Articles tagged architecture
Posted by Saul Caganoff on 15 October 2014
Last week I gave a presentation at the first meetup for Melbourne Microservices. Since many of us are aware of the general characteristics of microservices I wanted to survey the broader context of forces driving the emergence of microservices as a potential new application architecture.
Posted by Saul Caganoff on 26 September 2014
Is PaaS the secret sauce for the Composable Enterprise? Certainly Warner Music Group and their CTO Jonathan Murray have put a lot of effort into using CloudFoundry as the container for applications in their new enterprise. But I think PaaS is only one side of the coin.
Posted by Edward McLoughlin on 25 September 2014
In almost every integration project in existence, you’ll find that at some point you need to map one set of representative values to another. It doesn’t take long to think of a few common examples. Lets take two hypothetical systems named Xup and Yonder. How do they each represent countries in addresses?
Posted by Saul Caganoff on 10 September 2014
Continuing my series on the Composable Enterprise I’m looking at how different thought-leaders and organizations perceive the shift from our current methods of doing business to the digital platforms that will drive future, more agile businesses. This week I cover the “The Digital Enterprise Shift”, a whitepaper written last year by Neil Ward-Dutton, co-founder and Research Director at MWD Advisors and a prominent member of the enterprise architecture community.
Posted by Saul Caganoff on 03 September 2014
My last microservices post welcomed the opportunity to further the conversation about service oriented architectures, because frankly the SOA job isn’t done yet. But I didn’t actually talk about what microservices are. Here I write down a simple definition.
Posted by Saul Caganoff on 28 August 2014
My last post on the Composable Enterprise gave an overview of Jonathan Murray’s manifesto. While this is leading edge stuff, it is by no means new. We’ve been aiming for composable architectures for many decades now, going back to DCE and CORBA and perhaps even earlier. This speaks to how difficult the challenge is and how our approaches change with lessons learned from previous attempts.
Posted by Saul Caganoff on 21 August 2014
My colleague Yamen recently started the Sydney Microservices meetup group and the response was surprisingly strong with more than 86 people registered within 10 days. The first meetup on September 3 has 36 RSVPs. This is merely a local indication of the buzz that surrounds microservices at the moment.
Posted by on 14 August 2014
Fifty-five percent of businesses are under threat from digital disruption. An MIT CISR Research Report that landed in my inbox this morning reports that out of a sample of 105 senior executives that attended a recent workshop on digital business models, 55% assess their business as being in the "red zone"—significant threat of digital disruption.
Posted by on 23 July 2014
Building distributed systems is our métier. One lesson we learned very early is the importance of visibility across all the elements in a system. But the more extended and loosely coupled your systems, the harder it is to achieve the visibility required. Loose coupling promotes availability and resilience but works against oversight and control. This is essentially a corollary of the CAP theorem. The challenge is very applicable to microservices as described by Benjamin Wootton in his article "Microservices - Not A Free Lunch!."
Posted by on 25 June 2014
IT goes through cycles—fat clients vs thin clients, centralised mainframes vs distributed computing. These tend to be areas where the costs and benefits of either end of the spectrum are difficult to discriminate between the alternatives. It takes time for the industry to settle on an equilibrium position, and quite often technology change shifts the equilibrium before it is reached.
Posted by on 11 June 2014
Perhaps the number one problem in enterprise IT is 'change'—how to handle it and how to keep up with a changing world. Gartner says that "IT organizations' application strategies often aren't dynamic enough to handle changes in technology."
Posted by on 04 June 2014
There are two ways to look at integration:
Integration is a cost: poorly planned system procurement and development means that we carry the technical burden of multiple applications with overlapping concerns. Data must be replicated between systems in order for them to function. The mechanisms we use to perform this replication are decided by individual projects and as a result we have a hotch-potch of hundreds of interfaces, in different languages, using different tools, realtime, batch and manual re-keying.
Integration is an opportunity: no single application does what we need to run our organization. No application is an island, so it behoves us to make integration a core competency. By externalising data, processes and events, by making those capabilities addressable from the outside, we can develop and maintain a platform that allows us to build our unique organizational capability on top of our choice of commodity or best of breed applications.
Posted by on 28 May 2014
Deeply ingrained in our philosophy at Deloitte Platform Engineering is the idea of building solutions by composing services to fit a unique business need. Nothing really new here, people have been talking about "mashups" about "service composition" and "composite applications" for a while and we've seen our customers derive great benefit from this approach. But what is really exciting is the way that cloud and software as a service (SaaS) really kicks this philosophy into high gear. The majority of our projects in the last two years have involved SaaS integration and that demand is accelerating.