| Author |
Message
|
| Monk |
 Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 10:30 pm Post subject: Maintainance - WPS Vs MQ Workflow? |
 |
|
Master
Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Posts: 282
|
can someone tell me which is more easier to maintain Process server or MQ Workflow?
_________________
Thimk |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:05 am Post subject: Re: Maintainance - WPS Vs MQ Workflow? |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Monk wrote: |
| can someone tell me which is more easier to maintain Process server or MQ Workflow? |
Workflow - soon there won't be any maintenance to apply!! 
Seriously though - do you mean which fix packs take longer to run on? Which has the greater administrative burden?
If the latter, I would say Process Sever because it has more features than WF.
But I repeat; WF is in the twilight of it's years.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Monk |
| Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Posts: 282
|
| Quote: |
| Seriously though - do you mean which fix packs take longer to run on? Which has the greater administrative burden? |
What do you mean fixpacks take longer to run on?
I would assume that administrative burden would be more on WPS rather than on MQ workflow.
| Quote: |
| But I repeat; WF is in the twilight of it's years. |
Doesn't matter to my Client even if there is no support for it.
because things rarely change in the business process , infact nothing has changed in our workflow in the past 2 years.
and we will be using MQ workflow even if its not supported for the next 20 years , because its stable now and satisfies our requirement and we dont see any new development coming up.
Basically we can't find any good reason to move to WPS..
_________________
Thimk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Monk wrote: |
| What do you mean fixpacks take longer to run on? |
I was wondering if you determined "administrative burden" by the amount of time the administrator was sat applying maintenance.
I would assume that administrative burden would be more on WPS rather than on MQ workflow.
| Monk wrote: |
Doesn't matter to my Client even if there is no support for it.
because things rarely change in the business process , infact nothing has changed in our workflow in the past 2 years.
and we will be using MQ workflow even if its not supported for the next 20 years , because its stable now and satisfies our requirement and we dont see any new development coming up. |
Nor do you see any new hardware or OS on which WF does not run? There's no intention to make any changes to platform over the next 2 years? That's clearly a very stable business that's very comfortable behind the technology curve.
Especially if they're serious about still being on the same platform on 20 year. On that timescale, they'd still be running a business on Win3.1 
| Monk wrote: |
| Basically we can't find any good reason to move to WPS.. |
Then why ask the question?
Aside from the risk of running business process on unsupported software there probably isn't a good reason. Your clients clearly have very laid back auditors.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Monk |
| Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Posts: 282
|
| Quote: |
| Especially if they're serious about still being on the same platform on 20 year. On that timescale, they'd still be running a business on Win3.1 |
I can still run WF on new hardware which if my Client does buy after 20 years.
I will probably run it on virtual server, it really doesnt matter what hardware we use then , provided its fast enough.
| Quote: |
Then why ask the question? |
Just because my client doesn't understand technology and its impact doesn't mean I must not explore this option.
So I have to ask this question , so as to not miss out on anything..But clearly my client is..
I just to be sure for my self..
[/quote]
_________________
Thimk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Monk wrote: |
| I can still run WF on new hardware which if my Client does buy after 20 years. |
Really? Try running MQSIv2.1 under Vista. And try running Vista on 10 year old hardware.
My point is that even if your WF use is stable, your hardware/OS platform is not and you cannot guarantee that WF will continue to run. It's a business risk, and if your client is happy with the risk then fine.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
