. These are generally the parameters we will check.

In a production environment we check all the parameters. We can detect any leakage, any problems, whether RAM is sufficient, and whether CPU is crossing a threshold. We can determine if we need to add new servers or RAM or adjust the heap settings.

It helps save resources for a company.

It also helps us look at business-critical transactions and how fast they are happening. It helps us pinpoint the methods or functions that are taking longer to operate and we can advise the development team to look into it and fine-tune those areas. They can make adjustments immediately.

For me, the most valuable feature is being able to check memory patterns. We check them when we do load testing or soak testing to see if there are any memory leaks.

A CA APM agent takes a lot of memory. That is one disadvantage. If you configure CA APM correctly it will still consume around 15 to 20 percent of memory.

We haven't had any issues with its scalability.

When you submit a support ticket it will take them two to three days to reply. They told us they would resolve issues within 24 hours, but so far that has not happened.

There have been times when we were doing performance testing, load testing, where it didn't capture the required information we were trying to monitor. We called the CA APM support team. They suggested we increase the RAM and restart the agents. That was the solution they gave us.

The setup is not straightforward. It is a bit complex. I have not configured CA APM myself, but I use it for performance testing. When we are doing performance testing, we configure CA APM for a pre-production environment which is similar to the production environment. We will do load testing and take all the parameters and observations and send them, along with our recommendations and conclusions, to development. But I have not really configured CA APM.

Dynatrace is the most expensive of these tools followed by AppDynamics which is "medium-expensive." Both CA APM vs Dynatrace and CA APM vs AppDynamics are a bit lower in price. Because of this, our clients insist on using CA APM.

In my opinion, if you can afford it, go for AppDynamics instead of CA APM. But if our customers don't have the budget, we'll go with CA APM.

We have a comparison chart showing the license costs for AppDynamics, Dynatrace, and CA APM and other monitoring tools as well. We provide that information to our clients along with the advantages and disadvantages of a particular tool. We provide our opinion on which it is best to go with but we also listen to our clients' opinions. We discuss this at length to finally come up with a decision on which tool to go with.

I use many tools, such as LoadRunner, Silk Performer, and IBM. I also use AppDynamics and Dynatrace. The last two are actually the best for me at the moment because they support even the database level. CA APM does not support that much. It will only give me minimal information about the DB.

It has been very, very productive for us. It helped us with number of challenges we faced in the past. It prevented a lot of downtime and a lot of outages with the Java side of the house. We are predominantly a WebSphere shop.

We’ve been very successful using version 9.7. We're still not up to the latest version, 10. I've seen a lot of interesting things with version 10 happening, which hopefully will address our problems. Some of which are the inability to manage multiple hosts at the same time, configure agents in an easy fashion. There's a lot of manual labor that still exists that hopefully will be simplified with the new Command Center. We’re looking forward to upgrading our 9.7 to 10 to start using the Team Center, which is a phenomenal product we've seen today at CA World.

It's been very, very successful using our NOC. We are using the console and dashboards.

Looking forward to the growth and maturity. We're looking to standardize, reduce the number of tools and collapse them into one. I think that CA's been listening to the customers and have been moving to that direction.

Looking forward to another journey.

It's been a great five-year tenure with the APM suite. We're looking to expand that now that version 10 is out, 10.5 GA by the end of the month; looking to start using the new Team Center, which hopefully will greatly reduce mean time to repair. Makes our NOC as well as the SMEs more productive; repair issues much faster; and it's been a great run so far. CA has been listening to our concerns. They have been addressing some of them. There are unfortunately sometimes shifts in paradigms as CA is known to be a dynamic company. Sometimes the direction is not always clear.

Some challenges are maintaining the growth of the environment; a lot of manual labor is involved, which again is being solved with the new version that came out. One of the products we use, the real-user monitoring, has been very successful, but at times challenging to implement. There's some shift in paradigm using it today, moving to a more mature model within the APM umbrella, and again, start using a lot of the stuff with their new solution, AXA; some of the mobile platforms, which will help us to move into that direction, to unify the APM solution which we heavily rely on today.

Support from CA has been really, really phenomenal. We've always applauded CA as being one of our top vendors, compared to many others, such as HPE and Microsoft. Many times when we had an issue, it really was really, really phenomenal support. From a CA standpoint, any bugs, any issues that we typically have, we would have pretty much a few engineers involved and at times solve an immediate need, which is something that we cannot experience with other vendors, such as, again, like HPE or Microsoft, or what have you.

From other competitors and other competition that we looked into, such as Dynatrace and other vendors similar to CA, CA was a clear winner for us. Again, it's been a great product.

There's some deficiencies to their product. But again, they are being addressed, as CA's been very responsive to the customers. One of the most important things is they do listen to customers. If you have a major problem or major concern, CA try to address that. If that cannot be easily addressed, they try to lay it on the roadmap, and we've seen some stuff delivered that we requested in the past.

The product helps us to identify code problems very quickly. It can also help us identify other problems with the application as it's running. That's a significant for us because application failures can impact revenue and customer satisfaction. This product allows us to do even more. For instance, we've recently added CA Application Performance Management (APM). Prior to that, we were only able to look at the infrastructure stack. From the box perspective, this gives us additional ways to help us troubleshoot. Having tools with some level of intelligence can more accurately pinpoint the problems. This helps us cut down that whole blame game and helps us get to the root of the issue faster.

From the application speed perspective, we can install it in both the development and production environment for the applications. In the development environment, they're able to test and capture long-running transactions, database issues, too many threads, or memory leaks. We are able to identify those, in theory, before they make it to production. This gives us a much cleaner application when it goes up with potentially less issues from a newly deployed piece of code. That’s the kind of the big play that we're going for and we have yet to generate tickets because we're still working to capture the right level of noise. This is a better process then flooding application teams with a lot of details.

We have pretty much every tool we need. What I need for this tool to be able to demonstrate is that it totally surpasses the competition.

My partners are not just concerned about the back end of the system, they're are concerned about the users and what is happening to them. The user experience is everything. And it’s not fully baked into the equation. We are potentially going to buy a different product.

Stability has been good so far from my current experience and previous experience of APM. We are using an earlier version, 9.7. We're about to upgrade to 10.3. What is very important is making sure that you evaluate your application and what you want to measure and capture, in a development environment before you go to production. If you attempt to capture too much information in production it can lead to issues. Teams need to know what they're doing, because it can impact performance if you're looking for too many things you don't really care about.

We haven't hit the wall yet with finding the upper ends of the scalability. What we've been told is that we can deploy up to 60 apps in the current infrastructure without having some sort of performance degradation. We haven't experienced it yet, so that's still to be determined.

Technical support is usually the same in any big company. They tend to play the log game. I typically contact our support contact. I just reach out and we escalate. The account executives can help with that process as well. We ran into problems where my team was complaining, support wasn’t responding, or they were taking too long for issue resolution. I spoke with the account team, and then we were able to get the right connections so we can escalate more effectively and efficiently.

I was not part of the initial setup. I'm involved in the upgrade and the new Implementation.

Make sure the staff who runs, manages, and implements the tool with their customers or their partners has a middleware background or WebSphere experience. These individuals should understand how that all works, because that will shorten the learning curve. A person with these skills can really translate between the app team and the infrastructure. This can make adaption go a lot faster and gain the benefit and value faster.

My users are satisfied with this solution, most are financial institutions such as banks or card processors and telecom companies.

The primary use case is for the monitoring of business applications in production. Banks use it for monitoring Internet banking solutions, internal back-office applications that have high number of users distributed on many locations, monitoring back-office applications for card transaction processing, and also for front office applications monitoring. DX APM is also used in a test phase of apps life cycle especially during a performance testing. 

Business-wise very much. We have the best solution in the local market because we are the most experienced APM vendor in our region and have very satisfied customers. They said that UX is much improved and MTTR is significantly decreased.

The most valuable features are the low overhead, the ability to monitor production on 24/7 principle, the ability to decrease time to discover the point of failure in the IT infrastructure or the application environment in a short period of time, reporting for analyzing the performance of the application for improving the code optimizing process.

DX APM has a space for improvement in covering more technologies. I.e. monitoring of PHP should be solved in a more quality way. 

I have been familiar with this solution for 18 years.

This solution is stable. In the 15 years, we have not had any major issues. It's an excellent product.

We have a good approach and implementation. If we have any problems, we solve it in the testing phase before it's in production. I can't say that we have had serious problems in the last 10 to 12 years.

This solution is very scalable but we have not had the need to scale because our implementations not need more than one EM server. The new version of DX APM rely on microservices technology and scalability is automatized.

The technical support is good, we are satisfied. The transition period was a little bit problematic, but it only took a short time.

When Broadcom purchased CA they changed the support and the portal. We noticed but we had no real issues. They are responsible and responsive.

We are the first line of support the second line of support is done by Broadcom Support.

They have improved by making the documentation available publically, so it's not only available to partners anymore. The software documentation is really nice, approachable, readable, and searchable.

Positive

The installation is absolutely simple. The installation is quick.

You can install the system quickly and get results in monitoring.

The initial installation is not expensive for the customers.

Our company does the implementation for the customers. We have experts in our team to implement the solutions and for consulting the usage in the future.

We are there to support our clients, not only for the installation but also in exploring the solution.

Our customers are satisfied and there is no complaining about the price. All discounts are given case by case to accommodate the client's budgets. Setup is not expensive because projects are relatively short in man/days.

One of our customers has been using this solution for the last ten years since it was called Wily Introscope. They are really satisfied and they are buying more licenses, using the solution for the whole infrastructure.

All of my clients are using on-premises installation licenses. Most of our clients are at the enterprise level and they are some of the largest banks in the region. Broadcom DX APM is not only a tool, it's a solution. We have experts who are there to offer assistance in exploring the solution to give the customers the maximum value. In my opinion, it's the best product on the market.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.