| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
| Websphere ESB - any real projects out there yet? |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| hopsala |
 Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 8:43 am Post subject: Websphere ESB - any real projects out there yet? |
 |
|
Guardian
Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 960
|
Hi there,
I am thinking of offering Websphere ESB to a client of mine as an ESB and complex orchestration solution. Though technologically-wise it seems to be a natural fit to the client site, I still have some doubts.
My main concern is that it's such a new product (approx 2 years in the market, methinks). I have never heard of anyone who has actually implemented anything beyond a POC, and even that's a rarity..
So my question to you is - Has anyone tried working with this product? How was it? Is it stable in production? What sort of workload does it process? Are there any common pitfalls? What sort of projects did you implement - thin tranformation ESB, or full-blast service and orchestration flows?
Cheers, and have a good one,
Hop |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 10:32 am Post subject: Re: Websphere ESB - any real projects out there yet? |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| hopsala wrote: |
| Has anyone tried working with this product? |
Yes.
| hopsala wrote: |
| How was it? |
No technical problems, just political ones. For every n architects we asked for guidance on using the ESB we got n+1 solutions, which were revised n+2 times every t days (where t is the integer result of the equation describing the project planning process).
| hopsala wrote: |
| Is it stable in production? |
Yes.
| hopsala wrote: |
| What sort of workload does it process? |
Not vast amounts; the client is cutting over from an existing system to give the business comfort. About 40 transactions an hour peaking at 100 per hour. Expected to hit 5 times that once cut over completes.
| hopsala wrote: |
| Are there any common pitfalls? |
The term ESB seems to attract the most trout-worthy architecture & design people. Plus every manager seems to have read something on the subject and is therefore an expert.
| hopsala wrote: |
What sort of projects did you implement - thin tranformation ESB, or full-blast service and orchestration flows?
|
This was a full-blast, all singing, all dancing project, with a full chorus of orchestration and every bell & whistle you could imagine. Many of which actually had some purpose...... 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 10:55 am Post subject: Re: Websphere ESB - any real projects out there yet? |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| This was a full-blast, all singing, all dancing project, with a full chorus of orchestration and every bell & whistle you could imagine. Many of which actually had some purpose...... |
Did you have the 8x10 color glossy photos with the circles and the arrows and the paragraph on the back of each one? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:31 am Post subject: Re: Websphere ESB - any real projects out there yet? |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
| This was a full-blast, all singing, all dancing project, with a full chorus of orchestration and every bell & whistle you could imagine. Many of which actually had some purpose...... |
Did you have the 8x10 color glossy photos with the circles and the arrows and the paragraph on the back of each one? |
We had use case diagrams, flow diagrams, Bachman diagrams and every kind of PowerPoint you could imagine. Don't laugh.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hopsala |
| Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 12:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Guardian
Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 960
|
Ah yes, the bell & whistle killer app, the dream of every manager! I'm still waiting for the day when IBM deploys a PC speaker app into their sample gallery. You know, the one where you program in Logo on one server, and another bursts into mechanical poetry. Ah, the wonders of integration...
As for everything else - A happy surprise. Usually new products are quite unstable and ungainly (e.g MQSI), and I have heard rumors of "product immaturity" coming from IBM reps, no less.
So, a few additional questions, if I may:
- What were the features you used the most and that were the most effective in actually saving work? (as opposed to manual coding)
- Did you process anything except XML? How gracefully does WESB handle wire-formats?
- Does the uber-snazzy node-oriented development environment actually work? That is, were programmers able to easily share functionality and resources across different flows?
- What is the capital of Assyria?
- 100 tph is pretty low, did you stress test it to see what the max is?
Much obliged  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| hopsala wrote: |
| - What is the capital of Assyria? |
Nineveh and Assur, or Monty Python stylee: 'I don't know...Auuuuuuuuuugh!'
_________________
It's puzzling, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this before...and it's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| hopsala wrote: |
| - What were the features you used the most and that were the most effective in actually saving work? (as opposed to manual coding) |
Nothing on this project involved saving work. Pretty much everything was manually coded (by our out-source partners) and, to be fair, there was very little we could use as input to automated tools (n designers, n+1 solutions)
| hopsala wrote: |
| - Did you process anything except XML? How gracefully does WESB handle wire-formats? |
All XML. Wire formats were shoehorned in by outputing it to a queue & getting WMB to convert to/form CWF.
| hopsala wrote: |
| - Does the uber-snazzy node-oriented development environment actually work? That is, were programmers able to easily share functionality and resources across different flows? |
No, and I don't see that as a problem with the product.
| hopsala wrote: |
| - What is the capital of Assyria? |
It's the place the country is ruled from but that's not important right now.
| hopsala wrote: |
| - 100 tph is pretty low, did you stress test it to see what the max is? |
We didn't. We were more trying to get it finished.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| hopsala wrote: |
| - What is the capital of Assyria? |
It's the place the country is ruled from but that's not important right now. |
Was that in Airplane? I don't remember that 
_________________
It's puzzling, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this before...and it's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| exerk wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
| hopsala wrote: |
| - What is the capital of Assyria? |
It's the place the country is ruled from but that's not important right now. |
Was that in Airplane? I don't remember that |
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hopsala |
| Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 6:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Guardian
Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 960
|
Hm. Here's what I'm really getting at: I'm trying to figure out whether WESB is a fitting product for very complex connectivity, borderline application functionality. I'm talking about 30+ programmers, pounding away evey day on orchestration flows, with a lot of shared infrastructure between them (adapters, error handling, transaction types, common queries etc). The question is - will they be able to leverage the development environment and workflow UI to their advantage?
Conversely, you could tell me that WESB is an integration product, no more, and that it only fits small integration teams, who busy themselves adding extra integration functionality (another adapter, monitoring options and the like), and not build actual services, like the scenario I'm facing.
Oh, and shame on you for trying to get an integration project finished. A dangerous precedent! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| hopsala wrote: |
Hm. Here's what I'm really getting at: I'm trying to figure out whether WESB is a fitting product for very complex connectivity, borderline application functionality. I'm talking about 30+ programmers, pounding away evey day on orchestration flows, with a lot of shared infrastructure between them (adapters, error handling, transaction types, common queries etc). The question is - will they be able to leverage the development environment and workflow UI to their advantage?
Conversely, you could tell me that WESB is an integration product, no more, and that it only fits small integration teams, who busy themselves adding extra integration functionality (another adapter, monitoring options and the like), and not build actual services, like the scenario I'm facing. |
Given that you could discuss if any product can be used in the ways you describe. I've used WMB a lot in both teams of 30+ leveraging etc etc and small teams so that's not valid. If a product is right for your needs is a complex subjective discussion and only a POC will tell the tale.
I can only tell you my experience, not tell you how the product fits. I'll repeat that we didn't leverage the product as you describe but that's down to our team structure. I suspect you'll find the same problem or you'll find a solution to it. All products can, in the last analysis be used in any configuration.
| hopsala wrote: |
| Oh, and shame on you for trying to get an integration project finished. A dangerous precedent! |
I apologise for my lack of clarity. By "finished" I meant "signed off by the business". Or as it's sometimes called - "billable".
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hopsala |
| Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Guardian
Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 960
|
| Vitor wrote: |
Given that you could discuss if any product can be used in the ways you describe. I've used WMB a lot in both teams of 30+ leveraging etc etc and small teams so that's not valid. If a product is right for your needs is a complex subjective discussion and only a POC will tell the tale.
I can only tell you my experience, not tell you how the product fits. I'll repeat that we didn't leverage the product as you describe but that's down to our team structure. I suspect you'll find the same problem or you'll find a solution to it. All products can, in the last analysis be used in any configuration. |
In general I agree. What I was trying to ask is whether you chose not to use the workflow UI because you found some unsurmountable pitfall or a design flaw, or simply because you didn't need it.
Obviously, all products "can" be used in any configuration. They're all just Turing Machine variations, after all. But as you well know some products are better equipped for certain scenarios than others. For example, IMO WMB does not work well in service development teams. Once you cross a certain complexity thershold you find yourself stuttering. You don't have a proper JVM, or (controllable) connection pools, or any of the features a solid application environment like WAS gives you. This is why I'm thinking about WESB; basically it's just WAS + ESB EARs.
Now, Unless I misunderstand, it seems that you've used very little of the ESB facilities, and mostly worked with the WAS env. Why didn't you simply build it on a pure WAS server? I mean, you can use JCA connectors on a pure WAS..
I'm also trying to figure out whether this is an immature product, and whether there are other product alternatives I should include in the POC. If someone had warned me 5 years ago about the awful state of MQSI 2.1, it would have saved me and many others a lot of work.
In case it wasn't clear, I don't expect a magic answer, or a magic product to solve all my woes. It's not your job to do my work for me I've posted this in addition to everything else that I'm doing in parallel. A POC has already been scheduled and will begin in a few weeks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| hopsala wrote: |
| What I was trying to ask is whether you chose not to use the workflow UI because you found some unsurmountable pitfall or a design flaw, or simply because you didn't need it. |
I can confirm we found no insurmountable pitfalls or design flaws.
| hopsala wrote: |
| Now, Unless I misunderstand, it seems that you've used very little of the ESB facilities, and mostly worked with the WAS env. Why didn't you simply build it on a pure WAS server? I mean, you can use JCA connectors on a pure WAS.. |
It was originally intended to be on WAS. Then on WPS, then WESB. Management was decisive on this point.......
| hopsala wrote: |
| I'm also trying to figure out whether this is an immature product, and whether there are other product alternatives I should include in the POC. |
It's not the most mature product in the stack. Doesn't make it inherently bad. MQSI 2.1 wasn't immature, just a bad port of the NEON product with some dubious bolts-ons.
| hopsala wrote: |
| In case it wasn't clear, I don't expect a magic answer, or a magic product to solve all my woes. It's not your job to do my work for me |
I'm completely clear on this point and can only apologise that I've such limited experience to offer you.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hopsala |
| Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Guardian
Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 960
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| hopsala wrote: |
| Now, Unless I misunderstand, it seems that you've used very little of the ESB facilities, and mostly worked with the WAS env. Why didn't you simply build it on a pure WAS server? I mean, you can use JCA connectors on a pure WAS.. |
It was originally intended to be on WAS. Then on WPS, then WESB. Management was decisive on this point....... |
I see. So your answer is Yes, you mainly used WAS functionality. Was there any feature that is particular to WESB that you used?
To be more specific, which of the following features, if any, did you use, and how much:
1. Mediation flows (which mediation primitives?)
2. SMO
3. Data Handlers or maybe the Tranformation Extender
4. any of the build-in Connectors WESB provides.
If you didn't use any of them, I'd say this was a WAS project, with a strange new name
| Vitor wrote: |
| MQSI 2.1 wasn't immature, just a bad port of the NEON product with some dubious bolts-ons. |
The mother of all bad ports is more like it. And to be frank, it was a bad port of a bad initial product. Thankfully, it's much better now, though I still have my misgivings about it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 7:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| hopsala wrote: |
| 1. Mediation flows (which mediation primitives?) |
Yes and don't ask me which (different area ran with the details)
No
| hopsala wrote: |
| 3. Data Handlers or maybe the Tranformation Extender |
I think we planned to but didn't.
| hopsala wrote: |
| 4. any of the build-in Connectors WESB provides. |
I think we POC'd it.
| hopsala wrote: |
| If you didn't use any of them, I'd say this was a WAS project, with a strange new name |
It's not an unreasonable thing to say. The project was an odd beast, and the software selections mostly political.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
  |
Goto page 1, 2 Next |
Page 1 of 2 |
|
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
|
|
|
|
