Oracle Enterprise Manager Reviews

The automating diagnostic monitor (ADM) is the most valuable feature.

It will list the top findings: numbers one, two and three. Those are the areas where we have to troubleshoot. That helps my organization.

There are a lot of options; it takes time. I don't see anything like a dashboard or something similar. Adding some dashboards would possibly be a nice thing.

Stability’s good; no downtime.

Scalability’s good; it's okay.

We get good support. Tickets are resolved quickly and we are happy with the resolution. It is perfect.

I was not involved in the installation. A different team did it.

I think we are an Oracle shop; naturally we lean toward them.

It's pretty self-explanatory; just log in and explore the options. That's it.

I believe training would help. An expert can go over several options and make it easier.

The most valuable feature is its ability to integrate directly into S Space and move data, run business rules, run calculation scripts, and things like that.

The user interface is pretty clunky.

I have not rated it higher because it’s still new.

I have been using it for about 18 months.

It seems to be as stable as any other ETL product we use.

We're still in the development process. We haven't really put anything into production just yet.

As far as scalability, we're learning as we go on how to parameterize everything and stop hard-coding stuff. It seems to be handling what we're asking it to do.

Technical support is good. We get answers that we need within a couple of days. They are knowledgeable.

Initial setup is a little kind of hokey, but once you figure it out, it's okay.

We use also use DataStage and Informatica, outside of the Hyperion stack and the Oracle stack.

I recommend using the product for similar situations, just because it does technically integrate all the Oracle products together, especially in the EPM space.

Reputation is a big part of the decision regarding which vendor to work with. The other part is strategy: Do they have partners that can help us strategize on implementation? We don't need people on the keyboard, we need people helping us with setting up the big picture.

As a DBA contractor, I like the ability to be able to group my hosts/targets and set up different configurations to monitor based on the needs of my clients.

It has made my job easier in that I can put my focus on certain elements at the whim of my client.

The one area was the process of setting up targets and hosts as it seems rather lengthy and repetitive. There should be a way to merge some of the steps together.

As a DBA contractor, I have been using this solution/configuration since 2013. I started with the upgrade from 11 to 12.

I have had no issues deploying it.

There have been no issues with the stability.

I have no issues scaling it as needed.

Customer service has been consistently excellent.

Technical support has been consistently excellent.

My client has always been Oracle based.

With the proper available documentation the setup, although lengthy, was straightforward for the most part.

Implementation was done in-house. My advice, based on the upgrade that we performed, is to create a "sandbox" to "play" in and test, test, test and document, document, document.

We documented with great detail each step and the time it would take. We ran tests in the sandbox to ensure that the upgrade would work. It was very successful and ran into virtually no problems.

Do some research, follow the documentation and any advise that might be out there. The Oracle communities are good sources.

The ability to capture data and then processing it based on what we need to pull for analysis.

• Less manual work
• Less labor intensive
• More data consistency

More flexibility in terms of the user being able to customize a little bit instead of having it so standard. That would be helpful.

It's been pretty stable. It's good.

For us, it's a good size. It applies to all populations. It's good.

For technical, we have a technical team. Usually, because I'm an analyst, I just pass it over to the technical team and they deal with the technical side.

It was an old system. That's why we transferred into this. In technology, you need to be advanced. You need to keep up.

The decision was made by top management, but I'm sure that they look at cost and the support of it. Mainly the cost.

I think the initial setup was not too complex. It wasn't that bad.

We went with Oracle because we were looking for stability, a vendor that is reliable, being able to get help, troubleshooting when there's a problem. I think those are the important ones.

I would recommend looking into it.

I think what I really like in this product is that DBAs and my management development team don’t have to sit and manually write queries.

It has a graphical interface, which makes it handy for you to monitor the databases and that is the most useful feature.

You can manage many databases at the same time.

You don't have to write ad-hoc queries. Initially, my DBAs used to write scripts which were manual. So, running the scripts, writing them and trying to figure out what we want to monitor was a very difficult process. With OEM, you have all of this in the inbuilt interface, which really helped them in adding new databases in the main that we must monitor.

As the number of databases increased, it was fast for us to start monitoring them as well.

One of the big problems we had was using Data Guard along with OEM; it just didn’t work (Data Guard is a local higher level solution). Every time we did a takeover, it would stop working, so that was the biggest challenge we had. I think that this has been probably fixed in Oracle Enterprise Manager Cloud Control 13c.

We had issues in terms of stability. Some of the functionalities, which we were looking for, were not available. It's not that it wasn't working, but it wasn't able to meet all our requirements.

Stability, as far as it was in a test environment, we did find a few issues. This was in Oracle Database 11g and it would just hang our systems. Thus, we didn't let it go to production.

We have Oracle Advanced Customer Support in our company. Using it was easy. It's just that product had a few issues in certain scenarios.

Oracle recommended it to us: "Everybody is using it out there, so use it!"

It was straightforward. We had to install a server on the database side and GUI on the client side; it was quite straightforward.

Based on our experience, if you are looking for a certain type of requirement, it would work.

The main requirement for us was stability since we run machine-critical applications.

Resiliency is really the main requirement from our side, even beyond scalability.

We run a company that provides services for banks and financial institutions, and resiliency is the most important factor, especially for a product like OEM. Security is equally important but for OEM, we don't really expose anything, so it's fine. It's more of a monitoring interface.

Enterprise Manager comes with a suite of products that includes agents for setup. This makes it easier to monitor databases as well as servers and SANs.

It's given us the ability to monitor multiple aspects of the organization. Also, the ability to monitor different versions of Oracle and different platforms has been helpful for our customers.

Using, setting up, and maintaining the agents can be tedious and even almost a full-time job. Once it's done, it works pretty well. It's just setting them up that could use some improvements.

We haven't had any issues with the deployment other than setting up the agents.

I've had problems with its reliability and speed. Sometimes even giving it a large amounts of software and hardware to run on, it can still be sluggish and fail to respond as quickly as you would think.

It does seem to scale. Even when we throw thousands of objects at it, the scalability still seems to be there.

The newer versions are much simpler and they have a better look and feel, and once you get the agents taken care of, it goes a lot quicker.

We implemented it ourselves.

If you are going to be database-heavy, and that is what you are going to be monitoring the most, then Enterprise Manager might be your best bet. If not, there are other options out there to look at to see which pieces you need to monitor. Do we need to monitor applications, servers, and networks? Figure out which part you're going to need for that.

From my experience, I'd say that the most valuable feature is the ability to manage all the databases, hardware, and middleware from one pane of glass.

Having the single-pane-of-glass manageability of our database, hardware, and middleware infrastructure gives us the most efficient way to keep our thumb on the pulse of the infrastructure to ensure it's always up and running.

OEM needs to be a little bit faster. That's probably because the features that they've developed and put into the latest product are incredible. They're consolidating more and more, which, expectedly, slows it down.

I've been using Oracle Enterprise Manager for the last eight to ten years.

We've had no issues deploying it.

At the beginning it was in the development phase, but for the last, probably six years, it's been a fairly solid product from 10g right through to the current 12c version.

I haven't really had to scale it because the enterprise isn't large enough to require that, but the initial installation is sufficient for all the needs.

I've always been very happy with Oracle support. I think probably the one thing that I'd like to be able to have more of is input into the feature set for the next release.

I think the fact that I can manage all of our infrastructure, all the hardware and software, from one place which makes it very useful.

It makes it very easy for us to manage our infrastructure so that's important from a company perspective.

It's very expensive.

I think it's fine, there's no issue there.

I think it's fine, there's no issue there.

It's implemented just fine. It's fairly easy. Combination of an easy product and also technical expertise as well.

It's very expensive.