Architecture Considerations with AD RMS

Hi,
I'm looking to implement an AD RMS in an organization, and would like to find out more details on some architectures that I have come up with and hopefully some advice and which is better.
Architecture 1: 2 Physical Servers for AD RMS and MSSQL
Of course, we know that this is the most ideal architecture, but it is not cost-efficient for the organization, leading to the concepts of the following architectures.
Architecture 2: 2 Virtual (VMWare) Servers for AD RMS and MSSQL
What are the implications of using a virtual server for production?
Architecture 3: 1 Physical Servers for AD RMS and MSSQL
I know it is possible to install AD RMS and MSSQL in a single server (regardless of bad practices), but I would like to know the implications and if it will cause any underlying or prospective problems.
Architecture 4: 1 Virtual (VMWare) Servers for AD RMS and MSSQL
Most ideal in terms of cost, but what are the implications by doing so?
Thanks in advance for any advice!

Hi jeromeee,
AD RMS is at the end a web service talking to AD and has no problem running on a virtual server. For SQL it might makes sense to run it on a physical box but only for really large environments (dont ask me where really larger begins for RMS). So for the
projects I did i just used an existing SQL server/cluster provided from the client's SQL team. And you have to check performance as part of your operational tasks anyway, regardless if it is virtual or physical. And then you can move the SQL database to another
server, physical or virtual.
If you just plan with one RMS server SQL can be on the same machine. You could even add another RMS machine in the cluster for load balancing, but not for failover unless you don't care about the RMS log files.
Regards,
Lutz
Hi Lutz,
Thanks for your reply and input! It makes sense that both AD RMS and SQL Server could be running on a shared virtual environment (Architecture 4 as mentioned in my first post), and since it'll only be supporting around 600 users (at max), I feel that this
set up is the more favorable at the moment.
However, I don't quite understand what you meant by "..., but not for failover unless you don't care about the RMD log files.". Does this mean that if I plan to scale up by adding an additional RMS machine in the cluster for load balancing in future, there
is no possibility for failover?
Once again, thanks for your reply Lutz!

Similar Messages

Office files protected with AD RMS Client / SDK and Office

Hello,
I'm facing a strange issue when it comes to open an office file that was protected with AD RMS Client (to be precise, with an application built with AD RMS SDK 2.1). I would like to understand the reasons behind this issue (maybe some missing or wrong configuration)
or if this is just a gui only problem that does not affect the correct behaviour of the whole suite.
I'm not using templates.
If I protect an office file directly from MS Word (for example, but we have the same with Excel and Powerpoint) and save it, then I can close it and re-open it. The following infobar is displayed:
Now with AD RMS SDK 2.1 we have developed a standalone program that applies the same permissions on office files via the AD RMS Client. When the file is re-opened, the following infobar is displayed:
"Do Not Forward" is shown, no reference to email permissions was added by the client. The description is wrong too, as print permission has been granted, for example.
Is this behaviour correct?
How is this infobar created?
Is there a setting (either in client or in server) that may be wrong, and that leads to this issue?
Thank you,
Massimiliano

Thanks to Microsoft response, this issue has been resolved.
The license handle needs some additional properties to be set, in order for Office to display this information correctly.
IpcSetLicenseProperty(licenseHandle, FALSE, IPC_LI_DESCRIPTOR, pIpcTemplateInfo);
The last parameter is a PIPC_TEMPLATE_INFO pointer to a structure of type IPC_TEMPLATE_INFO where
wszName and wszDescription are filled with valid values.

Architecture Limitations with Replication of VM connected with Physical Mode RDM

what are Architecture Limitations with Replication of VM connected with Physical Mode RDM in vsphere replication. Why VMware is not supporting this?

vSphere Replication does not work with physical mode RDMs. This is because of the way that vSphere Replication and physical mode RDMs work.
As outlined in this: VMware KB: Difference between Physical compatibility RDMs and Virtual compatibility RDMs
It isn't currently possible for VR to do what it needs to do with physical mode RDMs.
Does this answer your question?

Microsoft Rights Management Sharing Application for Windows and the connection with AD RMS

Hi,
I have installed AD RMS and now installed on end users Microsoft Rights Management Sharing Application for Windows.
When I choose protect a document in any end user machine, does it connect with AD RMS server to get a certificate and encrypt the content, or does not use at all AD RMS services? What about when choosing to protect with an AD RMS template distributed
to end users?
Thanks

Hi Ardi -
The first time a user creates or consumes protected content, they must contact the RMS server to "bootstrap". In this process, the user obtains certificates to identity them within the context of RMS.
Once a user has bootstrapped, he or she can create protected protected content without access to the RMS server.
To open protected content, a user must connect to the AD RMS server to obtain a "use license".
Does that help?
Micah LaNasa
Synergy Advisors
synergyadvisors.biz

E-Recruitment 6.0 Architecture considerations

I am looking for some documentation which covers the points to be considered while designing the E-rec architecture. Target versions :
E-rec 6.0,
ERP/HCM : ERP 6.0 EhP4 on NW7.0 EhP1
ESS/MSS portal (in intranet): NW7.0 SP??
Existing SAP portal (with KM) : NW7.0 SP18
Here are our current considerations :
1) Standalone Vs Integrated : We are decising to go for integrated approach, i.e. E-rec and ERP/HCM on the same instance. With this we are accpecting the challanges with version dependencies and taking the advanntage of lesser systems and so less administration/ configuration (RFC/ALE) cost.
2) Fronend (UI) or w/o Frontend : Here if the role of the fronend is just a proxy, then we can use ISA or apachy instead of using additional SAP instance (Landscape). With ISA or apachy we can maintain the reverse proxy rules and so the external candidate willl not see hostname and other sensitive details of the URL.
Can someone please throw some light on this? Can someone redirect me to the right documentations?
Thanks in advance.
Shrikrishna

Thanks Sunny for your reply.
My question was around necessity of E-recruitment frontend.
My uderstanding is as follows:
E-recruitment frontend is ABAP+JAVA (NW 7.0) install with E-recruitment add-on (same as E-recruitment backend install). E-recruitement frontend (UI) contains user data and repositories of webdynpro required for E-recruitment application. So this means in all E-recruitment implementation needs this UI, webdynpros and user data. This frontend piece will be accessed by expernal candidates and non-registered recruiters (anonymous users) from internet, and so this piece MUST be in DMZ (or in other words accessible from inetrnet)
Question is When we are using integrated E-recruitment option (i.e. install ERP 6.0with HCM and E-recruitment backend/frontend for internal candidates and ALSO E-RECRUITMENT FRONTEND for EXTERNAL CANDIDATES on same instance), then we are probably exposing our ERP or HCM data on internet. Am I right? Can this be addressed by Proxis like Apache? Are there any BIG security concerns? Does customer go with such approach?
or we can completely deloy this E-recruitment frontend for external candidates functionality on SAP enterprise portal, but it do not have any ABAP stank.. Any issues?
Thanks,
Krishna

Architectural considerations on WLPS JSP tags

Hello,
I'm now looking at the WLPS (2.0) examples, more specifically to the
BuyBeans example.
I have experience in developping web applications using J2EE
(servlets-jsp-ejb).
Something in the bean example is very disturbing to me : I've always tried
to maintain a clear separation of concerns between the different blocks of
an application, namely business logic, control and view. Those of you
familiar with it will have recognized the MVC (model-view-controller)
paradigm.
And in the bean example, I see the JSP full of tags mixing the view and
controller roles, even some of business logic sometimes.
So my question is : is there a way of using the personalization/commerce
server while maintaining the separation of roles described above? And if so,
is it an efficient way of working or does it create too much overhead from a
development time point of view?
I hope I'm being clear enough. Please ask for clarifications if needed.
Thanks in advance for sharing your opinion on this subject
Nicolas

Nicolas,
I agree that the integration between PS and CS is not as tight as it could
be and we are working (hard!) on improving this right now. There are options
however, and a limted integration between the two is possible. The
DestinationDeterminers are pluggable so it should be possible to write
custom code to do both. As you say, this may not be an option on a tight
deadline if you need to deliver immediately.
Incidentally, the main reason we did not want to replicate the "old"
BuyBeans demo was that it contained a lot of code that was specific to the
BuyBeans site and look and feel. We wanted to create a "template" site that
was a much better starting point for users to customize.
I appreciate your comments, and I think you will be very pleasantly
surprised with coming releases which address things like graphical webflow
definition and move PS (and Portal) onto the Webflow model.
Sincerely,
Daniel Selman
Nicolas Lejeune <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Thank you Daniel,
I actually had a good look at the commerce server 3.1. You're right,
pipelines and
webflow are useful things, although the latter is a bit tricky since there
is no editor yet.
The big problem with version 3.1 is that the perso. server and thecommerce
server
are not compatible anymore. I guess that's why the buyBeans example isout,
and
the new commerce example (the catalog) is not a portal.
They are incompatible because with the PS, everything has to be sent tothe
Portal
Service Manager, and with the CS, everything has to be sent to the webflow
manager.
It might be possible to somehow combine them, but it's certainly not
straightforward
and we don't have time to play around in my actual project. I asked a BEA
instructor
about it but he had no solution.
Since the portal look&feel was a priority to us, wo we decided to drop the
CS, and
use only the PS.
Any comments on this subject ?
Nicolas
"Daniel Selman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Nicolas,
MVC considerations were a big part of the rationale behind the Webflow
and
Pipeline architecture used in WLCS 3.1. I suggest you take a look at the
latest release, which does a much better job at handling this (complex)
topic.
Sincerely,
Daniel Selman
Nicolas Lejeune <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Hello,
I'm now looking at the WLPS (2.0) examples, more specifically to the
BuyBeans example.
I have experience in developping web applications using J2EE
(servlets-jsp-ejb).
Something in the bean example is very disturbing to me : I've always
tried
to maintain a clear separation of concerns between the different
blocks
of
an application, namely business logic, control and view. Those of you
familiar with it will have recognized the MVC (model-view-controller)
paradigm.
And in the bean example, I see the JSP full of tags mixing the view
and
controller roles, even some of business logic sometimes.
So my question is : is there a way of using thepersonalization/commerce
server while maintaining the separation of roles described above? Andif
so,
is it an efficient way of working or does it create too much overhead
from
a
development time point of view?
I hope I'm being clear enough. Please ask for clarifications if
needed.
>>>
Thanks in advance for sharing your opinion on this subject
Nicolas

Enterprise Services - Architecture - Interaction with ECC

Can someone please link to architectural docuementation for Enterprise Services which explains how NW PI interacts with ECC?

Hi Jesse,
> I've already searched and not found what I was looking for
Which means you haven't used proper keywords. PI and ECC integration (using proxy, RFC, Idoc etc) is well documented and I am surprized to know that you weren't able to find it.
>So you should assume that the poster has already searched.
Nope. This is very common for people to do "Crowd-sourcing" and "do-my-job" and post question without searching (or rather lazy search) and that's why moderators are there
Let me give you few keywords for search.
ECC Proxy PI = Proxy connection between PI and ECC (provider as well consumer)
ABAP Proxy PI = same as above
SWF_BAM = Business Event triggering outbound services
Still you won't be able to find then read following:
http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/index?rid=/library/uuid/c0e7ae66-be6d-2a10-d385-92e6e67dee10
http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/index?rid=/library/uuid/50d69314-1be0-2b10-11ab-8045021f0c3a
>If you have links, please do share, but please do not again reply to anyone's post with, "Go search."
Sorry if you are looking for spoon-feeding then you are asking at wrong place. I can only help you with some basics and then you need to figure things out by yourself and "one-liner" question won't help either.
Regards,
Gourav

Architecture choice with TimesTen

Hi,
I have just started reading through TimesTen so the question might sound very obvious to most of you guys. I was wondering if this could possibly be a) feasible and if so b) good architecture choice if I introduce a TimesTen db on top of existing disk based Db so that the TimesTen is a replica of the physical one with the intention of underlying system to populate tables in physical db (existing architecture so I don't want to change that) but then those data get replicated into TimesTen for faster access by upper layer components.
I hope I was able to provide a clear picture of my question.
Thanks,
S.

This is a very common deployment model for TimesTen and conceptually this is both feasible and a good option. As with anything, the devil is in the detail; what is the underlying disk based database (Oracle or something else)? What kind of SQL and data types does you app use? What database APIs does it use? What are the data volumes? How volatile is the data? and so on...
Chris

Architectural designing with Adobe software?

Hello,
Can anyone tell me if there is software from Adobe that lets you design architectural drawings?
I'm searching for my own company [url removed by host]
With kind regards,
Leon Herbers

While you could design architechural drawings in Illustrator, specialty programs offer certain advantages. Architectural drawing were originally designed by hand. Illustrator is certainly a step up from that. Programs like AutoCad, SolidWorks offer advantages.

Architecture Question with WebLogic

          WE have started a new project using WebLogic (in fact we will do that very
          soon). Since we are new to WebLogic, we are questioning the following
          tradeoff:
          About the system:
          The end system will be a web-based application providing secure access to
          its web users. The business logics (combination of some session and entity
          beans) store data in Oracle. The system is very report intensive, meaning in
          most of the time, people using it to get some report. The system also have a
          specific web interface to specific user for administration purpose. The
          admin ultimately create, update, remove data stored in Oracle.
          Questions 1 -- Servlets, JSP, and use of RMI:
          To generate the report, we decide to use WebLogic Servlet with JSP. There
          are 40 different reports, and each is mapped to one servlets. There will be
          a servlet manager to start other servlets, the ones that actually using the
          JSP to dynamically generating the HTML pages (the report).
          The Servlets themselves have to interface with the business logic objects
          using RMI. They have to do that since we don't want to re-implement the
          business logic in the Servlet again. The Business logic (Java Beans)
          executes on separate NT computer. Is this is a good architecture?
          Question 2 -- Applet/application and RMI:
          The system needs to interact with some admin users. To do that, the business
          logic portion (the session and entity Beans) provide remote interfaces to
          the applets/application. With Applet, Of course we can embed them in the
          HTML pages.Note that the business logic Beans are the ones also used by the
          servlets.
          Anyone see any problem with this approach? Is there any other alternative?
          Remember this approach has to be worry about synchronization between the
          report pages IF data is changed through applet/application by some
          administrator? This is something that we like to avoid! Anyone has a better
          alternative architecture or any suggestion?
          Thanks,
          Mansour


Manish,
          See below...
          >
          >WE have started a new project using WebLogic (in fact we will do that very
          >soon). Since we are new to WebLogic, we are questioning the following
          >tradeoff:
          >
          >About the system:
          >The end system will be a web-based application providing secure access to
          >its web users. The business logics (combination of some session and entity
          >beans) store data in Oracle. The system is very report intensive, meaning in
          >most of the time, people using it to get some report. The system also have a
          >specific web interface to specific user for administration purpose. The
          >admin ultimately create, update, remove data stored in Oracle.
          >
          So currently, you're supporting two different clients - one typically
          generating reports using a browser-based interface (HTTP/HTML) and the
          other a little more complex which may need the functionality of an
          applet or application.
          Servlets/JSPs should definitely be used to bridge the gap between your
          browser-based clients and your application's components. How dynamic
          is the underlying data used to generate the reports? Are the majority
          of reports static or based on adhoc queries? Sounds like they may be
          fairly static. If so, consider caching the reports somehow to prevent
          database hits. Although, consider the fact that the database caches
          data a lot better than we can - typically. I would create a few test
          cases to validate an approach.
          >Questions 1 -- Servlets, JSP, and use of RMI:
          >To generate the report, we decide to use WebLogic Servlet with JSP. There
          >are 40 different reports, and each is mapped to one servlets. There will be
          >a servlet manager to start other servlets, the ones that actually using the
          >JSP to dynamically generating the HTML pages (the report).
          >The Servlets themselves have to interface with the business logic objects
          >using RMI. They have to do that since we don't want to re-implement the
          >business logic in the Servlet again. The Business logic (Java Beans)
          >executes on separate NT computer. Is this is a good architecture?
          >
          Sounds like you guys have decided on using the second access model for
          JSPs and this certainly provides the most flexibility. Good decision.
          I'm assuming you really mean your business components are EJBs and not
          straight-up RMI objects as your statement may be interpreted?!?!?!
          EJBs are the correct choice for a lot of reasons.
          >Question 2 -- Applet/application and RMI:
          >The system needs to interact with some admin users. To do that, the business
          >logic portion (the session and entity Beans) provide remote interfaces to
          >the applets/application. With Applet, Of course we can embed them in the
          >HTML pages.Note that the business logic Beans are the ones also used by the
          >servlets.
          >Anyone see any problem with this approach? Is there any other alternative?
          >
          Using servlets to provide an interface to clients who choose to speak
          HTTP to your application is a good approach. For browser-based clients
          its a must and you may easily use the same servlets in your
          applets/applications as well. However, do consider the fact that your
          applets/applications may speak T3 to WL. My only concern with the
          latter approach is duplication of logic in the client itself and you
          will certainly want to eliminate this. Leveraging the servlets will
          certainly be a benefit.
          >Remember this approach has to be worry about synchronization between the
          >report pages IF data is changed through applet/application by some
          >administrator? This is something that we like to avoid! Anyone has a better
          >alternative architecture or any suggestion?
          >
          Consider a report manager layer that will be responsible for ensuring
          the latest report is potentially cached and available or is
          responsible for generating the report (by calling the servlet or bean
          or whatever...).
          Again, if the underlying data is fairly dynamic, then I would tend to
          generate the reports each time and rely on the database to cache data,
          optimize queries, handle synchronization issues... rather than
          attempting to cache reports in WL. If the data is fairly static
          though, developing a report manager layer that can cache reports...
          may be worth while.
          Jason

Design considerations with clustering

anybody have any docs (besides the weblogic ones)/comments on things to
          consider when designing an app/sys (jsp/serlvet/ejb) that will be deployed
          in cluster.
          thanks.
          Tinou Bao
          http://www.tinou.com
          mailto:[email protected]


I too use stateful session beans when appropriate. My suggestion is to
          avoid clustering them (WL added the feature in 6.0). I don't doubt that the
          replication works, however a web-based architecture with HTTP session
          replication is typically sufficient and already expensive enough. Designing
          an application that requires EJB replication introduces a lot of variables
          that I believe are best avoided.
          Peace,
          Cameron Purdy
          Tangosol, Inc.
          http://www.tangosol.com
          +1.617.623.5782
          WebLogic Consulting Available
          "giri" <[email protected]> wrote in message
          news:[email protected]...
          > Cameron,
          > Is there any specific reason for not using stateful session EJBs in a
          cluster?
          > We are using'em to store search results in our application and the data is
          not
          > actually sensitive. So it need not to be replicated. If we lose that
          > information we can seacrh again.
          >
          > thanks
          > --giri
          >
          > Cameron Purdy wrote:
          >
          > > 1) The only "global variable" in the cluster is the database -- static
          > > doesn't cut it
          > > 2) Don't load up your HTTP sessions with non-transient data because it
          will
          > > get carted around your network and kill performance
          > > 3) If you change something in the session that needs to be replicated,
          you
          > > must actually call setAttribute on the session or it will not get
          replicated
          > > 4) Simple tasks like time-based or periodic application events become a
          > > real pain -- how do you get exactly one server -- no more no less -- in
          the
          > > cluster to run something, and have it guaranteed to be run. Avoid these
          if
          > > possible.
          > > 5) Don't cluster stateful session EJBs unless you have a really good
          reason
          > > to.

Architectural Problem with file upload feature. URGENT!!!

Hi,
          We have an architecture in a production site which has iPlanet in the front & WebLogic at the back. The web-tier and the middle-tier both reside on the WebLogic server & only the static assets (images, PDFs etc.) are serviced by iPlanet. Recently we had to incorporate a new feature to our existing site to allow the user to upload images onto the server. The problem with this is that since our web-tier is in WebLogic, the uploaded file would reside in the WebLogic server's document root and will not be accessible to the iPlanet server. Is there any way that I can store the images directly in iPlanet even though the servlets reside on WebLogic. I know this query sounds a bit weird & I'm asking for too much but I also have this feeling the architecture of our site is not very different from a lot of other sites & other sites also have upload functionalities, so how do they go about dealing with this problem. Porting the web-tier to iPlanet is not a solutions since there are a lot parties involved & we cannot at this point take that decision.
          Would really appreciate any help from you guys.
          Thanks in advance,
          VD.


u can have AppServers serve the image if u want to.
          u just need to set the path correctly and save them in the right directory.
          we are already doing it with Iplanet and we wrote a sample for Weblogic6.1 too.
          if i remember correctly u need to put the image directiry say "imageDirectory" in "wlserver6.1"
          then u need to access via http://apache_webserver_box:80/weblogic_identifier/imageDirectory/myimage.jpg
          Hope it helps!!!
          -aseem
          vikram wrote:
          > Hi,
          > We have an architecture in a production site which has iPlanet in the front & WebLogic at the back. The web-tier and the middle-tier both reside on the WebLogic server & only the static assets (images, PDFs etc.) are serviced by iPlanet. Recently we had to incorporate a new feature to our existing site to allow the user to upload images onto the server. The problem with this is that since our web-tier is in WebLogic, the uploaded file would reside in the WebLogic server's document root and will not be accessible to the iPlanet server. Is there any way that I can store the images directly in iPlanet even though the servlets reside on WebLogic. I know this query sounds a bit weird & I'm asking for too much but I also have this feeling the architecture of our site is not very different from a lot of other sites & other sites also have upload functionalities, so how do they go about dealing with this problem. Porting the web-tier to iPlanet is not a solutions since there are a lot parties involved & we cannot at this point take that decision.
          >
          > Would really appreciate any help from you guys.
          >
          > Thanks in advance,
          > VD.

Knowledge Provider KPRO architecture integration with Documentum

Hi All,
As a part of KPro architecture it is understood that the SAP Content server at the bottom layer can be replaced by any third party Content server and in our case we wish to make use of Documentum content server in place of SAP content server
On digging further it is understood that the integration point is an HTTP script
Currently http script is having a default value to point to SAP content server as ContentServer/ContentServer.dll
Now we need to point the http script to point to Documentum ?
Our environment is in solaris and hence instead of dll it should be a shared library .so file.
Have anyone tried that?
If so how can we achieve this? How can we make the http script to point to Documentum in KPro

Hi Guys
Can anyone give a clue on this. We are stuck at this phase.

Architectural Issues with AIA Asynchronous MEP

Hi,
We are implementing an AIA service which should follow an Asynchronous (request/delayed-response) MEP. I need some advice from people who have implemented this pattern.
The rough requirements are that we have two ABCS Requesters for two different systems, which read from files and call the EBS (eventually there may be an EBF involved as well but don't want to confuse the question). The response for the operation will take up to 10 minutes but we need to deal with the response when it comes back at the requester level.
It looks something like this
ABCSRequester1
<--> EBS <--> ABCSProvider1
ABCSRequester2
My question is, why does AIA only create a single port service in ABCS Provider and it forces me to call back via a seperate WSDL when I select the request/delayed-response option in he service constructor.
This means that I must have two EBS services (one EBS Request and one EBS Response) - unless I am missing something (which is entirely possible) and dynamically route the response to the appropriate endpoint and then correlate it.
I understand this is possible, but it seems an overkill to me when I could have two ports on the Provider ABCS wsdl (which the service constructor does not create), which I could then callback on and the EBS will then create a callback to the calling client. This would make the whole process easier to manage IMO.
I could change the generated WSDL and add a callback port, but as the service constructor generates the ABCS like this, I do not want to just alter this without understanding maybe why I shouldn't.
Do people recommend the Fire and Forget Async MEP as seems to be documented in AIA documentation for a scenario like this and if so why?
Have people implemented the two port single WSDL solution (as is created by SOA Suite if you build a service as Async from scratch) as an AIA provider?
If anybody has a sample Async project in AIA showing this sort of scenario, I would love to see it.

Hello,
Provider ABCS does not need to have 2 port types for this scenario. You would have 2 port types in Provider ABCS only if it interacts with provider application in an asynchronous manner. In that situation, provider application will be sending the callback response by invoking the service operation defined in the callback response port type within provider ABCS.
Your question is more about why we need to have 2 EBS - one for processing request and another for processing callback response. For this situation, you do not have to add additional port type in provider ABCS WSDL.
You can certainly leverage the mediator’s call back facility to eliminate the Response EBS that is normally recommended for processing the callback. 11g mediator does have the support and you can leverage that.
We did look at this feature during the 11g adoption and decided not to leverage this feature after prototyping for the following reasons:
1.     EBS Operations need to support fire-and-forget as well as asynchronous delayed response MEPs. We had to support this functionality of Requester ABCS at run time indicating in the EBM whether it needs the response or not. EBS.Operation would be invoked by both fire-and-forget and asynchronous delayed response MEP requesters; and for the delayed responses, ResponseEBS.Operation would be used. Hardwiring the MEP at the EBS Operation level would lead us to create 2 operations – one for fire-and-forget and another for asynchronous delayed response
2.     This stateless programming model allows us to be OSB-friendly
3.     To be backwardly compatible with 2.x services
Any custom solution built by you can certainly leverage the 11g Mediator's callback facility provided your requester ABCS is coded always to receive a callback from EBS. You could certainly leverage this pattern if you dont have a need for Requester ABCS to invoke EBS using fire-and-forget pattern.
Ravi

Performance considerations with mapping outside the BPE

Hello together,
we have an Integration Process with 2 more or less complex transformations steps (i.e. Message Merging).
Since the overall performance is rather poor, we consider to let the mapping take place outside the IP. This
means we would have no more transformation step within our IP. Instead we use Interface-Mappings between
the abstract an the Inbound-Interfaces.
Does anybody know whether this approach leads to any significant performance advantages or not?
Regards Gunnar

The design with mapping outside BPM is always better in terms of performance.
Regards,
Prateek

Architecture Considerations with AD RMS

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for