OSB - Business Case for Adapters Vs Transport

Hi
1. Can you please explain me a business case on when one should use Db/JMS/FTP/File Adapter in OSB and when should one go in for equivalent transports for configuring Business/Proxy services? Would be great if you could point me to some documentation on which approach should be chosen over the other/any benefits that a particular approach has etc..
2. Also is there some Oracle Documentation available on comparision between OSB and BPEL? When should a particular product be chosen? I tried searching for an example with a business scenario which provides details on when to use OSB and when to use BPEL but havent been able to get much info.
Thanks!

Can you please explain me a business case on when one should use Db/JMS/FTP/File Adapter in OSB and when should one go in for equivalent transports for configuring Business/Proxy services? Would be great if you could point me to some documentation on which approach should be chosen over the other/any benefits that a particular approach has etc.. For DB, you have to use DB adapter in OSB beacuse there is no seprate transport defined for DB. For FILE, you have both options - FILE transport and FILE adapter (in OSB 11g). FILE transport should be the preferred option (never seen documented anywhere) as it has been designed as part of the product and hence should be faster (although never comapred). For JMS and FTP, you have to use respective transports defined in OSB because OSB does not support JCA adapters for FTP/JMS (you may refer - 25.2.1 Adapter Support
at http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E14571_01/doc.1111/e15866/jca.htm#BABBICIA)
2. Also is there some Oracle Documentation available on comparision between OSB and BPEL? When should a particular product be chosen? I tried searching for an example with a business scenario which provides details on when to use OSB and when to use BPEL but havent been able to get much info.OSB is a dedicated routing product and must be used for scenarios where only routing is required along with light transformations. Being a stateless product OSB can bear heavy load as well as gives better performance. BPEL can do what OSB does (to a certain extent) but being a statefull product it is much slower than OSB and should be used only for scenarios where process orchestration/human workflow intervention is required.
OSB being a service bus, can mediate among almost each and every kind of protocols but BPEL would need adapters for such mediation.
Regards,
Anuj

Similar Messages

Business Case for OCM

I am interested to see if anyone has any content they are able to share around the business case for OCM presented in a manner that has managers understand what the OCM game is about and why it is important to fund it and support it.

Our firm has incorporated OCM in our SAP/BPC delivery methodology and it has met with a very warm acceptance by our clients. Our OCM material has been maturing for over a decade, but is customized for each client, and clearly is a competitive advantage for us. So we are more than a bit hesitant to publish it to an open forum. I've been involved with OCM related work since 1991 and agree with many of the commentaries above regarding the 'critical' deal-breaking nature of well managed OC. I have a goofy mantra I use to describe this reality... "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't necessarily make him do the backstroke."
I have been saying for a long time that IT systems work is the technological equivalent of human organ transplant surgery. I use this analogy with our clients and it seems to help everyone get it intellectually. Just think of the key issue surrounding organ transplants and how that can be applied to our work. Compatibility of tissue, rejection, anti-rejection medication, severing of vital connections and reconnecting them (nerves, muscles, vessels, etc.). All the preparation that goes into it it (technically and emotionally).
Isnt' it interesting that when we introduce a new system that "replaces" an old one, the company, just like the human body, sends out corporate white blood cells to kill the foreign object even though its very life depends upon the survival of that object? So what do we do? We administer anti-rejection medication IN ADVANCE of the operation and after to ensure that NATURAL reaction does not happen. We have to take equivalent measures when we introduce new systems. The OCM issue then is to define what equals anti-rejection medication in a corporate envivronment. Our OCM discipline defines that and engages the organization in creating it and administering it to itself so it can optimize its success.
As for getting it in terms of the bottom line, y'all are right--that is a little tough for most of us to document, but you'd have to have been hiding under a rock and not read any relevant magazine, blog, or whitepaper for the past 15+ year to be so ignorant of this histoical fact. The IT landscape is littered with the dead or battered bodies of leaders and followers who have launched their ships unprepared to deal with this monster.
Our OCM kick-off Workshop seems to create in the minds of our clients a clear and undeniable gap between what they'd get if they don't take care of these matters.
Sorry to go so long on this, but it's one of my favorite topics as you can tell. Hope this is useful in some small way.

Advice on how to build a business case for partitioning

Hi Everyone,
I'm the architect of a business intelligence/data warehouse team. We've grown to the point where I believe we need database partitioning. I believe we are at about 1.5 TB of data. Our largest tables are in the 100 million row counts with relatively wide record lengths (~100 columns). Our just sort of large tables are in the 10 million to 50 million range, however, they have very long row lengths (~300 columns). Based on our future source system plans, our data will become even more granular and there is still a need to maintain our historical data.
Those aren't the only reasons, but are some of the larger driving issues that are making most members of our team think it's time we purchased database partitioning. Our team is pretty unanimous for partitioning, many of our source system partners also consider it a "no-brainer", however, we're getting push back from our CIO saying that 1.5 TB and 100 million records isn't that much data as compared to other "big data" companies and that it doesn't require partitioning.
Does anyone have a advice on how to build an business case for purchasing partitioning? Is there a good way to demonstrate cost-vs-benefit value?
Thanks for your feedback.
-=Joe

I'm going to be contrarian and start from the end of your post.
>
Does anyone have a advice on how to build an business case for purchasing partitioning? Is there a good way to demonstrate cost-vs-benefit value?
>
Yes - forget about cost-vs-benefit. That's the CIOs job not yours. You're an architect. Stick to architecture. Design and implement the architecture needed to meet the business requirements of your projects. If you are given requirements that can't be met with your current infrastructure then that is when you should propose alternative infrastructure.
>
We've grown to the point where I believe we need database partitioning. I believe we are at about 1.5 TB of data. Our largest tables are in the 100 million row counts with relatively wide record lengths (~100 columns). Our just sort of large tables are in the 10 million to 50 million range, however, they have very long row lengths (~300 columns). Based on our future source system plans, our data will become even more granular and there is still a need to maintain our historical data.
Those aren't the only reasons, but are some of the larger driving issues that are making most members of our team think it's time we purchased database partitioning.
>
NONSENSE! That's what ALL of the above statements represent - UTTER AND ABSOLUTE NONSENSE.
Who cares what you believe? Beliefs don't carry weight, facts do. You do list some facts: 1.5 TB of data, 100 million row counts, wide record lengths, large sorts, long rows, data will get more granular, need to maintain historical data.
Ho Hum! So what? How do ANY of those facts indicate any sort of issue or problem, existing or potential, at all? They don't. You haven't provided information that suggests that ANY of those facts illustrate what Justin referred to as 'pain points'.
Unless those facts prevent you from doing your job of providing an architecture that meets the business requirements you don't have a leg to stand on.
My first reaction to your request would be similar to your cio's. Implicit in your cio's response are some questions you need to ask and answer
1. What is it that you do now that you can't do with the current architecture?
2. What is it that you need to do for an upcoming requirement that you can't do with the current architecture?
3. What alternatives are available to modify the current architecture to do what can't be done in items #1 and #2 above?
That #3 is where my skepticism lies. You seem to have already concluded that partitioning is the answer. Why? What problems do you think it will solve? Why not RAC? Why not a separate data warehouse system? Why not split that historical data off into an OLAP system? Maybe that can reduce the size of the OLTP system to where you won't have whatever problems you are having.
Partitioning is just about addressing some performance issues. A lot of times partitioning is used more for management purposes such as loading/offloading data without impacting those huge tables you are talking about.
If my hot queries use a primary key value to retrieve data it isn't going to matter much if the tables are partitioned or not.
That is what sets the context for what Justin is telling you. You and your team need to document the constraints (and SLAs) your system currently has, how close you are to hitting those constraints, your options for avoiding/evading those constraints using the current infrastructure and the options for avoiding/evading those constraints using a modified architecture.
It is up to the CIO to do the cost-benefit analysis of working within the limits imposed by the current infrastructure versus modifiying the architecture.

Common business action for Email/FTP transports behaving differently

Hi B2B Gurus,
We have configured a common business action for incoming documents for different transports (Email and FTP). Since the exchange protocol is "Custom document over generic exchange" and the payload is the same for the 2 protocols, we had to create a common business action as the Document definition (identification criteria) is the same. We have ofcourse created separate agreements with separate DCs but the same business action.
In the above scenario, it works fine for all well formed documents (XML). We are observing that it it throwing the "unable to identify the document protocol" error when the invalid payload is sent through Email protocol but is allowing the document into Oracle B2B for FTP. We are using Oracle 10g and are on the latest patch.
Can you pls let us know if this is the behaviour expected? Shouldn;t it be the same as the business action is the same ? Is transport making a difference? pls let us know asap as this is blocking some test scenarios as we have to go live soon.
Regards
Kavitha

Hi Kavitha,
Do you mean to say that the agreement is identified based on the "identification criteria" for Email protocol and not on the Email ids?In case of EMail transport, Email ID's are used for partner identification but for XML document identification, only XPATH is used.
Is there anything that can be changed in our configuration to allow invalid documents pass thru b2B so that the validation can be handled by our backend?Treat XML files like Flat files and keep validation disabled and then invalid documents can also be passed.
In this case, we also see that the idenfication criteria (XPATH) value is coming fine but the XML is not well formed.If you have configured B2B for custom XML and incoming XML is malformed then anyhow it will fail in EMail transport as document it self will not be parsed and hence XPATH can not be applied. As I mentioned above, if you still want to accept this doc, configure B2B for custom flat file instead of custom XML.
Regards,
Anuj

What's the business case for using adobe forms for handling print forms

Hi
We are just starting our SAP project and are looking at the possibility to use Adobe forms for generating and printing our forms, like purchase orders, invoices etc.
My Question is:
1. Is this possible / adviseable ?
2. if so - what's the business case in using Adobe forms - <i> We have been looking on the SAP Pricing for adobe interactive form, and in our point of view it's grotesque high</i>
3. What other options do we have - do we need to settle with SAP Script / Smartforms ?
Regards
Morten Nielsen

Hi Morten,
1. Is this possible / adviseable ?
As far I know SAP is going to stop support for SAPScript in coming years (I don't know exact dates). It is pretty much advisable to use Adobe Print Forms.
2. if so - what's the business case in using Adobe forms - We have been looking on the
SAP Pricing for adobe interactive form, and in our point of view it's grotesque high
We can use Adobe Print Forms where ever we can able to use SApscripts/PDF print Forms.
3. What other options do we have - do we need to settle with SAP Script / Smartforms ?
It is better to settle with Adobe forms rather than using SAPscript/Smart forms. One of the main reason for this is maintainance is much easier than SAPscript/Smart forms.
But remember that Java Stack need to be installed in order to use Adobe Forms.
Please visit the below SDN area on Adobe forms for more details.
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/interactiveforms
Thanks
Ramakrishna
Message was edited by:
Ramakrishna Ramisetti

Need Business Case for iBook and DayTimer Stuff

I'm having a hard time trying to find a case for my iBook that still has room for my 8.5 x 11 Day Timer portfolio that looks, how shall I say, "professional"??? I'm one of those Bible carryin' guys, too. Help, suggestions?

Hi Gebo,
What size do you have? Do you want metal, leather, or other? Do you want a messenger type bag, brief case, or something else? I personally like the:
Targus radius Leather Messenger
Anything by Folee
McKlein V Series Morgan
McKlein I Series River
Jon
G4 1.33Ghz iBook, G4 iMac 1Ghz, G3 500Mhz iBook, Macintosh 128K, eMate... Mac OS X (10.4.5) Airport EX, Moto Razr, iLife '06, SmartDisk 160Gb, Apple BT Mouse, Sight..

Issue on OSB business service configuration with email transport

Hi,
I am trying to create a Business Service with email Transport configuration. While creation, I have selected ServiceType as MessagingService.Then in Message Type Configuration page have selected Request Message Type as Text and Response Message Type as None. Now in Transport Configuration page email option is not showing in protocol.It's only showing http , jms option there.
While I tried the same in some other OSB installation environment I am able to find email option in Protocol.
Any idea what could be potential reason of it.How can I able to see email option in Protocol ?
Regards,
Subhra

Hi,
Please check the state of Email Transport Provider in the admin console it should be in the active state , and also Go to JMS Module --> jms resources and check dist_wlsb.internal.transport.task.queue.email_auto.
its heath and assosiated member will be working fine.
Regards
Bharat

Business Case for SOA

Hi,
We run all our systems on Oracle (including eBusiness Suite, Oracle database for bespoke apps, Oracle Spatial, etc.) and have been able to use database links to join everything together very nicely. We mainly use APEX to produce easy-to-use applications, achieving very rapid development cycles. We also use JDeveloper to generate JSP pages.
Yet I keep getting pressured to migrate to a Service Oriented Architecture. Why should I? What business benefits would we get? Every time I look at it it seems to me that we would need to spend money on new server software, on more training for our developers and our productivity would take a serious hit.
Am I missing something?
Patrick.

Hi. I think there is a lot of hype around SOA. If you realize that SOA is really about architecting and implementing that are easily developed, easily managed, easily extended, easily debugged, then you can get a sense of what SOA is about. Vendors will hype their own particular approach to a Service Oriented Architecture. I think what you have to think about is why you are "being pressured" to think SOA.
In my mind, any solution must be architected and implemented keeping in ind the overall project lifecycle cost of ownership. This includes cost of architecting, developing, debugging, deploying, operating, extending, depreciating, end-of-life'ing, and replacing. Therefore, any products, techniques, approaches that you take to mnimize the overall cost is a good thing.
Therefore, governance plays a very very strong part here. SOA governance is fundamentally about knowing what you have, what you need, and how to get there in the most expedient manner possible.
Anyway, I could talk at length on this subject, but hopefully you get a flavor for why SOA.

User Stats/Demogs to Convince Mgmt of Business Case for iTunes U

I'm looking for some sort of supporting statistics and demographics about iTunes U users to help support my case with management, so we can begin using iTunes U.
I work for a professional association, and this would be a great channel for dissemination of our podcasts, research, education, and other media.

This has happened with at least the previous 2 to 3 version of iTunes, but get same issue with iTunes 7.4.2. Before a week ago, it wouldn't display an error dialog, it would change my access from authenticated or site admin to public anonymous.
Now, it displays a dialog, when I am in a course, click navigation down one level...
We could not complete your iTunes Store request. The requested resource was not found.
There was an error in the iTunes Store. Please try again later.
One workaround, is when in the course, click on the course navigation, then you can click sub-navigation and not get the error.

A business case for billing customer for asset use

One of my clients has a equipment which he hires it out for customers . Based on its usage (like if customers uses it for for more than some quantity ) then he wants to bill customer automatically . He says while service confirmation if quantity is of usage is more than some X unit , then automatic billing is to be triggered else no billing .
For equipment maintenance he wants PR to be created automatically from service order .After vendor invoicing , at service confirmation he wants to bill the customer with vendor invoice amount .
I am aware of PM order process , but can any one pl suggest step by step solution for the scenario ?
Thanks in advance
This is a duplicate [thread|http://forums.sdn.sap.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2084697&tstart=0]
Edited by: Paul Meehan on Nov 23, 2011 4:45 PM

regarding the selection of the servers based on the content requested, the current CSM is limited to match only 6 - 10 host name while the CSS has no limitation except the size of the config.
The only protocol that can be loadbalanced based on content - so layer 5-7 is HTTP and RTSP.
IF your citrix application makes use of these protocols, you can do L5/7 content rules.
My favorite between CSS and CSM is the CSM because of its ability to link a vserver/content rule to a vlan and because there is no such thing as garbage collection which is annoying on the CSS with long lasting flows.
Regards,
Gilles.

Your Comments Please: Business Case for XI

We are a small site commencing a major project that will involve integrating SAP R/3, BW, CRM, and various non-SAP applications (web and client/server). The applications have a number of external interfaces, receiving data from or sending data to external agencies.
I'm trying to understand the costs and benefits of including XI in the solution and would welcome comments from people already using the tool. I've read a lot of the SAP documentation so understand that it is the best thing since sliced bread, but I'd also be interested to hear your general comments and also your thoughts on the following specific points:
(1) Maintenance effort: since we are a small site we don't have teams of people to work on each piece of technology, what is likely to be the time and effort of the training, initial configuration and on-going support?
(2) Data transformation capabilities: are there extensive functions to manipulate the data without writing code? If you are familiar with ETL tools such as DataStage, Informatica, etc. how does it compare?
(3) Performance with large data sets: one of our external data sources will include about two million rows of data per day, how would XI cope?
(4) What is it like to work with? Do you spend half your time searching for, and trying to decipher notes, and applying patches, or is it generally an enjoyable experience? (for someone who doesn't enjoy the above) -- and if so why is this forum so popular?
Many thanks
Rob

Hi Robert,
I have just starting using XI 3.0 and am finding it a good experience on the whole. In answer to your points :
1. Maintenance effort is low. Once you have grasped the concepts and steps for development it is relatively easy with no coding (although you should really have a basic understanding of Java). I would recommend attending the SAP XI 3.0 Fundamentals course for training purposes. The initial configuration has been minimal so far as it is Basis who should perform the basic configuration steps during the installation
2. The mapping tool is a GUI driven tool and has a lot of basic functions for transforming data. It also allows the use of any specific Java functions you may already use to transform data
3. Performance would be driven by the volume of data and the number of integration servers you have. I would personally recommend having an Integration Server solely for use for the very high volume data set you mention.
4. From what I have seen so far, it is an enjoyable experience. Patches should be applied regularly by your Basis team so you shouldn't need to worry too much about that side of things.You are bound to get teething difficulties with such a vast product but once you get to grips with it, it is very good indeed.
Finally, I would definitely recommend attending the XI course I mentioned. It concretes the basic understanding you would get from the SAP documentation.
Hope this helps.
Kind regards
Colin

Frost & Sullivan: The Business Case for Cloud Communications

Hello, I have a

I looked through previous topics on this issue, and I've ran into a roadblock with troubleshooting.The Offline Address Book has been broken for several months, ever since we had to recover our Exchange after a massive failure. When you try to download the OAB, it errors out with Task reported error (0x80190197): the operation failed. We've recently come back around to trying to get it resolved, and here's where I am:
I followed the instructions in the following resources:http://unified.swiatelski.com/2011/02/exchange-2010-cannot-download-offline.htmlhttp://andywolf.com/exchange-2010-offline-address-book-oab-will-not-download/http://blog.dargel.at/2012/02/23/remove-legacy-exchange-server-using-adsi/http://community.spiceworks.com/topic/134752-outlook-2010-is-not-downloading-the-exchange-2010-addre......

Business Case template for Facebook/Social Media Sites.

might be better on stackoverflow.

HI everyone,
We have a department that wants to host their own Facebook site.
We'd like them to put forward a Business Case for this - so managers and the department realise what will be involved.
Has anyone faced a similar issue? Anyone want to share a template?
Thanks,
Damien,
This topic first appeared in the Spiceworks Community

Business Case- Need inputs

Hi Experts,
Please let me know what does a business case satnds for in general. I had been asked to prepare a business case for my client and I donot have any clue about this. Would be a real help if any one cen please pass me on soem older templates, samples for this.
Rgds
NS

HI,
The Business Case identifies the objectives and proposed solution of the SAP Program and documents quantifiable benefits that support the Programu2019s justification.
Below mentioned are the contents of a business case at higher level.
1. Executive Summary
     a. Program Objective
     b. Problem Statement/Opportunity
     c. Proposed Solution
     d. Industry Comparison
2. Strategic Alignment
     a. Business Strategy
     b. Technology Strategy
3. Program Benefits
     a. Tangible Benefits
     b. Intangible Benefits
I think sharing the business case of my projects will be difficult because of confidentaility issues. Hope this helps you and you can make your own business case document on these guidelines.
Rgds
Manish

Need business case to move to 4.1

Hi all,
We are currently using APEX 3.2, and would like to upgrade. I haven't had much time to look into the features of APEX 4, and now I have been told that I need to put together a business case for upgrading by next week. While some of the new features look great, I have to put this to business users rather than technical people. Can anyone point me to improvements that look good from a business standpoint and any info on the upgrade process?
Thanks for any advice!
John

http://en-us.sysadmins.lv/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=134
HTH
Vadims Podāns, aka PowerShell CryptoGuy
My weblog: en-us.sysadmins.lv
PowerShell PKI Module: pspki.codeplex.com
PowerShell Cmdlet Help Editor pscmdlethelpeditor.codeplex.com
Check out new: SSL Certificate Verifier
Check out new:
PowerShell File Checksum Integrity Verifier tool.

OSB - Business Case for Adapters Vs Transport

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for