OPS/MVS Automation Intelligence Reviews

The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and capability to solve problems across different platforms and different software products.

This product has helped our organization since we are now be able to automate things; things don't break as much. There are not so many human interactions so as to make mistakes.

We're missing the boat. We don't have a graphical display and we need something beyond just pretty PC pictures for the other departments. As a manager, I would love to have a dashboard that shows the problem and that the automation is taking care of it. The systems management and the computer operators would love to have a pretty graphic to display everything when it went down and to resolve the issue.

The graphical interfaces need to improved. It's good for a technician. However, when I have to go and talk to my management or a director or somebody about it, it is very hard to explain. It would be so much better if there was just a picture or a dashboard showing the problems of what is breaking or what is wrong, perhaps a type of roadmap during the initial load.

The product is very stable.

It is extremely scalable.

I have used the technical support. It is very good.

I was involved in the setup process not at this shop but at a different shop in the past. The process was complex.

You should install version 12.3 as it makes it a lot easier to set it up.

Stability is a major criteria for selecting a vendor. Ease of working with a vendor is also an important factor.

Compared to the products on the market, it is hands down the best one.

• The ability to create your own automation
• Flexibility
• The reliability of constant, active monitoring

The benefits are the ability to do monitoring on your mainframe systems exactly the way you want to do it. It provides a lot of flexibility. That really improves the way our organization functions.

The only issue we have is when we try to integrate with common services. That's why it doesn't get a perfect rating. The OPS/MVS product itself is really good.

We have asked CA for things, including the ability to test multi-line WTOs. This is on their backlog. We have several of those that we would like to monitor and we can’t test our code before it goes in and actually runs.

This solution is very stable. We haven't had any issues with stability in a very long time.

So far, we haven't run into scalability issues. We can use the solution when scaling up or down.

I have used technical support and they are very good. They're very responsive to any issues we run into and even respond if we just have questions.

We didn't switch from a previous solution. In 1988 when we started, this solution was one of about three tools that were available. We evaluated all of them and this one was the best. It was the most flexible and the one that would work best in our environment.

Our initial setup was probably a little complex, but that was a long time ago in 1988. The new releases are reasonably good and do not require a lot of effort on our part. It's a pretty stable process.

At the time, IBM and Tivoli (a separate company at the time) were the two other options we considered. We chose CA because of the flexibility and the way the product worked. CA was easier to interface with and they knew our systems.

When selecting a vendor, the stability of the vendor, as well as the stability of the product, is very important to us. We want to make sure that the vendor will be around to support us. We also want the flexibility of the product to make sure that it will handle our unique situations.

I would advise others to go with OPS/MVS. We still occasionally review what's in the market to make sure that it's still the best product for us and we have never been disappointed by it.

We like the flexibility that enables us to keep up with all the other products that are coming up and available.

It's very active at keeping our start tasks on the mainframe up and running for our business solutions.

I'm in a sprint review with the next version, so I've seen some of the things that they're coming out with. It's going to very nice. I like the things they're coming up with.

The mainframe TSO side still displays green screens. Today, people are more into web and things like that. I would like to see that type of interface available for them.

It's very stable. We have very little errors with it. It is easy to configure.

Scalability is good. I'd say it's up there in the upper range, 9/10 or 10/10 for scalability.

Technical support is very good. They are very knowledgeable and very quick in getting your answers, what you need.

We've been using the solution for quite a long time; 15 years or more.

Initial setup was pretty straightforward. It's very easy to install. The documentation they give you and also the product, the way they had it set up to install, make it easy.

I would say yes, definitely use it. The ease of using it and the training is useful. It's very good.

• Rules
• OPS/REXX
• SQL
• SSM
• Global variables
• OPSLOG

We control our DR tests with OPS/MVS as a wrapper to IBM’s GDPS so our operations staff does not have to manage using their interface in NetView. We also have other “applications” like managing logical engines on LPARs.

Our last main complaint was having sysplex-wide variables (outside of OPSHFI), but this is now a reality.

If you look in the v12.2 command and function reference manual, there are sysplex variables. As in, their scope is sysplex-wide. If you update one on system A, it is accessible from system B.

Prior to sysplex vars, the only option was to use OPSHFI (also documented in that manual), which uses a dataset that is accessible from all systems. There are, however, still some restrictions with sysplex vars as far as which kinds of rules you can use them in, which is also the case for OPSHFI vars.

I have used it since 1997.

We have not really encountered any stability issues. We’ve had a few cases over the years where the product would shut down due to command or message rate exceeded but those have been mitigated.

We have gotten close in one or two cases with the size of global variables but no show-stoppers.

Technical support is excellent.

In a previous life, I supported NetView and also the old Auto-operator. OPS/MVS is much more intuitive to use, especially compared to Netview/SA/GDPS.

We have another team perform the install and we do some customization or test new features. From what I understand, there are no complaints about set-up.

- NetView

I would advise others to simply install it in a test environment first, then play with all the features. I know there are also many samples and tools provided, such as how to set up a table to start up your system tasks.

By far, the most valuable features of this product are:

• SSM
• AOF
• OpsLog

Our largest LPAR currently has 633 tasks defined to SSM. We can shut the system down and have it back up in 30 minutes. Without SSM, that could not be possible.

I think some of their built-in functions are short on functionality. We have written homegrown REXX functions to perform many of these.

• There is nothing in place to ensure that your rules are consistent across all machines in an environment. I have worked at large (20+ LPARs) to gigantic (200+ LPARs) shops. The key to having good automation is to make sure all the rules and REXX execs are the same everywhere. Otherwise, you lose track of changes and differences very quickly. Obviously, some rules might only apply to one system, and we code them accordingly. (CA says that they are working on this currently, and I have seen a demo which looks very promising).
• To go with the previous topic, we have a function called PLEX that returns the current logical sysplex that the rule or REXX exec is running on. Currently, with the provided tools, you would have to code a long select and list each system.
• There is no function within OPS/MVS to open problem tickets to an outside product. Currently, our problem management tool is ServiceNow. We automatically open problem tickets and assign them to the appropriate group all automatically. This function I did demo for other companies at CA World in 2010. Some were very interested in what we have done.
• There is one built-in OPS/MVS function that actually does not work at all. If you are using OPSVALUE to retrieve global information cross-system, there are times that it is not possible to get the information. The reason is you have to pull the data one level higher than what is needed, and you are limited to a number (I do not remember exactly what the value is) that can be returned cross-system, and it is less than what is retrieved from your request. We wrote a function that will look up global information on the system where they reside and return only the info that is needed. This one I have opened a problem ticket on, and have posted it to the CA website.

These are the biggest issues. Some of these I have opened issues on, and others I have just posted online. So far, the only one that seems to have gotten attention is the first one.

• Current employer: 11 years
• Personal experience and usage: 14 years

I have not encountered stability issues very often. It is a very mature product, so there are usually only minor issues.

As mentioned, our largest LPAR currently has 633 tasks defined to SSM. That kind of shows that there does not seem to be any issues with how big a system can get.

Technical support is very helpful, and usually extremely responsive.

We previously used and we continue to use a different solution. (We still have two LPARs on a different solution.) The #1 reason we switched to this product was the ease of operations and the hands-off approach in day-to-day usage.

There are some things that are different, but that is true for pretty much all products. Overall, it is very easy - time consuming because of the code having to be rewritten - to convert to OPS/MVS.

OPS/MVS tends to be one of the more expensive products if you strictly look at the licensing costs. The ease of use and operations more than makes up for that cost, however.

I have been working with system automation since 1986. I have used or evaluated probably six different automation tools. When we made the decision to switch, OPS/MVS was the only option that was considered.

If converting from a different product, all of your existing code (REXX, rules, clists,...) will have to be rewritten. It is NOT hard, but it is time consuming. If you are installing automation for the first time, use the samples, and be aware that automation is an evolution and it takes time for everything to fall into place. Once it does, life becomes MUCH easier and system stability improves tremendously.

• System State Manager (SSM) and the RDF, EPI, POI REXX functions and commands
• Global variables
• MSF
• OPSLOG
• Archive capabilities

After implementing SSM, we dropped our IPL time from 40 minutes via manual commands to eight minutes via SSM.

Use something other than CCI for external communications.

I have been using it 20+ years.

I have not encountered any stability issues; very stable product.

I have not encountered any scalability issues; very scalable.

Technical support gets the highest rating; always knowledgeable and good response time.

I did not previously use a different solution.

Initial setup was very straightforward.

Before choosing this product, I evaluated BMC Control products, IBM.

Make sure to allocate enough space for the OPSLOG and for the global variables.

OPSLOG, message rules, ability to manipulate the msg autoflag, MSF, RDF Tables. The whole product is very valuable, but if I have to list some, those are a good start.

The product is so advanced in all ways that it's hard to pick a specific area. OPSLOG and MSF has saved us more than once when a system was unavailable via TSO, but we could see what was going on via our cross domain logs. This allowed us to correct the problem with an actual IPL of the system.

The ability to manipulate the autoflag has allowed us to setup the kind of message forwarding that is important to our end users.

All of the OPS/REXX built in functions are great. We've recently used OPSTATUS to give our operators extra info they needed about WTORS that wasn't available via system commands.

We initially installed OPS in 1989 when it still was part of Goal.

It is an extremely stable product.

We're a large shop with many requirements and scalability has never been an issue.

The technical support is top notch. They have always been right there for us whenever we were needed, including the offer to be available on weekends during a recent upgrade if needed.

Friendly, professional, knowledgeable. I rate OPS/MVS technical support amongst the best support in the world.

We had a home grown product before choosing OPS.

Our initial setup was not overly difficult, but support was sent out to help us with our initial install.

I'm not involved in pricing and licensing. I'm aware that OPS (as well as other CA products) are considered to be pricier than most. Having said that, you get what you pay for. If you want the features and reliability of Cadillac, then you have to be willing to pay for it.

We evaluated basically all available options, narrowed it down to CA, BMC and one other (now absorbed) company.

If you're at the point of implementation, take advantage of CA technical support and the local OPS online community. Both are extremely helpful and willing to give advice to help new people avoid potential problems.

System State Manager and all the built-in functions.

It’s invaluable for expediting the shutdowns/IPLs of our z/OS LPARs and monitoring our z/OS LPARs for issues/problems.

It needs to have more compatibility/interfaces to other vendors’ products.

I've used it for more than 15 years.

Upgrading the product, either adding maintenance, or moving to a new release, is usually painless.

Some earlier releases crashed occasionally, very rarely with recent releases.

Adding OPS to a new LPAR or removing it from a decommissioned LPAR, hasn’t caused any issues.

Excellent – very helpful and knowledgeable.

When I first started using OPS, there were not any similar products from other vendors, with all the features OPS provided.

Once you're familiar with the product, it’s easy to use. The documentation is very good – coding some rules for console ‘message suppression’ is a good way to start.

The pricing for the base product is probably comparable to other vendor’s offerings. There are some optional applications/features, with separate pricing/licensing, that can be added to the base product. Get a trial license first to determine if any of the ‘optionals’ are going to be of use.

OPS was already in place here when I became administrator.

Ask the vendor for a demonstration of the product.