| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| Message Broker vs. ESB |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| wyatt |
 Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2005 1:04 pm Post subject: Message Broker vs. ESB |
 |
|
Voyager
Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 76
|
There is considerable controversy and debate in our shop regarding the difference between a message broker (MQSI), or traditional EAI solution, and an ESB (app server).
Im of the opinion that an ESB transformation/routing solution will provide the same capabilities but is implemented using open source tools (java) which will ultimately lead to lower cost of ownership. I would also argue that WBIMB and associated ESQL will soon be displaced with ESB (app server).
What is your opinion? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2005 1:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
ESB is not equal to app server.
ESB is not really a "product". It's a design pattern/architecture.
ESB can be implemented using WBIMB and MQ, in conjunction with app server processes - or not.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wyatt |
| Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2005 2:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 76
|
| If conducting a capability comparison what factors would influence your choice in selecting a technology solution for implementing transform/routing of data (EJB or Message Broker) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2005 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
The biggest factors would be who was asking me to make the comparison, and why.
And did you change to EJB from ESB for a reason? Or had you meant EJB all along?
In terms of EJBs, though, they are application level artifacts. Transformation/routing of data is extra-application. It's infrastructure/enterprise.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| samgunddi |
| Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2005 8:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 17 May 2004
Posts: 54
|
| ESB is essentially built on WAS ND v6. It was enriched with a few functions of Brokering and BPEL engine. There is an advanced version of ESB which includes WBIMB functionality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JLRowe |
| Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2005 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 25 May 2002
Posts: 664
Location: South East London
|
IBM were saying ESB was a design pattern and not a product for ages, until *cough* they announce websphere ESB.
see http://in.sys-con.com/read/129738.htm
So what is an ESB?
I see it as a messaging provider that knows about the business content of the messages. Take MQ for example, all it knows is that a text message is in a certain code page, an ESB knows the WSDL, knows how to transform and deliver the message to many different transports and formats/bindings.
My take on it is that building on top of the WAS J2EE platform is the future. The messaging provider in WAS v6, which will probably also be the basis of WAS ESB takes full advantage of the base WAS v6 features: clustering, the new HA capabilites, the extensive administration support, database support etc etc.
The messaging engine stores messages in a database which is managed/cached/pooled/administered/clustered/failed over/transacted by WAS. Compare this with MB/MQ written in native code, which have had to implement all of these services themselves, and not only that, they certainly have different code bases to support the quirks of each platform.
I'm not knocking message broker, but the time will come when it will either have to run on top of WAS, or a migration path will be provided to a different product and message broker will be EOL'ed.
The strongest point of message broker is it's flexible message support for legacy message formats (i.e. EDI, tagged, cobol copy book etc), the WAS product set is much better at XML and web services.
The greatest problem of WAS, is that it is such an all encompassing product, it is very difficult to know where to start with it, it is a big beast. MB is a much tidier solution, easier to get to grips with and get the most out of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
