Ok, that's what I thought, but I got a bit confused by your example with
the private service.
Thanks!
// Dennis Djenfer
Steve Jones wrote:
There can be public services much lower down, it was just the case
that here the Level 2 service was deliberately hidden from everyone
else (the only allowed invocation was to/from the manager service).
So Level 2 services can access Level 2 services from other Level 1
areas, but you can also specify those Level 2 services which are
internal to a Level 1 service and only for that Level 1 service to
invoke.
An example of this is credit card payment and fraud detection. You
could have 2 services called CCPay and FraudDetect and expect users to
do the smart thing, or you could have a Level 1 service of "Payment"
which contains CCPay and FraudDetect and which is responsible for
ensuring a low fraud rate. External services can only use the Payment
service directly.
Steve
2009/1/30 Dennis Djenfer <[email protected]>:
Steve,
Is all your public services on Level 1, or is there public services also on
Level 2? Another way to formulate the same question: Is all Level 2 services
contained by a Level 1 service or are Level 2 services directly accessible
from other Level 1 services?
// Dennis Djenfer
Steve Jones wrote:
Batch processing itself (IMO) isn't a service that is just the
technical implementation.
As an example I did a system in 2000 where there were two batch
interactions, one was for the customer information the other for the
product information, we received these each night from the mainframe
and updated the local system. Now the main service was
CustomerManagement but "inside" this service (i.e. Customer Management
was at Level 1) there was another service called
CustomerSubmissionService which was only accessible to Customer
Management and could only access customer management. This Submission
Service was the batch processing engine which received the, rather
large, update files over MQ and then did the database update.
Implementation wise we used MQ round-robin for failover for resilience
and a tiny bit of load-balancing.
So batch processing wasn't a service it was the _implementation_ of a
business service (CustomerSubmission) which from a domain perspective
was wholly contained within an overall business service
(CustomerManagement). This meant the folks dealing with customer had
responsibility for all of customer work (including the batch job).
The same model was used for Product.
Steve
2009/1/29 Rob Eamon <[email protected]>:
What are people's thoughts about batch processing being
an "application frontend" and thus not a service but a service
consumer?
Steve, at what level do you position batch processing? Where on a BA
diagram would "batch process" be depicted?
Is "batch processing" a service in and of itself or is it an
attribute/characteristic of a 'proper' business service? For example,
assuming "Billing Service" is one of the identified top-level
services, would batching be just another operation/interface next to
the "one-off bill" operation?
-Rob
--- In [email protected], Steve Jones
<jones.ste...@...> wrote:
Couldn't agree more that batch processing can be better handled as a
service, its one of the "odd" things that vendors seemed to exclude
because it wasn't in their product set (or worse claim an old ETL as
SOA just to get some more license sales).
Steve
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
________________________________
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.15/1924 - Release Date: 1/29/2009
5:57 PM
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.233 / Virus Database: 270.10.16/1925 - Release Date: 01/30/09 07:37:00
