Hi,
I think there are two levels to SOA monitoring and management - data
layer and
content layer. By data layer, I mean checking if the low network connection
such as checking if a SOAP message can be send. By context layer, I mean
checking if the defined process is properly being processes.
Operations are able to monitor the data layer, but it is common to have
a process
owner monitor the content layer. It is difficult for operations to
monitor SOA
processes because the person needs to know about the content of the process
which may be modified by the process owner.
I think SOA is similar to a situation when personal computer first came out
- organization have to adjust to accept that it is different to monitor
what each user
do with them. As each user of a personal computer accepts some
responsibility,
some responsibility should be accepted by the process owner - the degree of
responsibility depends on the corporate culture.
FYI, Amberpoint and Systinet offer tools to monitor processes.
H.Ozawa
Erik van Gilder wrote:
> All of the below. Operations has difficulting interpreting the
> messages because they don't understand the distributed dependencies of
> systems and business impact. I'm not knocking operations - I have a
> difficult enough time understanding the infrastructure but I have the
> experience to know how research the problem. Perhaps I can refine the
> question. Has anyone automated the capture and analysis of events to
> filter out most false positives?
>
> And yes, as Steve Jones points out, the tools (and the culture) is so
> biased towards the developers, that operations suffer. To be fair to
> developers, operations hasn't kept up with the technology either.
>
> Just as Todd Biske suggests, I have given much thought to using
> Production Control (the batch control folks). Yes, the orchestration
> pattern is familiar, but SOA technology, let alone the distributed
> environment, is largely alien to them. Perhaps I should be asking if
> the successful deployment and opera tional maintenance of
> SOA-technology (apologies for loosely using the term) has required
> changes in the operations organization where over-specialized
> organizations are blended into a more cohesive operations staff?
>
> In short, I suspect SOA is disruptive to IT operations. Businesses and
> developers may become increasingly agile, but I'm not certain how
> operations will keep up.
>
>
>
>
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/
