Nomad, from HashiCorp, is presented as a simple, flexible, and production-grade workload orchestrator that enables organizations to deploy, manage, and scale any application, containerized, legacy or batch jobs, across multiple regions, on private and public clouds. Nomad's workload support enables an organization to run containerized, non containerized, and batch applications through a single workflow. Nomad is available open source, or via a supported enterprise plan.
N/A
JAMS
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
JAMS is a centralized workload automation and job scheduling solution that runs, monitors, and manages jobs and workflows. Reliably orchestrate the critical IT processes that run your business from a single pane of glass.
$9,996
per year
Pricing
HashiCorp Nomad
JAMS
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Core
9,996.00
per year
Advanced
Customized Pricing
per year
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
HashiCorp Nomad
JAMS
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
Yes
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
- Core: For small teams getting started with automation. Core Integrations: PowerShell, SQL, Azure Data Factory, Python, 20+ others.
- Advanced: Comprehensive solution for large-scale operations. Core Integrations: SAP, JDE, Ellucian Banner, Informatica, Mainframe and Power Systems.
Nomad is well suited for organizations who wish to tackle the problem of cloud computing with as little opinion as possible. Where competing tools like Kubernetes limit the concept of "batteries included," Nomad relies on engineers understanding the missing components and filling them in as necessary. The benefit of Nomad is the ability to build a system out of small pieces with the cost of having more complexity at a system level compared to alternatives.
It's currently one of the best of the lower entry cost options out there, as it currently is a set license cost, not based on the number of jobs executed. In the hands of a good script writer and users with workflow experience, it's a powerful tool to accomplish just about any process that you have a need to complete.
The Activity Monitor clearly shows the Running Jobs, and Jobs that are to run soon. Successful Jobs can be viewed as well. The Refresh of this monitor is completely customizable to your liking.
Job Definitions are very well organized by use of Folders. This simplifies the structure of how to best Implement JAMS Jobs, including the ability to provide specific properties on each folder - whereby Jobs will inherit these properties.
Connectivity to servers is well thought out by having Shortcuts to include Credentials and Connection Store for server information.
JAMS Jobs can be controlled via System Resources. This is very powerful and is a very useful configuration found in JAMS.
Nomad only handles one part of a full platform. Expertise and vision are required in implementing an entire system that is functional enough for an organization to rely on. This includes other tools to handle things like secrets, service discovery, network routing, etc.
Nomad is delayed in some modern functionality, like features for service-mesh and open tracing. These features are on the tool's roadmap, but there's currently no native support. These paradigms can be established still, but require more expertise outside of Nomad itself.
Nomad is not the leading tool for this space, and as such risks being left behind by tools with much greater support, such as Kubernetes.
JAMS is a critical resource free up people to do other things and ensuring that processes and tasks are run consistently. We are also confident that procedures are run consistently and on time or as soon as the necessary data is available. With automated job failure notification, we are not required to check that jobs are running correctly.
JAMS is very user friendly; you hardly need to do coding. The only thing that I would say a challenge is setting it up, but that's because you barely know the product yet and, in every processing, setting up is the difficult part. But once you've set it up and you are going to use it, you will really feel that it is worth to invest in this kind of software solution, it really does it job very well.
We didnt really encounter any downtime, no issues encountered during 2 years of use of JAMs also our client barely raise an issue with JAMS, mostly the issues is on the batch jobs that jams executes. So I would gave it a perfect 10, very reliable hardly encounters any error and bug
JAMS performance is very great, there are no issues raised with the performance, it just like nothing happens on the job after integration it gives you this monitoring capability, no reports and bugs raised on the performance, we didnt do integration with other software only database and with use of JAMS agent to different servers
I've never had to wait more than a day for a response to any email queries submitted. We had a very positive experience using support hours during out migration process from v6 to v7. We've also recently had a weeklong group training course where all attendees were positive about the learning outcomes, a shoutout to Jose who did both the migration and the weeklong course!
People that were involved in the POC found the training a lot easier to follow. I think most people would have preferred to just get the training material and run through themselves.
I Was not part of the original Implementation, and the persons did that are no longer with the Organization. But I was part of the recent Upgrade process a year ago and I am the JAMS admin and was very pleased
Nomad's primary competitor is Kubernetes, specifically its scheduling component. Kubernetes is a much more complete system that will handle more things than job scheduling, including service discovery, secrets management, and service routing. There also exists a much larger community support for Kubernetes vs Nomad. One might say Kubernetes is the safer choice between the two. Kubernetes is the complete "operating system" for cloud computing, but with it includes complexities that are "Kubernetes" specific. The decision really comes down to a mindset of monolith vs components. With Kubernetes, I would argue you choose the entire system as a whole. With Nomad, you design your system piece by piece. There is no wrong answer.
I had evaluated 2 others in 2010/2011, but I do not remember their names. This was the easier one to work with and had a better looking, sometimes more professional looking UI than what I was evaluating. JAMS was more scaleable and had the ability to make custom interfaces to more systems through Execution Methods that could be tailored.
The product is quite flexible. There are a number of features and functions that we use on a daily basis, and there are many features that are available that we have not yet needed or explored (like setting up jobs with the ability to do FTP or Sftp file transfers).
Nomad has allowed our organization to deploy quicker and more frequently with a lower failure rate.
Nomad has brought in consistency from an operations perspective.
Nomad's performance allows us to scale infinitely while providing functionality that reduces mean time to repair (canary deploys, versioning, rollbacks, etc).
Using JAMS when working from home (initially COVID, and now permanent) gives me tremendous visibility into the running operations of our business without any loss in productivity for not being in the office.
With JAMS I can more tightly schedule evening batch jobs by running one job after the successful completion of predecessor, as opposed to the CRON like guessing at safe start times.
Central control on a monitored server in a datacenter for all job scheduling tasks has given us 99.9% uptime reliability, instead of herding cats on multiple machines.
