New-age Transactional Systems - Not Your Grandpa's OLTP
John Hugg discusses high volume transaction processing applications with high and low frequency profiles, and how VoltDB can be used for that purpose.
The content has been bookmarked!
There was an error bookmarking this content! Please retry.
Posted by Mark Little and Boris Lublinsky on Jul 22, 2009
Given how much SOA has invaded the industry mentality over the recent years, it is surprising how few standards there are relative to other technologies such as CORBA, Enterprise Java or Web Services. Of course there are the various WS-* standards and specifications that many people associate with SOA, but in terms of those that are deliberately implementation agnostic the OASIS Reference Model for SOA stood alone for quite a while. Earlier this year the OMG released the SOA Modeling Language and The Open Group announced the formation of a SOA Working Group as well as releasing a SOA Source Book.
Over the past few months members of all of these efforts and others have been working to try to reconcile these various efforts and have now released a new white paper called Navigating the SOA Open Standards Landscape Around Architecture (available on all of their web sites). As the paper states:
This joint white paper explains and positions standards for SOA reference models, ontologies, reference architectures, maturity models, modeling languages, and governance. It outlines where the works are similar, highlights the strengths of each body of work, and touches on how the work can be used together in complementary ways. It is also meant as a guide to users of these specifications for selecting the technical products most appropriate for their needs, consistent with where they are today and where they plan to head on their SOA journeys.
The specifications and efforts examined in the paper include the OASIS Reference Model for SOA, the OASIS Reference Architecture for SOA Foundation, the OMG SoaML Specification, The Open Group SOA Ontology, The Open Group SOA Reference Architecture, The Open Group SOA Governance Framework, and The Open Group Service Integration Maturity Model.
This is a good addition to the SOA library. The white paper is deliberately technology agnostic, staying clear of referencing implementation approaches to SOA such as Web Services or JBI. On the one hand that can be seen as a good thing keeping vendor hype out of the picture and potentially increasing the longevity of the paper. But on the other hand questions may be asked as to the practicality of what is reported.
According to a white paper, existing standards can be grouped in the following categories:
capture the "essence" of SOA, as well as provide a vocabulary and common understanding of SOA. The goals of the reference model include a common conceptual framework that can be used consistently across and between different SOA implementations, common semantics that can be used unambiguously in modeling specific SOA solutions, unifying concepts to explain and underpin a generic design template supporting a specific SOA, and definitions that should apply to all SOA.
a view-based abstract reference architecture foundation that models SOA from an ecosystem/paradigm perspective. It specifies three viewpoints; specifically, the Service Ecosystem viewpoint, the Realizing SOAs viewpoint, and the Owning SOAs viewpoint.The Open Group SOA Reference Architecture provides:
the basis, or blueprint, for an enterprise architecture so that the enterprise architect can use that template or blueprint as a standard that will be instantiated during each individual project or solution that is being developed. This will be performed within the organization where the SOA reference architecture will be instantiated. This SOA reference architecture is designed to support different kinds of scenarios including those involving consumer organizations, vendors, other standard bodies, and other Open Group projects.
captures a set of related concepts within the SOA space and explains what they are and how they relate to each other. The objectives are to facilitate understanding of these terms and concepts within the context of SOA, and potentially to facilitate model-driven implementation. The ontology is represented in OWL (Web Ontology Language) to enable automation and allow tools to process it.
provides corporations and IT practitioners with a means to assess an organization’s maturity within a complete SOA migration path. It provides a process to create a roadmap for incremental adoption which maximizes business benefits at each stage along the way. The model consists of seven levels of maturity and seven dimensions of consideration within an organization or scope defined by a project, and acts as a quantitative model to aid in assessment of a current state and designation of a desired future state.
extends UML in order to provide additional capabilities for managing cohesion and coupling afforded by an SOA style. SoaML is applicable across a broad range of domains and levels of abstraction from business services to detailed IT services. Using a common language for these different purposes simplifies systems modeling and integration of separate concerns in order to enable business agility which can be represented with business architecture models such as BMM and BPMN. SoaML can be viewed as supporting instantiation of the OASIS Reference Model for SOA that provides a concrete platform for services modeling...
As the white paper explains, although there is a wide range of SOA standards
...there is a great deal of agreement on the foundational core concepts across the many independent open specifications and standards for SOA.
These standards are related and are building on each other.
The white paper is a great document, simplifying navigation between different standards, their relationships and how and where to use each standard.
John Hugg discusses high volume transaction processing applications with high and low frequency profiles, and how VoltDB can be used for that purpose.
Kevlin Henney examines code samples to see what can be learned from them starting from the premise that one won’t write great code unless he knows how to read it.
Jason Ayers share the observations he made watching a team of developers collaborating in real time on the same code base, pushing XP, pair programming and continuous integration to their extremes.
Michael Snoyman presents Yesod, a web framework written in Haskell and containing a web server, templating, ORM, libraries (templating, gravatar, etc.).
Richard Kreuter and Kyle Banker on how to avoid classical RDBMS transactional systems by using compensation mechanisms, transactional messaging or transactional procedures.
Attila Szegedi talks about performance tuning Java and Scala programs at Twitter: how to approach GC problems, the importance of asynchronous I/O, when to use MySQL/Cassandra/Redis, and much more.
One category of risk that project teams need to ensure they address is business value failure – delivering a product that fails to provide value for the business investor.
InfoQ spoke to the authors of Software Systems Architecture on a couple of new topics, the System Context viewpoint and Agile, which have been added to the second edition.
No comments
Watch Thread Reply