CA APM is a Standard
Rating: 6 out of 10
February 05, 2016
JE
Vetted Review
Verified User
1 year of experience
My organization primarily utilizes CA APM to track the performance of all of our in house java web applications and websites. We us it to gather performance metrics from an Dev App prospective to better understand how our sites and applications are being utilized. So we as a company know what our goals and progress moving forward should be.
- Introscope does a good job of tracking performance of java jvm applications.
- CEM does a good job of creating the reports that can be used to track web trends.
- Team Center can quickly map out the applications and pin point possible issues and gaps within the monitoring.
Cons
- There is a steep learning curve with the tool which can make it at times daunting to use.
- APM can at times be fickle with what it can and cannot track as far as performance metrics go.
- Other than Team Center, the rest of the pieces of the tool aren't as intuitive and require more time to instrument.
34%
3.4
- Introscope is deeply utilized within the organization. However, CEM and Team Center not as much. Those that use one piece don't generally use the others. Partially because of the curve in learning how to use the consoles effectively.
- reporting is pretty well configured and easy to setup if you know how to use the tools. So this can be easy to use and takes less time to configure for the different groups within the organization.
App Dynamics seems to be far easier to instrument and has little overhead for additional configurations. While Team Center is a nice addition to the overall APM process. I feel it needs to be more streamlined in how to implement and configure. Not having a universal console for all the separate pieces is a distraction at best.