How is something like Zircon Zircomp different from ZeroC Ice? - corba

Is there anyone that's currently using Zircon Zircomp? How is their technology different from something like ZeroC ICE? Are they trying to solve the same problem domain? How's their target audience different?
Additional question: if I could choose between Ice and CORBA, should I go with Ice based on your experience?

Well, ICE is sort of simplified CORBA, where you still have to write idl, create object adapters and write your own implementations of interfaces, etc. Zircomp doesn't require any of this. To put it simply it provides you a tool for making your synchronous calls asynchronous and then offers a "commodity" server that would run any such call/function. "Commodity" - because you do not have to modify it at all. The only coding is on client side. You have to supply your original (to be distributed) function in the library and provide an xml description of function parameters library/headers location. Note that the library source code itself is also not necessary. Such xml description is supplied to a builder that produces another library to be linked now with a client. It contains function with the same arguments as the original one, but that you now use in your code. And this function takes care of detecting available servers, load balancing, data caching, routing and recovery of lost network/engines. Replies come to the application via barrier synchronization or callback. Note, that the same functionality could be configured to execute locally, by co-location, no code change required. In this case multi-thread/core usage would benefit from absence of copy or marshalling.
And finally, there is no GPL license, this is commercial product.

I'm not using or have ever used Zircon Z, but all I've seen is that it's an enterprise system and company controlled. Douglas C. Schmidt (a former CORBA guru) joined the company which is an indicator of pushing the company to commercial success. But both, ICE and Zircomp are available with GPL v2 ... so, I'd prefer ICE as I've used it and I'd say: I like it.
2nd question: ICE; if you're free. But your decision may depend on other requirements.
With ICE you circumvent the CORBA over NAT problem and you're as flexible as possible if you have to connect to plain old CORBA stuff later.

Related

BPM Engine vs BPM Engine Server

I'm doing some research on the workflow concepts and specifically BPMN standard. And I'm mostly interested in the available software on the subject.
I've already studied software like Activiti and jBPM, both of which are implemented in Java. As great as they are, I'm looking for something else. Even though such software call themselves BPM Engine I would rather name them BPM Engine Servers. They are stand alone servers (with web based GUI) which makes it really hard to embed them in other servers.
Now my question is: Is there a concept as BPM Engine in the manner it only executes the given BPM with the given data, only one step? Without any GUI or direct user interaction (something like a library)? What should I search for? What is it named? Are my expectations valid?
[UPDATE]
I've spent the last hours studying Activiti's user guide. I'm still not sure if I can use it the way I want it to! And I'll be grateful if someone can confirm it.
I'm interested in a console-like application which I can run whenever I like, give it the previously running process (most likely serialized as a string). The engine should construct the process based on the given history.
Once the process is reconstructed, I would like to move it forward one step by telling it what has happened. Then it should inform me of the next tasks to be performed and shutdown.
Finally I'll be storing the updated process after getting it as a string (the engine should serialize it in a way so it can unserialize it later).
I don't want the engine to have its own database or memory storage. I want it to shutdown completely once it's done. This is what I mean by Engine, no user interaction, no storage access.
Can any of the BPM engines perform in such a way?
perhaps I am missing your point, but Activiti is really nothing more than a jar file that can be embedded in any other java application. Certainly in order to run Activiti in any meaningful way you need a backing datastore (database) and one or more process definition, but as you can see from the unit tests that are part of Activiti, the database can be in memory and the process definition can be included in the war. There are many examples of Activiti (and likely jBPM) used as simply an embedded state machine with no exposed UI or user interaction.
My company has implemented a number of such solutions for different organizations.
If I have missed your point, feel free to give me an example of your requirement, I'm sure we have addressed it at one time or another.
You might be interested in Bonita BPM.
This open source BPM solution offers an execution engine that can be used as a standalone.
Just like its competitors, it also offers an optional GUI in the form of a web based application: Bonita Portal.
I think the challenge for what you want to do is that most of the BPM Engines separate the definition of the process from the execution. So for most of them you need someplace that will allow you to store the definition long term (typically a database) and then they track the state of a given instance of that definition for you.
If you wanted a truly stateless BPMN "interpretation" engine, then your serialized data would have to include not only the current state of the process, but he process definition as well. I'm sure this can be done, but I don't think any of the engines have taken this approach as doing so would add complexity to the solution, and solves a problem that not many people seem to be asking about.
Additionally it begs the question "given that we now have a process that knows what task it is on, how does that task actually get executed?" In most of the solutions I've seen the execution of the task takes place in the same server as the engine. In some where the execution is in a different technology, the "executor" doesn't understand the Process much at all except to make a call to signal "okay this thing is done" and the engine handles what happens next. You want to have this data in a serialize data structure of some sort, so the question would arise "If we have this stateless BPMN Engine, would the executor of the task have to update the serialized data to indicate the state change for the task".
There are other requirements of the BPMN specification that I think would make your approach very difficult, such as how to handle items like Intermediate Message Events that are either waiting for a specific time, or a message, before moving the process forward. While all of these are potentially solvable, it certainly would take significant re-engineering of current approaches.

How to implement OData federation for Application integration

I have to integrate various legacy applications with some newly introduced parts that are silos of information and have been built at different times with varying architectures. At times these applications may need to get data from other system if it exists and display it to the user within their own screens based on the business needs.
I was looking to see if its possible to implement a generic federation engine that kind of abstracts the aggregation of the data from various other OData endpoints and have a single version of truth.
An simplistic example could be as below.
I am not really looking to do an ETL here as that may introduce some data related side effects in terms of staleness etc.
Can some one share some ideas as to how this can be achieved or point me to any article on the net that shows such a concept.
Regards
Kiran
Officially, the answer is to use either the reflection provider or a custom provider.
Support for multiple data sources (odata)
Allow me to expose entities from multiple sources
To decide between the two approaches, take a look at this article.
If you decide that you need to build a custom provider, the referenced article also contains links to a series of other articles that will help you through the learning process.
Your project seems non-trivial, so in addition I recommend looking at other resources like the WCF Data Services Toolkit to help you along.
By the way, from an architecture standpoint, I believe your idea is sound. Yes, you may have some domain logic behind OData endpoints, but I've always believed this logic should be thin as OData is primarily used as part of data access layers, much like SQL (as opposed to service layers which encapsulate more behavior in the traditional sense). Even if that thin logic requires your aggregator to get a little smart, it's likely that you'll always be able to get away with it using a custom provider.
That being said, if the aggregator itself encapsulates a lot of behavior (as opposed to simply aggregating and re-exposing raw data), you should consider using another protocol that is less data-oriented (but keep using the OData backends in that service). Since domain logic is normally heavily specific, there's very rarely a one-size-fits-all type of protocol, so you'd naturally have to design it yourself.
However, if the aggregated data is exposed mostly as-is or with essentially structural changes (little to no behavior besides assembling the raw data), I think using OData again for that central component is very appropriate.
Obviously, and as you can see in the comments to your question, not everybody would agree with all of this -- so as always, take it with a grain of salt.

Understanding SharedMem

Good evening guys!
I'm currently designing a desktop interface with various features using Firemonkey/FMX. One of these features is the ability to show information inside a "panel". This "panel" consists of a title and context (both tlabel), and an image (timage). One panel is created for each "application" that wishes to interact with my application. Each panel is named when it's created using a variable assigned when calling the procedure to create it, which is designed to allow other developers to access their panel with ease, but there's a risk this could be exploited so i may switch to bindingname.
I've already written the code to create one of these panels based upon variables, as well as the code to typecast down to the label and image levels based on a nested iterative .children and FindComponent loop, and i can freely change the text of the labels or the image (with .loadfromfile) using this method (i.e. the code works). However, as i'm wanting to open this feature to other applications and developers to actually display information inside one of these "panels", i need to work with Shared Memory.
The problem is that i truly can't understand it. Everything i've read implies that using SharedMem is easy, but i just can't understand it at all. Even the simple example in XE2's included samples confuses me. I unfortunately don't understand IPC at all, despite trying numerous times to get a grasp on it. I could use inifiles, but i don't feel they have flexibility required. I considered GlobalAtomTable, but as with SharedMem, i don't understand that either, not to mention that it reportedly leaks in Delphi.
Essentially, i'm looking for a function/procedure where i first create the area of shared memory. I'm then really looking for a function to read a string from that sharedmemory and output the result for me to access via other procedures or functions. As i'd like to make my other projects compatible with this one, i'd also be looking to get a procedure/function to write values to the shared memory from a seperate application.
As i said, i don't understand IPC or SharedMem, and i really need a basic start point from which i can work and teach myself, up to the more advanced levels. A step-by-step Walkthrough on exactly what i'm hoping to learn would be much appreciated. I am wanting to learn this rather than just get a lump of code as it's pretty much a given that i should be working with IPC by now.
Look at Cromis IMC or IPC components.
The IMC is for inter machine communication using tcp (indy) and the IPC is for inter process communication using windows named pipes.
Both uses the same client/server message system(packet based), so you don't have to dwell over the windows documentation to implement your application.
Just follow the examples found on the links above and you would have your application running in no time. Btw, the author Iztok Kacin is a SO member.

Visual statechart editor for non-programmers, with limited conditions, events and actions

I'm looking for some visual statechart-editor, for my customer. I'm building for him server application, and he needs tool to build statecarts and upload them to the servers. Ofcourse, the tool needs to have the capability to export to some readable format (such as SCXML), so I could build a reader for it.
I saw some tools, like fsm-editor. But they can't be good for me, because I want to limit my customer to set of specific set of parametrized-conditions, parametrized-events and parametrized-actions.
For example, I'll define:
conditions: coIsDoorOpen, coIsThereNAppelsOnTheTree(n as uint[0..200]), ...
events: evLightOn, evLightOff, evTimeout(ms as uint[1..10,000]), ...
actions: acSetAlarmOn, acCloseWindowN(n as uint[1..10]), ...
and my customer could build some dozens statecharts with those explicit predefined attributes (conds, events & actions), and upload the export of them to the approperiate places.
There is no need to be strict to one statechart-standard or to another. But I need support on this things:
parametrized conditions/events/actions
before entering/exiting state actions
no need to support inner variables; I can use actions&conditions for it.
Is there any tool for it (preferably free)?
If not - is there any OpenSource (C# / JS) implementation of editor that supports all abpve without the stricting of conds/events/actions, that I could easily break in to it and add the requested strict mode?
Based upon your needs, my knee-jerk reaction of recommending Visio or Dia would be inappropriate here. You appear to require a tool with some form of an API or descriptive language to lock users to a constrained set of components Lemmings-style, and your needs would best be serviced by something relatively simple if possible.
I'm curious why altering the source code to SCXML-GUI (fsm-editor) or Violet would not solve your needs, however. You seem to indicate that an open source utility written in C# or JavaScript is most desirable, which I cannot easily locate.
But, in the interests of completeness, here's a comparable question that may help your search. Most notably, this appears to be exactly what you desire and may be worth purchasing.
Best of luck with your project.

What is a concise way of understanding RESTful and its implications?

**update: horray! so it is a journey of practice and understanding. ;) now i no longer feel so dumb.*
I have read up many articles on REST, and coded up several rails apps that makes use of RESTful resources. However, I never really felt like I fully understood what it is, and what is the difference between RESTful and not-restful. I also have a hard time explaining to people why/when they should use it.
If there is someone who have found a very clear explanation for REST and circumstances on when/why/where to use it, (and when not to) it would benefit the world if you could put it up, thanks! =)
REST is usually learned like this:
You hear about REST being using HTTP the way it was meant to be used, and from that you shun SOAP Web Services' envelopes, since most of what's needed by many SOAP standards are handled by HTTP in a simple, no-nonsense way. You also quickly learn that you need to use the right method for the right operation.
Later, perhaps years later, you hear that REST is more than that. REST is in fact also the concept of linking between resources. This often takes a while to grasp the full meaning of, but when you learn this, you start introducing hyperlinks into your responses so that clients can navigate your system without being coupled to how the server wants to name its resources (i.e. the URIs).
Even later, you learn that you still haven't understood REST! And this is because you find out that media types are important. You start making media types called application/vnd.example.foo+json and put hyperlinks in them, since that's already your understanding of REST.
Years pass, and you re-read Fielding's thesis for the umpteenth time, to see if there's anything you missed, and it suddenly dawns upon you what really the HATEOAS constraint is: It's about the client not having any notion of how the server's resources are structured, but that it discoveres these relationships at runtime. It also means that the screen in front of the user is driven completely by what is passed over the wire, so in fact, if a server passes an image/jpeg then that's what you're supposed to show to the user, not an error message saying "AtomProcessor can't handle image/jpeg".
I'm just coming to terms with #4 and I'm hoping the ladder isn't much longer! It's taken me seven years.
This article does a good job classifying the differences in several http application styles from WS-* to RESTian purity. What I like about this post is it reminds you that most of what we call REST really is something only partly in line with Roy Fielding's original definition.
InfoQ has a whole section addressing more of the "what is REST" angle as well.
In terms of REST vs. SOAP, this question seems to have a number of good responses, particularly the selected answer.
I would imagine YMMV, but I found it very easy to start understanding the details of REST after I realised how REST essentially was a continuation of the static WWW concepts into the web application design space. I had written (a rather longish) post on the same : Why REST?
Scalability is an obvious benefit of REST (stateless, caching).
But also - and this is probably the main benefit of hypertext - REST is ideal for when you have lots of clients to your service. Following REST and the hypertext constraint drastically reduces the coupling between all those clients and your server, which means you have more freedom when evolving/developing your service over time - you are not tied down by the risk of breaking would-be-coupled clients.
On a practical note, if you're working with rails - then restfulie is a great little framework for tackling hypertext on the client and server. Server side is a rails extension, and client is a DSL for handling state changes. Interesting stuff, check it out here: http://restfulie.caelum.com.br/ - I highly recommend the tutorial/demo vids they have up on vimeo :)
Content-Type: text/x-flamebait
I've been asking the same question lately, and my supposition is that
half the problem with explaining why full-on REST is a good thing when
defining an interface for machine-consumed data is that much of the
time it isn't. OK, you'd need a really good reason to ignore the
commonsense bits (URLs define resources, HTTP verbs define actions,
etc etc) - I'm in no way suggesting we go back to the abomination that
was SOAP. But doing HATEOAS in a way that is both Fielding-approved
(no non-standard media types) and machine-friendly seems to offer
diminishing returns: it's all very well using a standard media type to
describe the valid transitions (if such a media type exists) but where
the application is at all complicated your consumer's agent still
needs to know which are the right transitions to make to achieve the
desired goal (a ticket purchase, or whatever), and it can't do that
unless your consumer (a human) tells it. And if he's required to
build into his program the out-of-band knowledge that the path with
linkrels create_order => add_line => add_payment_info => confirm is
the correct one, and reset_order is not the right path, then I don't
see that it's so much more grievous a sin to make him teach his XML
parser what to do with application/x-vnd.yourname.order.
I mean, obviously yes it's less work all round if there's a suitable
standard format with libraries and whatnot that can be reused, but in
the (probably more common) case that there isn't, your options
according to Fielding-REST are (a) create a standard, or (b) to
augment the client by downloading code to it. If you're merely
looking to get the job done and not to change the world, option (c)
"just make something up" probably looks quite tempting and I for one wouldn't
blame you for taking it.

Resources