When I started pursuing software development and application architecture in 2015, vendors, analysts and experts all announced the demise of ESB architecture.

Everyone loves microservices that are flexible and decentralized, and they will be doomed to not shatter monoliths.

The so-called world of these experts predicted that it was one of the self-contained and independent services.

Enterprise software stores no longer need to maintain large, heavy storage, as each service has all the logical data and processing commands it needs in a backpack.

But the need for a centralized system has never really disappeared. Anyone who thinks they can operate without a single source of truth – at least as a failure – is misunderstood as if vendors advance the imaginations of dynamic software architectures and spread completely

Let’s take a look at what Kim Clarke, IBM’s integration and process architect, had to say in her 2018 article on ESB’s fate:

“If you look back somewhere before 2000, integration was almost asynchronous, using files and text to integrate between record systems.

Writing code in or around each system for individual point-to-point integration is expensive and results in complex web interactions. The inevitable result is the introduction of an integration hub that is connected between all systems ”

However, a reasonable point is that today’s asynchronous communication is more complex than in 1999. Doktor containers are not just applications. But it also provides sophisticated applications to run completely on its own from the system.

And there is no question that a change in total cloud application dominance makes asynchronous communication more essential than alternatives.

But even if that’s the case, “The Ten Commandments Written by MSV Architect and Technology Analyst, microservices require registration of certain types of centralized services. (Which may be cloudy), which examines service rules and limitations There is a centralized way to do and some that are standardized. How to record and send notification messages

He is the catch. Enterprise ecosystems can actually work together without a single powerful delegate, keeping these important tasks in sync. And when you add a single app to the mix, it actually looks like an impossible target.

Pure message brokers such as Apache Kafka may be able to use event-driven messaging for what ESB can do without heavy burden. But the target cannot be attached to the ESB, but the ESB architecture must conform to the current requirements.

As Ken Tien, blogger for Mulsoft in 2016 on MicroServices v ESB said:

“For ESBs, no, they are alive. We have to adapt to this concept of architecture and cannot understand that integration is simply a centralized concrete structure and is no longer flexible for the entire company.”

It is argued that the ESB architecture model is more important than ever. It is just a model that needs to find a better place in the new world, which already exists in many ways. Keep in mind which functions in iPaaS are actually different from ESB.

The creators of ESB have never imagined serious issues, such as those related to security, availability, and protocol compatibility.

But why dig the underlying ESB architecture? Think ESB is not the only thing that keeps service under lock and key. Rather, it judges for the assistance that the services need to operate in their own freedom.

“Mainframes are really driving the global economy. It’s the most reliable and secure logging system in the world,” said Sam Knutson, vice president of product management at Compuware, which sells development tools for mainframes. “For major corporations, COBOL is the platform that drives.”

While some blame COBOL for the reduction of these unemployment systems. But that’s a wrong point of view, said Gartner analyst Thomas Klink.

“It’s not really a COBOL problem,” Kleinek said. [New unemployment insurance] which is a problem ”

He said that applications have changed over the years due to new regulations and laws, applications have become more complex, whether it is written in any language.

The fact that many retired COBOL developers kept their valuable knowledge of the application with them only made the problem worse. The good news is that most developers can easily choose COBOL, according to Klinect.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *