With multiple schedulers, “when errors do occur it takes a long time to figure out what the upstream and downstream implications of those errors are," says Jorge Montoya
What if you needed different automobiles for various transportation uses? Imagine needing one car for doing your shopping, another for driving children to school, a third car for commuting to work, a fourth car for your weekend activities, and another for vacationing. You would have to purchase, insure, license, fuel, maintain, and park all of these vehicles. This would be an inefficient and cumbersome way to meet your transportation needs. Luckily, one car can be used for many different purposes.
Likewise, using a single workload automation tool is a much more efficient way to meet your batch processing needs than by employing multiple job schedulers. And converting your scheduler to a workload automation tool can be less complicated than you think. Join us as we talk with Jorge Montoya, senior director of worldwide software consulting for BMC Software, for an honest discussion about the costs and risks of multiple schedulers, and ways to consolidate your schedulers.
Jorge Montoya is senior director of worldwide software consulting for BMC Software. He has more than 15 years of job scheduling and enterprise workload automation experience. He currently runs the BMC Control-M Software Consulting organization.
How is it that organizations often wind up with multiple job schedulers?
Why is it less than ideal for IT organizations to have multiple schedulers in place?
Why are organizations afraid to make the switch to a single enterprise workload automation scheduler?
What can the organization do to alleviate those fears?
What are some of the main signs that we need to switch schedulers?
So say I’m ready to switch schedulers, how do I sell the benefit of the switch versus the risks?
Any other thoughts you’d like to leave with our listeners?