Hyperautomation Technology

< Click to collapse

Here is the life cycle of a conventional IT change.

The assessment, routing, approval, and implementation stages alone may take weeks. The execution stage also often takes hours or even days. In some cases, the administraor may become ill or unavailable, prompting the escalation manager to seek an alternative. In the case of hyper-automation, however, there is no waiting. The delivery starts in seconds - be it an Incident resolution or a Change Request execution. 

Here is another example: a long-running project, like fleet upgrade or DC migration (depicted below).  

These take time for two reasons. Unlike robots, people don’t work 24x7x365. They are also terrible at multi-tasking and tracking dependencies, especially if the project involves multiple parallel tasks executed by disparate teams, departments or business units. That is why hyper-automation is perfectly capable of condensing the same 6-month-long DC Migration project to just two short months.

< Click to collapse

Here is a comparison of an omni-vendor enterprise-wide emergency password rotation, performed on 10,000 database assets at the same time to address an immediate security threat. It compares a conventionally automated activity with a hyper-automated one. Apart from the duration of the task dropping from 34 years (yes, that is how long the activity would take for a team of professionals to do this!) to only a couple of hours, the cost falls from $19.2 miliion dollars to $200.

.

You may ask: how is that even possible?

It became possible as soon as the manager assigned the emergency password rotation Change Request to a hyper-automated group, instead of a regular database team like the San Diego Database department group hown below. This department is not automated, of course.

But that San Diego team was a conventional, unautomated department. Let's assign the same Change Request to a hyper-automated team instead. This department is the perfect candidate: "Database Atlanta". It employs only one administrator, Bow Ruggeri, and the second employee is a hyper-automation module ("Replayable" is the name of a product).

Here is the hyper-automation module's HR entry in ServiceNow.

.

< Click to collapse

< Click to collapse

People commit mistakes. That's a fact. No matter how much effort your team puts in, they are bound to make errors, several of them, in fact. This includes situations like running the wrong script, on the wrong database, not running it on time, not being prepared (not having the right password or connect string), not understanding the prerequisites or the handover process, and so on. In the case of Closed-Loop Automation, the execution logic remains unchanged. It doesn't depend on how much sleep the admin got the night before. It scans execution logs (sometimes thousands of them, in parallel) in real time as they are written. If it detects an error, it immediately opens an Incident in ServiceNow for the DBA to investigate the failed CR and attach the error log. It does not understand the concept of "good enough" and honestly thinks that 9-5 is just a number. Another way to describe hyper automation is that it is always at its best, 24x7x365. Forget that —not just at ITS best, but at the INDUSTRY's best, because whatever the technology or vendor, hyper-automation modules have vendors' best practices embedded. You execute the Change Requests and Resolve Incidents repeatedly, and get predictable results every single time. That is because our software is built on vendor best practices, aligned with ITIL principles, with documented risk mitigation and cost containment at every step. It's like having a hundred PhDs in Computer Science on standby, or just as many IT industry veterans, handling your day-to-day operations.

Imagine you had to perform an Oracle database upgrade.

Not a patch — a real version upgrade, the kind every DBA team dreads. You're moving a production database from Oracle 21c to 26ai, and there's no room for a mistake: get it wrong, and you're looking at hours of downtime, corrupted application connections, or a rollback scramble at 2 AM. Here's what actually happens when Replayable runs it — and why each part of that process is a genuine safeguard, not busywork.

Vendor best practices. Oracle's own guidance says never upgrade production directly — clone the environment first, upgrade the clone, validate it, then touch production. Replayable's upgrade workflow does exactly that: it runs Oracle's AutoUpgrade tool through its analyze phase before ever touching a live database, surfacing version-incompatibility issues and blocking conditions in advance. If the analysis fails, nothing has been risked yet — no downtime, no half-finished upgrade, just a clean stop before the point of no return.

ITIL alignment. Every upgrade change is classified honestly, not rubber-stamped: risk and impact are both marked High (because a version upgrade genuinely is), the affected database is linked as a real Configuration Item, and a planned maintenance window is recorded before a single command runs. If your compliance team ever needs to show an auditor exactly what was changed, when, and how much risk was assumed going in, it's already documented — not reconstructed after the fact.

Risk mitigation. The upgrade doesn't just run and hope. It checks four separate times that things are actually in the state they need to be — before starting, after the analysis phase, after the deploy phase, and after the final restart — and it never proceeds past a checkpoint that fails. And if something does go wrong, the failure-handling logic is smart enough to tell the difference between "this upgrade genuinely failed" and "this is leftover recovery data from an earlier interrupted attempt" — a distinction that, done wrong, has cost real DBA teams hours of chasing the wrong problem.

Cost containment. Out-of-place upgrades need real infrastructure — cloning a full Oracle home can mean an extra 300GB of storage that nobody budgeted for. Instead of quietly provisioning it and surprising someone in next month's cloud bill, Replayable estimates the cost up front and holds the upgrade until a budget owner explicitly approves it. No surprise charges. No "who authorized this storage" conversation after the fact.

Here is the yearly error rate for ServiceNow Incident resolution, compared between a team of top-notch DBAs and a hyper-automation software.

< Click to collapse

What used to be physical (the servers) is now just definition code that explains to the Cloud what it is. You owe it to yourself to protect your investment. With hyper-automation, the task definitions and automation workflows never leave your repository, always properly secured, versioned, and tagged. The administrators don't even see the low level code, which runs by itself when the end-user clicks the "Submit" button in ServiceNow. The code doesn’t require DBA understanding, because it is modular.  

This is the same shift that’s already happened to labor once mechanized: once the object being maintained is code instead of hardware, the skilled maintainer becomes a codified, repeatable process instead of a person. We think that’s the direction all of skilled IT labor is headed — read our manifesto on why.

< Click to collapse

With the advent of the Cloud, it became almost impossible to keep up with different vendors and technologies. In the case of automation, the code is in a single source of truth.

There is one centralized code repo (Github, Gitlab or similar), one encryption Vault for storing passwords/certificates, and one location for execution logs (ServiceNow ticketing), no matter which Cloud vendor or product is used. There’s never any confusion about what the automation did, where, when and why. You execute it repeatedly and get predictable results every single time. There is never any finger-pointing, when it comes to IT services automation.

< Click to collapse

The load a current IT service management team carries can be increased by 5%-10%, and only for a few days. If the number or the priority of the requests is to double today, the process becomes unmanageable by the current headcount. It doesn’t matter how much money you throw at your employees. Overworked, they will eventually burn out and quit to serve your competitor.

Our closed-loop automation software will do an equally brilliant job whether it runs on one server or a thousand at the same time. The image below runs a Change Request on a server named "lnx1000" (that is a screenshot of the automation inventory file).

If you want the same task run on a thousand servers, all you have to do is to replace the "lnx1000" with "lnx[000:999]". The automation software will run the same CR on servers lnx000, lnx001, lnx002 ... and all the way to lnx999. A thosand of them!

That is the equivalent of hiring a thousand DBAs on a moment's notice and releasing them just as quickly during a busy period, or when your company expands. Our automation software will do an equally brilliant job, whether it works on one server or a thousand at the same time.

< Click to collapse