As we have often said, IONA's Artix ESB is unlike other ESBs, enough so that Anne Thomas Manes doesn't even like to call it one.
A few years ago one of our product managers was sceptical about the idea that Web services would resolve all customer requirements. So we built into our configurable microkernel the ability to switch out communication protocols and data formats. I suppose some might disagree with our decision to use WSDL as the neutral interface format - this was in fact a long discussion - but when customers complain about the performance of SOAP/HTTP we suggest a configuration change to SOAP/IIOP, SOAP/JMS, fixed format/IIOP, fixed format/JMS, etc. The interface does not change, and in fact if you need two communication protocols and data formats for the same service we can do that too. In the future we expect to support programming models the same way - i.e. these are configurable too. So I would just respectfully suggest that the characterizations of ESB here may not apply to all products that call themselsves an ESB, only those with a fixed communications protocol and data format. Eric ----- Original Message ---- From: Bill Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2007 1:21:23 PM Subject: RE: [service-orientated-architecture] Kaufman on Reuse & SO Can't Network latency and reliability issues be addressed comfortably with (asynchronous or synchronous) reliable messaging and distributed event driven ESB? An ESB actually adds to the problem, substantially. It's even worse when the overhead of XML is introduced. After we completed our ESB evaluations last year, we basically concluded: Use BPEL if we want to time processes with a calendar; Use WS* if we want to time processes with a stopwatch; Use JMS (non-durable) if we want to keep your jobs; Use something faster to keep a competitive edge. Of course, our real-time requirements are not typical but when we looked at the numbers and saw orders of magnitude difference between approaches, the way was clear. -- email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] com From: service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:service- orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Jerry Zhu Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 9:22 AM To: service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com Subject: Re: [service-orientated -architecture] Kaufman on Reuse & SO --- Steve Jones <jones.steveg@ gmail.com> wrote: > For highly interactive systems (such as plant > management) don't under > estimate the cost of network latency. > The bigger drivers against shared infrastructure I've seen have been latency and reliability, sometimes there really are reasons to put the tin next to the users. > Can't Network latency and reliability issues be addressed comfortably with (asynchronous or synchronous) reliable messaging and distributed event driven ESB? Jerry ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _ Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta. http://advision. webevents. yahoo.com/ mailbeta/ newmail_tools. html ____________________________________________________________________________________ No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail
