Java 进程服务器好不好？
只是想向社区大声疾呼，看看人们对 Java 进程服务器的总体看法。
IBM 尤其倾向于对 Websphere 进程服务器大肆宣传。如果您在 Web 服务领域工作，我可以看到流程服务器背后的想法，但实际上它们是否真的有效，或者只是矫枉过正？
BPEL 是另一种密切相关的技术，它往往会得到 IBM 的大力宣传，但我还没有看到现实生活中的实现。
欢迎一般想法。
Just want to shout out to the community to see what peoples thoughts are on Java process servers in general.
IBM in particular tend to make a lot of noise about Websphere process server. I can see the idea behind the process servers if your working in a web service world but in practice are they really effective or are they just overkill?
BPEL is another closely linked technology that tends to get a lot of hype from IBM but I am yet to see an implementation in real life.
General thoughts welcome.
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（2）
一些项目/公司确实拥有复杂的业务流程，涉及许多服务、应用程序、人员交互，为此使用 BPM 引擎、其连接器、其建模工具是合理的。但这显然并不适合所有人。
现在，要使用 IBM Process Server，您需要一个许可证，您需要一个应用程序服务器来部署它（随机，WebSphere），一些（IBM）机器，可能一些昂贵的连接器，一些建模工具的许可证，因此，我对 IBM 的喧嚣并不感到惊讶（即使实际上没有相同的感觉），销售这样的解决方案对他们来说一定是一笔划算的交易（更不用说他们将添加到账单中的咨询服务） ）。
BPEL 是一种标准化语言，用于将流程描述为使用或生成 XML 消息的一系列服务，即通过 XML 和 Web 服务对 BPM 进行概括，它是进一步推动 SOA 的另一块砖，为营销提供了动力。因此，软件供应商试图推广它也就不足为奇了。
从概念上讲，我不认为 BPM、BPEL 等是坏主意。但正如我所说，它们并不适合所有人。如果它们不能为您解决任何问题，那么使用它们将是一个坏主意。但这并不一定会使它们作为概念失效。
Some projects/companies do have complex business processes that involve many services, applications, human interactions for which using a BPM engine, its connectors, its modeling tools can be justified. But this is clearly not for everybody.
Now, to use IBM Process Server, you'll need a license, you'll need an app server to deploy it (at random, WebSphere), some (IBM) machines, maybe some expensive connectors, some licenses for the modeling tools, etc. So I'm not surprised that IBM makes noise about it (even if don't really have the same feeling), selling such a solution must be a good deal for them (not even mentioning the consulting they will add to the bill).
And BPEL, which is a standardized language to describe flows as a sequences of services consuming or producing XML messages, i.e. a generalization of BPM through XML and Web Services, is another brick allowing to promote SOA a bit further, feeding the marketing soup. So, again, there is nothing surprising in the fact that software vendors try to promote it.
Conceptually, I don't think that BPM, BPEL, etc are bad ideas. But as I said, they are not for everybody. If they don't solve anything for you, then using them would be a bad idea. But this does not necessarily invalidate them as concepts.
IBM 目前在该领域提供多种产品。
收购的 Lombardi 和遗留的 WPS 并未合并为 IBM Business Process Manager。 IBM 还提供 FileNet BPM，其目标是以文档为中心的 BPM 解决方案。
Lombardi 堆栈有效地使用 BPMN，而 WPS 使用 BPEL 作为编排机制。
IBM/Oracle 阵营选择了 BPEL 路径，而 Appian、Lombardi、Pega 等其他阵营则使用 BPMN 作为业务流程的执行模型。
它们都被广泛使用并且有一个有意义的存在理由。
HTH
曼格鲁
IBM has multiple offerings now in this space.
The acquisition Lombardi and heritage WPS are not merged as IBM Business Process manager. There is also a FileNet BPM that is available from IBM which are targetted towards Document centric BPM solutions.
Lombardi stack effectively uses BPMN while WPS uses BPEL as the orchecstration mechanism.
The IBM/Oracle camp had chosen the BPEL path while the others like Appian, Lombardi, Pega etc had come in from using BPMN as the execution model for the business process.
Both of them are widely used and have a meaningful reason to exist.
HTH
Manglu