camel-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Magnus Palmér <magnus.palmer.w...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: oracle BPEL vs camel
Date Fri, 14 Sep 2012 08:24:56 GMT
As an integration platform I think this article should will scare some
people:
http://www.jayway.com/2010/05/07/xslt-transformations-in-oracle-service-bus

In Sweden it has also been notoriously hard to find competence on Oracle,
even from Oracle themselves.

http://www.jayway.com/2010/05/07/xslt-transformations-in-oracle-service-bus

I've worked briefly with the Oracle Service Bus (10.x though) and
developing traditional Enteprise Integration solutions take time, alot of
time.
I guess only real good use case I can think of is if there are a lot of
already defined services with WSDL that you can use.


2012/9/14 Charles Moulliard <ch007m@gmail.com>

> Never forget that with a BPEL engine, all the steps (= status change
> ) defined in a Process must be saved in a DB. With Camel a process could be
> a camel route or a collection of camel routes and one camel exchange (=
> message) can pass though a collection of processors (= steps defined in a
> BPEL workflow). That will simplify your architecture as we can group steps
> in a camel route or split them through a collection of camel routes. If
> persistence is required to avoid to loose information carried by camel
> exchanges, then you can use one of the camel persistence component
> supported (JMS, JDBC, JPA, SQL, iBaitis, myIbatis, Hibernate, ...)
>
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:40 AM, Christian Müller <
> christian.mueller@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > it's cheaper (Camel is for free)
> > it's simpler (the Camel DSL is much more readable and understandable)
> > it's more flexible (it works with any kind of payload)
> > it supports more protocols (more than 120 at present)
> > it's more open (you can extend Camel yourself and add new components)
> > it has a very good community which helps other users (Red Hat CEO Jim
> > Whitehurst says: In the ESB case, that leading community is the Apache
> > Camel project: http://tinyurl.com/bphnwfm)
> >
> > Best,
> > Christian
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 8:05 PM, mfcplus <mfcplus@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, can anyone give some really good convincing stuff that why should
> we
> > > use
> > > camel over BPEL? I'm trying to convince somebody here to use camel
> > instead
> > > of oracle SOA 11g that has BPEL engine as so called 'orchestrator'. any
> > > references, materials are good, and especially like to have some input
> > from
> > > the gurus
> > >
> > > many thanks
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > View this message in context:
> > > http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/oracle-BPEL-vs-camel-tp5719204.html
> > > Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Charles Moulliard
> Apache Committer / Sr. Pr. Consultant at FuseSource.com
> Twitter : @cmoulliard
> Blog : http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message