Just because it's internal, doesn't mean we don't need it sent
reliably. Chances of a failure are probably far less, but if it's a
mission critical order processing system, reliability is important.
One thing that must be considered, however, is that the whole thing
must be reliable. It's only as reliable as it's weakest point.
Therefore, if I use reliable messaging for the front end to talk to
the order entry system, but my front end is web-based, I still have
issues to deal with. If the browser request when I hit "Place Order"
times out, I have no idea what the state of the system is anymore.
In this case, designing the interfaces so they handle repeat
submissions properly is very important. If it can handle repeat
submissions, then you may be able to say that reliable messaging
really wasn't necessary. It's a complex problem. Too often, we just
throw a technology at it, rather than really understand the problem.
Often times, the technology is far more expensive than just creating
a process where a person figures out what's wrong in the .001% of
messages where it times out, but yet we do it anyway...
-tb
On Apr 1, 2006, at 4:41 AM, Steve Ross-Talbot wrote:
> If you were building an application that is totally within an
> enterprise what compelling reason would make you even look at WS-RM? I
> can see if you cross organisational boundaries this stuff might be
> attractive but if you are within a domain of control (an organisation)
> then I cannot see why you would use WS-RM. If you have MSoft on the
> desk top you can always use ASP.NET Web Service style and pass to a
> service that is a proxy for JMS. Any light on this would be most
> welcome.
>
> I might just be behind the times.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve T
>
> On 31 Mar 2006, at 17:52, Logan, Patrick D wrote:
>
>>> The response was "who needs WS-RM, just use JMS"
>>
>> I would be interested in real experience reports comparing these two
>> approaches. How well does WS-RM line up with the various
>> capabilities
>> of
>> JMS, and how well various vendors' implementations of WS-RM
>> implement
>> the standard, how well they interop with each other and so on.
>>
>> Is WS-RM even a standard yet?
>>
>> Unless someone can produce the information above, I'd have to say
>> the
>> better investment for the time being would be in JMS.
>>
>> I am willing to be convinced otherwise, but I've not found a
>> shred of
>> support for that yet. I'd *really* like to see it so please respond.
>>
>> I'll have to interpret no response as implying no evidence.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Patrick
>>
>>
>>
>> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>>
>> ▪ Visit your group "service-orientated-architecture" on the web.
>>
>> ▪ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> ▪ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>> Service.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
