Cost and support are the obvious two distinguishing features.
If you have no money to pay for licenses, then open source is a good alternative.
If you don't like open source because of managerial objections, then you'll go with a licensed product.
With open source, you want to be sure that you're getting something that has some longevity to it. The signs are vibrant developer and user communities, easy access to forum support, periodic updates to the software, standards-based with alternatives available, etc. You don't want to make a choice for something as fundamental as infrastructure and regret it a year later because the open source project has fallen apart.
ESBs can play a lot of roles:
gateway for B2B with external parties
messaging between services
transformation between formats (EDI, XML, etc.)
orchestration of services
centralization of cross-cutting concerns like auditing, logging, metrics, etc.
You'll want to make a careful decision to meet all these needs.
I know nothing of their product, but Loose coupling versus decoupling ... briefly discusses an important point often missed, and one that can bite you very hard later on.
I worry that BizTalk is being taken over by the .Net types within Microsoft, and may be headed in the direction of the closely-bound interfaces of WCF. Read a lot, ask a lot of questions. Don't expect much of open source offerings.
Among other concerns, given the nature of the ESB design pattern, performance is very important. There are many results published out there. Here is the latest round of ESB performance done in January 2013. However in the performance space, it is advisable to run your own performance test and pick your choice, rather than banking on what are published out there.
In addition to performance, ease of use, extensibility, development effort it takes to integrate systems via the ESB needs to be taken into account. Sometimes, you may start the integration with an ESB, and later, as the system evolves, ability to govern the solution, security, ability to monitor, metering and billing, number of connectors supported, will come into picture. So you might want to watch out for the related solutions around the ESB along those lines.
In general, as it is the case with any software, total cost of ownership (TCO) is also key. Sometimes, it would seemingly be less costly to start with one vendor, yet over time costs might proliferate. Specially, supportability and maintainability is important, given the central nature of the ESB use.
发布评论
评论（3）
成本和支持是两个明显的区别特征。
如果您没有钱购买许可证，那么开源是一个不错的选择。
如果您因为管理层的反对而不喜欢开源，那么您将使用许可产品。
对于开源，您希望确保您获得的东西具有一定的寿命。 这些标志是充满活力的开发人员和用户社区、轻松获得论坛支持、定期更新软件、基于标准并提供可用的替代方案等。您不想在选择基础设施这样的基础设施时后悔一年后来因为开源项目已经分崩离析了。
ESB 可以发挥很多作用：
。做出谨慎的决定来满足所有这些需求。
Cost and support are the obvious two distinguishing features.
If you have no money to pay for licenses, then open source is a good alternative.
If you don't like open source because of managerial objections, then you'll go with a licensed product.
With open source, you want to be sure that you're getting something that has some longevity to it. The signs are vibrant developer and user communities, easy access to forum support, periodic updates to the software, standards-based with alternatives available, etc. You don't want to make a choice for something as fundamental as infrastructure and regret it a year later because the open source project has fallen apart.
ESBs can play a lot of roles:
You'll want to make a careful decision to meet all these needs.
我对他们的产品一无所知，但是松散耦合与解耦......< /a> 简要讨论了一个经常被忽略的重要观点，并且这个观点可能会在以后给你带来很大的困扰。
我担心 BizTalk 正在被 Microsoft 内部的 .Net 类型所取代，并且可能会朝着 WCF 紧密绑定接口的方向发展。 多读，多问。 不要对开源产品抱有太多期望。
I know nothing of their product, but Loose coupling versus decoupling ... briefly discusses an important point often missed, and one that can bite you very hard later on.
I worry that BizTalk is being taken over by the .Net types within Microsoft, and may be headed in the direction of the closely-bound interfaces of WCF. Read a lot, ask a lot of questions. Don't expect much of open source offerings.
除其他问题外，鉴于 ESB 设计模式的性质，性能非常重要。 那里发表了许多结果。 这是 2013 年 1 月完成的最新一轮 ESB 性能。然而，在性能领域，建议运行您自己的性能测试并选择您的选择，而不是依赖于那里发布的内容。
除了性能之外，还需要考虑易用性、可扩展性以及通过 ESB 集成系统所需的开发工作量。 有时，您可能会开始与 ESB 集成，随后，随着系统的发展，管理解决方案的能力、安全性、监控能力、计量和计费、支持的连接器数量都会显现出来。 因此，您可能需要关注围绕 ESB 的相关解决方案。
一般来说，与任何软件一样，总拥有成本 (TCO) 也是关键。 有时，从一个供应商开始似乎成本较低，但随着时间的推移，成本可能会激增。 特别是，鉴于 ESB 使用的核心性质，可支持性和可维护性非常重要。
Among other concerns, given the nature of the ESB design pattern, performance is very important. There are many results published out there. Here is the latest round of ESB performance done in January 2013. However in the performance space, it is advisable to run your own performance test and pick your choice, rather than banking on what are published out there.
In addition to performance, ease of use, extensibility, development effort it takes to integrate systems via the ESB needs to be taken into account. Sometimes, you may start the integration with an ESB, and later, as the system evolves, ability to govern the solution, security, ability to monitor, metering and billing, number of connectors supported, will come into picture. So you might want to watch out for the related solutions around the ESB along those lines.
In general, as it is the case with any software, total cost of ownership (TCO) is also key. Sometimes, it would seemingly be less costly to start with one vendor, yet over time costs might proliferate. Specially, supportability and maintainability is important, given the central nature of the ESB use.