Question about the coherence of an architecture using ServiceMix 4.4

[Hugo <th...@voila.fr>]

Hi everyone,

I am beginner with Service Mix and I have got to check the coherence of an
architecture for my company using Service Mix 4.4.

Use case :
- I have high level business processes handled by final users (through
Bonita). 
- A process/task has to be send by Bonita to an ESB (ServiceMix) using
ActiveMQ.
- Camel gets back the message (the task) and forwards it to an orchestrator
(Apache ODE).
- The orchestrator has to call all the required webservices of the back ends
(for the given task), combine the responses and send it back to Bonita (->
Camel -> ActiveMQ -> Bonita).

I have got several questions about this architecture.

1. Are there some misunderstandings of SMX or Apache frameworks in this
use-case ? 
2. Does this architecture seem to you well-thought for a high traffic use ?
3. If someboy has already used an similar architecture, do you have any
feedback which would be useful for me about come across issues or
performance issue or simple advices ? 

Thanks in advance !

--
View this message in context: http://servicemix.396122.n5.nabble.com/Question-about-the-coherence-of-an-architecture-using-ServiceMix-4-4-tp5568411p5568411.html
Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Question about the coherence of an architecture using ServiceMix 4.4

[Hugo <th...@voila.fr>]

Hi Jean-Baptiste,

Firstly, thank you for your quick answer.

I've got some new questions which came to my mind due to your answers :

"Why don't you fire directly Camel route from Bonita ? I think that ODE
is redondant especially with Bonita.
More over the integration scenarii could be implemented directly with Camel.
"

In my mind, Bonita manage the main tasks and we would have implemented in
ODE (deployed in SMX), for a given task, the thiner granularity i.e the
sequence of webservice calls.

1. When you are talking about "fire directly Camel route from Bonita", you
arenot talking to skip activeMQ but ODE, right ? you mean to skip the ODE
part and directly implement the thiner granularity in Bonita ?

But, by doing this, I would delete the separation between the user part,
Bonita with the high level processes management (which is, for information,
on a jBoss server) and the technical part (sequence of webservice calls)
which was the initial goal at the beginning ? 
In compensation, would it improve significantly the performance to delete
the ODE stage ?


"More over the integration scenarii could be implemented directly with
Camel. "

2. I don't get exactly what are you suggesting me here ? Without ActiveMQ,
ODE and ServiceMix ?


3. In SMX 4, I don't manage to understand which server is used. I can find
jetty file in the SMX_HOME directory... Karaf is launched on a jetty server
? And if we deployed application on ServiceMix (on the deploy directory), it
is deployed on jetty too ? Is it a way to switch jetty by jboss (to deploy
SMX and Bonita on the same server) ?

Thanks for your time and your answers. It helps me to get me out of the
woods :)

--
View this message in context: http://servicemix.396122.n5.nabble.com/Question-about-the-coherence-of-an-architecture-using-ServiceMix-4-4-tp5568411p5570382.html
Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Question about the coherence of an architecture using ServiceMix 4.4

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Hi Hugo,

my comments inline:

> Use case :
> - I have high level business processes handled by final users (through
> Bonita).
> - A process/task has to be send by Bonita to an ESB (ServiceMix) using
> ActiveMQ.
> - Camel gets back the message (the task) and forwards it to an orchestrator
> (Apache ODE).
> - The orchestrator has to call all the required webservices of the back ends
> (for the given task), combine the responses and send it back to Bonita (->
> Camel ->  ActiveMQ ->  Bonita).
>
> I have got several questions about this architecture.
>
> 1. Are there some misunderstandings of SMX or Apache frameworks in this
> use-case ?

Why don't you fire directly Camel route from Bonita ? I think that ODE 
is redondant especially with Bonita.
More over the integration scenarii could be implemented directly with Camel.

> 2. Does this architecture seem to you well-thought for a high traffic use ?

All depends about your route, the retention that you want, etc. From a 
general perspective, it should work with a high number of messages.

> 3. If someboy has already used an similar architecture, do you have any
> feedback which would be useful for me about come across issues or
> performance issue or simple advices ?

Yes, we have already implemented such kind of architecture (with Bonita 
and Talend ESB, but it's possible to do quite the same with ServiceMix).

Regards
JB


>
> Thanks in advance !
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://servicemix.396122.n5.nabble.com/Question-about-the-coherence-of-an-architecture-using-ServiceMix-4-4-tp5568411p5568411.html
> Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

-- 
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com