ESB Features Comparison
Table of Contents
How Sonic ESB compares with Fiorano ESB ... 3
Key technical differentiators ... 4
Additional Technical Benefits of Fiorano ... 5
How Sonic ESB compares with Fiorano ESB
The table below illustrates the availability of SOA features in the respective platforms
SOA features Fiorano ESB Sonic ESB
1 Model driven : Not Code driven
2 Programmer productivity tools: Graphical IDE
3 Programmer productivity tools: Integrated Debugging
4 Visual schema mapping integrated with metadata and semantic definitions
5 Interoperability in heterogeneous environments
6 Pluggable XSLT engine
7 Support for modeling composite applications - graphically defined business processes and rules
8 Security and management framework
9 Infrastructure QoS - service component level load balancing
10 Metadata and semantic definitions
11 Support for multiple transports (HTTP(S), TCP(S), FTP, JMS, SMTP, POP3, SMS, MOM implementations)
12 Scalable architecture
13 Webservices support
14 Content Based Routing Partial2
15 Support for Industry standards – EDI, HL7, SWIFT, AS2
16 Built in JMS messaging server
17 Business component framework (SDK to build custom service components)
18 JCA compliant adapters
19 Visual Load balancing configuration
20 .Net interoperability
21 Integrated Event Monitoring
22 Integrated Document tracking Partial3
23 Service Component level hot failover
24 Deployment Management rules
25 Service Component versioning
26 Integrated BPM capabilities
27 Data fragmentation and reassembly support for large sized messages
28 SaaS integration support
Partial2 Sonic requires complicated coding using JavaScript to do any type of content-based
routing in the orchestration. Thus the CBR is only as effective as the user’s technical proficiency.
Partial3 Sonic entails JavaScript coding of tracking listeners and cumbersome deployment
Key technical differentiators
1.
Visual process orchestration tools
a. Fiorano includes a powerful service component orchestration tool built for business users and architects. This tool uses a single view for design (both service configuration and mediation), deployment, management and debugging.
b. Sonic Workbench is a complicated package of disparate tools and editors. It requires the user to be technically adept and does not offer a complete “no-coding” environment for integrating applications.
2.
Pre-built adapters
a. Fiorano bundles 50+ pre-built components that are customizable for a number of integration scenarios, dramatically reducing time to market. Fiorano adapters are compatible with multiple transports including JMS, TIB/RV, WebSphereMQ and can also be deployed as a JCA resource in an application server.
b. Unlike Fiorano, Sonic Adapters are not standards (JCA) compliant and the learning curve involved in creating custom adapters is steep.
3.
HA setup
a. Fiorano’s distributed architecture allows HA to be set up in minutes via intuitive visual tools.
b. It’s a challenge to set up HA in Sonic; also failover configurations are inflexible and involve complicated configurations.
4.
Single Integrated product
a. Fiorano bundles all features and functionalities into one installation. The product is complete and independent, and does not require support from any other software to integrate applications.
b. Sonic requires five products from the Sonic ESB family to provide functionality similar to Fiorano. This results in complex deployment processes and monitoring methods.
5.
Event Process Deployment
a. Fiorano’s ‘single view’ approach enables process deployment at the click of a button. b. Process deployment in Sonic is a complex multi-step process. Deployment starts with
Additional Technical Benefits of Fiorano
1.
Time to implement
a. 50+ pre-built components and visual tools for orchestration, deployment, management and debugging enable a quicker path to an SOA with Fiorano
b. With Sonic ESB, development and deployment is a complex, time-consuming process. A deeply hierarchical model, the process involves connecting to servers manually from the orchestration tool, creation of several levels of housings before the flow can be created and frequent manual intervention for monitoring the mediation.
2.
Transactional visibility
a. Fiorano’s intuitive visual interface provides a single view for development, deployment and management of event driven business processes. This gives the user unprecedented transactional visibility into implemented business processes with a multitude of concomitant benefits including easy identification of bottlenecks and incremental, dynamic extensibility.
b. Sonic ESB does not house development, design, deployment and monitoring in a single tool. The services are orchestrated using the Sonic Workbench and exported to be deployed from the Sonic Deployment Manager. Transactional visibility is therefore poor.
3.
Ease of Use
a. Fiorano’s visual tools and robust pre-built components enable rapid process deployment.
b. Sonic ESB has a steep and wide learning curve and users require considerable training before the product can be used effectively; Orchestration is complex due to the scripting involved at every stage, and users have to traverse a large number of menus and wizards before configuration is affected.
Summary
The time, effort and cost of implementing SOA projects with Sonic ESB are significantly higher compared to Fiorano ESB. It becomes necessary to purchase at least five separate products from the ESB family to implement even a simple integration scenario with Sonic.
