Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OTM 5.5 CU4 & EBS 11.5.9 Integration

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • OTM 5.5 CU4 & EBS 11.5.9 Integration

    Hi,
    We are exploring different options of integrating OTM 5.5 CU4 with EBS 11.5.9. One of the options (short term) that the client exploring is flat file integration (the plan is to upgrade EBS within a year or so). Please suggest,
    (1) Application Server Choice: WebSphere Vs Oracle AS (Pros and Cons)
    (2) Any issues / limitations of implementing flat file integration? (we are thinking of using Python scripts)
    (3) Any other suggestions which will help us in the identification of platform and in the implementation.

    Few Additional Details: The client decided to go with OTM 5.5 CU4. The software is to be purchased. The choice of App. Server is to be decided. Planning to use RedHat Linux. The Production EBS version is 11.5.9.

    Thank you.
    Ganesh.

  • #2
    Re: OTM 5.5 CU4 & EBS 11.5.9 Integration

    Ganesh,

    In response to your questions:
    1. Application Server Choice: WebSphere Vs Oracle AS (Pros and Cons)
      1. Stay away from WebSphere. I ported the technical architecture of OTM from WebLogic to WebSphere and I can tell you that it (WS) works very poorly with OTM, in terms of configuration, performance and reliability.
      2. WebLogic is the preferred app server for OTM and is highly recommended. Especially when running on Linux, your performance using WebLogic/JRockit can be twice that of OAS/SunJDK.
      3. OAS would be my second choice, but few are using it in production and I don't consider it a good option until OTM 6.0.
      4. You can find more details on OAS vs WebLogic by searching these forums.
    2. Any issues / limitations of implementing flat file integration? (we are thinking of using Python scripts)
      1. No issues - this can be implemented using either Python or any other integration engine. Regardless of the choice, you'll need to convert to G-Log XML in order to post to OTM.
      2. Python is limited in terms of management and performance, but if your volumes are low, this isn't an issue.
    I hope this helps!

    --Chris
    Chris Plough
    twitter.com/chrisplough
    MavenWire

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: OTM 5.5 CU4 & EBS 11.5.9 Integration

      Chris,
      Thank you. Few related follow-up questions. In addition to the flat file integration, we are also exploring other integration options listed below. Please share your experience and any suggestions/recommendations that will help us in making an informed decision.

      (1) Integration Option# 1:
      EBS 11.5.9 integration with OTM 5.5 using Oracle Workflow, XML Gateway, Oracle Advanced Queuing (AQ) and Oracle Transport Agent (OTA).
      Will this approach work?
      Any limitations (general limitations, limitations related to OS, web server, appserver etc)?
      Does this option require OTA on the OTM side too? (OR) Can we have BPEL at OTM and OTA at EBS?

      (2) Integration Option# 2:
      EBS integration with OTM using BPEL technology - Customizing out of the box EBS 11.5.10 BPEL logic and making it work for EBS 11.5.9 Family Pack I.
      Will this approach work?
      Any limitations (general limitations, limitations related to OS, web server, appserver etc)?
      Any lessons learned?

      Thank you.

      Regards,
      Ganesh.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: OTM 5.5 CU4 & EBS 11.5.9 Integration

        Ganesh,

        (1) Integration Option# 1:
        EBS 11.5.9 integration with OTM 5.5 using Oracle Workflow, XML Gateway, Oracle Advanced Queuing (AQ) and Oracle Transport Agent (OTA).
        Will this approach work?

        CP> I'd recommend getting references from existing clients using OAQ with OTM. I'm only aware of 2 and each of them are looking at other integration solutions, since they've had a lot of problems with OAQ bugs and finding people strong enough to support them. Matter of fact, I was just helping a client out with a production issue around this till 3am on Tuesday. Nearly all OTM / G-Log clients are using HTTP posts to publish integration into OTM instead.
        Any limitations (general limitations, limitations related to OS, web server, appserver etc)?
        CP> Web Services is still maturing in OTM, so HTTP posts are your best option (sorry to sound like a broken record). You'll have to convert from whichever format to G-Log XML, so I'd recommend getting the GLog.xsd file from your OTM installation, to understand the scope of the transformation necessary. No other limitations, other than those I've already noted about the OTM app server.
        Does this option require OTA on the OTM side too? (OR) Can we have BPEL at OTM and OTA at EBS?
        CP> On the OTM side, you don't need OTA. Matter of fact, you can just use any integration technology that is capable of posting via HTTP to OTM. As noted earlier, I'd avoid using OAQ to post to the OTM DB directly.

        (2) Integration Option# 2:
        EBS integration with OTM using BPEL technology - Customizing out of the box EBS 11.5.10 BPEL logic and making it work for EBS 11.5.9 Family Pack I.
        Will this approach work?
        CP> Honestly, I don't know - simply because I don't know how the interfaces differ in EBS 11.5.9. Also, a lot of the integration (concurrent processes, etc) are installed via Oracle patches that are only available on 11.5.10.x. Since OTM has been integrated with nearly every WMS/OMS solution out there, I'm sure that there is a way to make it work, though it could require extensive customizations.
        Any limitations (general limitations, limitations related to OS, web server, appserver etc)?
        CP> You should utilize BPEL 10.1.3.3. Otherwise, no other limitations that I'm aware of -- save those mentioned about the OTM app server previously.
        Any lessons learned?
        CP> I highly recommend searching through these forums (especially this section) as there are many lessons learned about the EBS/OTM integration. The biggest lesson I can pass your way is that it isn't well supported and every client who has implemented it has required customizations to get it to match their business process. It's an okay template, but I don't consider it a full solution.

        Hope this helps,
        Chris
        Chris Plough
        twitter.com/chrisplough
        MavenWire

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: OTM 5.5 CU4 & EBS 11.5.9 Integration

          Hey Chris:
          I have a follow-up question on the WebSphere as an Application server for OTM question.

          - You mentioned that there are reliability issues. What are the reliability issues that you faced with WebSphere as an AS (pun intended!)? Anything specific like have to reboot quite often because of memory leaks, server connections gets lost in ether etc?


          Cheers
          Manoj Turlapati

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: OTM 5.5 CU4 & EBS 11.5.9 Integration

            Manoj,

            Because it uses the IBM JDK, there are many issues with using WebSphere as the OTM Application Server:
            • Due to issues with native memory management, it will crash often. (The same issue is encountered when running OTM on AIX using any app server.)
            • It will not perform nearly as well as other platforms.
            • Only a couple of clients are utilizing it, so there's a high potential for issues and bugs.
            I'd highly recommend steering them towards WebLogic -- especially now that the BEA acquisition has taken place.

            --Chris
            Chris Plough
            twitter.com/chrisplough
            MavenWire

            Comment

            Working...
            X