Comments on: Making ESB pain visible

By: Colin Jack

Colin Jack — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 22:22:18 +0000

Interesting post, I didn’t quite understand the bit about the asymmetry around the WsToRestHandler though.

Also agree that the diagram here makes the cost involved much clearer.

By: Kamal

Kamal — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 06:17:53 +0000

An interesting article, people need to choose the technologies like ESBs only when required. If someone thinks of using ESB no matter what the project requirement is; then definitely there is a problem.

By: Shan Kandaswamy

Shan Kandaswamy — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 05:18:44 +0000

Great Article…. It clearly is that the Architects who simple choose to implement ESB with no proper analysis is RDD. I got a very good idea on why we should not use ESB. Analysis still going on why we should use ESB.. Pointers welcome…

Article twittered by Shan using bluez25 in twitter.

By: Erik Doernenburg

Erik Doernenburg — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 04:43:33 +0000

@Ross

Great checklist, and I couldn’t agree more; when used for the right reasons an ESB like Mule can drastically simplify a project. Unfortunately, though, we still see a lot of architectures that wouldn’t make it past even the first point on your checklist. And it was those that I had in mind when I wrote this article.

By: From the Mule’s mouth - Musings from the MuleSource Experts » Blog Archive » To ESB or not to ESB

Mon, 06 Jul 2009 08:42:38 +0000

[...] There is an interesting post from ThoughtWorker Erik Dörnenburg with the unfortunate title “Making the ESB pain Visible”. Erik provides a real-world example of when not to use an ESB citing that – Based on [...]

By: Ross Mason

Ross Mason — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 15:24:56 +0000

Hi Erik, I just posted about how to select whether to use an ESB for a project. Hopefully it might help some people avoid the pitfals of RDD and other misguided technology selection: http://rossmason.blogspot.com/2009/07/to-esb-or-not-to-esb.html

By: Ross Mason

Ross Mason — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:42:12 +0000

I think its pretty funny that the technology was blamed here and not the architect (a conflict of interest for a ThoughtWorker I guess). Common sense should tell any architect that there is no need add a Web Service layer only to un-marshal the soap and convert it to a REST call and then make the actual call (two network hops). Given that this is all HTTP request response, just use HTTP. Just to be clear, Mule did not add these layers, the user did.

By: Andrew Perepelytsya

Andrew Perepelytsya — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:34:38 +0000

I don’t understand why so much noise? What I see is a clear abuse of common sense, be it with or without esb. What, are there no examples in IT?

Were I to give my recommendation on their diagram – use the simplest thing possible for UI-to-backend communication, and add WS for external clients when needed. But routing everything through a WS… So, what’s wrong with an ESB here? Too much power in wrong hands?

Andrew

By: Holger Hoffstätte

Holger Hoffstätte — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 10:55:00 +0000

Erik, you have no idea how much I enjoyed reading this.

By: Wille

Wille — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 08:53:00 +0000

I’ve written at length over and over again of the ills of modern “Enterprise Architecture” and “Service Oriented Architectures”.

Rather than just keeping it simple a lot of developers and “architects” seem to think that the sole purpose of software is to shuffle ones and zeroes through as many layers of “architecture” as is possible, regardless of whether those layers actually do anything other than just pass through.