What is our primary use case?
I manage the team responsible for the tool itself, the administration of the system. We have a separate team internally that does all the operations and scheduling facets of the tool.
Our primary use case includes supply chain, payroll, accounting, information technology, pricing validations, etc. Most of the areas of the business have some facet into Control-M.
How has it helped my organization?
We have automated critical processes with Control-M. It is critical in a lot of different processes. We use it for all of our server patchings every month, we schedule that so that it kicks off the job every month, then goes and updates all of our Linux servers, for example, or our Windows servers. It does deployments and things that are critical to IT business.
Automating this critical process has taken the human aspect out of that process. So, that user no longer has to be up in the middle of the night to do server patching. That's all hands-free, completely zero downtime, knowing back to the customers. It's been beneficial in that regard.
Control-M helped improve data transfers. Specifically things like processing sales information. So we have all the data from our various retail locations, our individual stores that get processed every day automatically using Control-M. And we have our daily pricing information that we send to the stores to update all the pricing for all the different locations. Those would be some of the bigger areas of business automation.
It has helped to improve data transfers. Specifically things like processing sales information. So, we have all the data from our various retail locations, our individual stores that get processed every day automatically using Control-M. And we have our daily pricing information that we send to the stores to update all the pricing for all the different locations.
What is most valuable?
The most valuable features are the scheduling aspects of the tool and to have everything scheduled and automated to be able to run on a set timeframe.
It's important to our work because we can set it and forget it. We don't have to worry about logging in and pulling that data every day or manipulating the data. It can be run on a schedule and then the proper timing after dependencies are run.
Control-M provides us with a unified view where we can easily define, orchestrate, and monitor all of our application workflows and data pipelines. It's not super important in my particular line, but it is important for the operations and scheduling team that use the tool.
We use mobile interfaces. They allow the development teams to be able to go in and set up the jobs that they need to schedule them accordingly. There's still quite a bit of a gap between the two tools. So, a lot of our users still prefer to use the desktop client.
We use Control-M to integrate our file transfers within our application workflows. But we do not use the BMC MFT program. We use a different third-party file transfer tool.
The ability to integrate file transfers has been instrumental in allowing us to accomplish the things we need with Control-M. In our industry, we take a lot of data and either push it down to the stores or retail grocery stores. We take files and push them down to the stores or pull files and information from the stores and bring it back to corporate. So, it's two-way communication with file transfers. One of the bigger things that we do with Control-M is scheduling data moves and moving data from one location to another.
We also use Control-M to streamline our data and analytics projects. It's not doing any automation now. That would be done with the tools that it feeds, like Cognos or other reporting tools. It just collects data for us.
The integrated guides and how-to videos in the solution's web interface are okay for some of the basic user questions that we get for how to use the tool and do some of the basics, but from an admin standpoint, which is what I'm responsible for with my team, they're not very helpful. We still go back to BMC Docs, open tickets when we need to, and things of that nature to get the information.
What needs improvement?
The MFT applications should have more functionality and flexibility within that tool. Having more flexibility with that tool for handling the one to many or many to one concept. Like being able to take data from one source and push it to many locations or pull data from many locations and bring it back into a single source. That's why we still use our TPS program for the file transfers just because we don't have some of those capabilities available to us within MFT.
It is still a little difficult to get support on Control-M. It seems to be its own very specific BMC product unlike Remedy and some of the other BMC tools we have. It's quite a bit more difficult to get support for Control-M.
I would rate their support a five out of ten. They're just average to adequate.
You don't have the option to have a dedicated support resource and engineer. Someone that works with you individually to understand your environment, to help you grow and adapt to new things, and to roadmap your maturity within the tool as you do with some of the other BMC tools.
We use Premier Support for other BMC tools, just not this one.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Control-M for two and a half years. The company started using the product in 2014.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It's very stable. We have no complaints in this area. The application is very well built and it is reliable. We were also very focused on the idea of availability when we built our environment. We are setup with both high availability and a fail-over environments. If we were to have problems with a particular server, we have the secondary to fail over to. Or, worst case, another environment to use in our secondary datacenter.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Scalability is excellent. It's easy enough to spin up another server and add it to the server group.
Pretty much every application that we have in this company has some kind of Control-M piece to it. That's everything from accounting and payroll for our stores and customer interfaces. We're pushing and pulling data and doing different job-related things for almost all applications.
We'll continually use Control-M. Our IT business has 3,400 people. Control-M is mostly used by some of our development teams, traditional application development groups that develop our in-house applications. We have our system administrators, our infrastructure teams, IT security, operations, and those types of groups.
We require only one staff member for day-to-day administration. She was responsible for all the day-to-day administration of the tool like adding users, provisioning users, making sure hotfixes are applied to system upgrades.
We recently did overall system health initiatives. It was also a point of contact for our operations scheduling group. If they have questions on the tool if there are any issues, or things of that nature.
How are customer service and support?
Technical support through BMC Support can be challenging at times. If any issues need to be escalated to R&D then you have to work with directly with the team in Israel. This can cause problems coordinating between time zones.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We previously used ESP. There were a few reasons the company decided to move from ESP to BMC Control-M.
1. The need for a product that was distributed based vs. mainframe based. The company was working to retire the mainframe so there wasn't as much of a need for a product that was heavily mainframe focused.
2. We were told that BMC Remedy and BMC Control-M were integrated so job failure ticket automation would be simple.
3. There was a desire to have the same vendor for our automation, orchestration, monitoring, CMDB, and ITSM tools. BMC was able to meet this requirement.
What about the implementation team?
For the initial conversion, we used BMC. Through the last couple of upgrades, we used other BMC preferred partners.
We have used both CFS and Cetan Corporation to assist us with upgrading the application. Both companies were knowledgeable and we were able to perform the upgrades without problems.
Recently, we have been able to upgrade the environments without assistance from a third party.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The licensing and pricing are bundled together with our other BMC products. I don't know the specific cost of Control-M by itself. For us, it is based on how many jobs we run annually. We run roughly 9,000 jobs a year.
If I had to guess, I would say it's in the neighborhood of about $250,000.
Since it is based on a per-job run, if we increase the number of jobs that we run annually, the cost will increase accordingly.
There are also additional operational costs, hardware for servers, databases, BMC maintenance, etc.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Yes, other vendors were evaluated at that time. Control-M was selected primarily because of the integration between it and other BMC tools.
What other advice do I have?
Make sure that you spend enough time to design and build your environment, both high availability and failover are critical to overall success. Because we rely on Control-M so heavily, it needs to always be available. Control-M is critical to the success of our business, we cannot accept downtime. We do everything we can to keep the system running 24/7, 365. For example, we have invested additional time and resources to fully automate our monthly server patching. Now we can patch our environment with zero impact to jobs.
Another piece of advice, use BMC as a partner for professional services, especially when doing your initial implementation. It is a big endeavor and BMC can help you be successful. Lastly, spend time training your staff on how to use and administer the product. Control-M is a powerful but complex application. It requires skilled and knowledgeable operators and admins to keep the system working well.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
*Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.