| [cosmos-dev] Performance positioning of the COSMOS M2 vis-a-vis P2P integrations |
|
All, On more than one occasion, some of the reviewers of the
COSMOS presentations have put the following questions on the table; and this
usually happens when we describe the data manager…. “But you just added TWO layers to my data-integration
problem that I solved using point-to-point integration… Specifically, you
are now asking me to add Data Managers to BOTH of the products I just integrated
via a P2P approach?” Obviously, this view has its flaws, i.e. it fails to
recognize that COSMOS offers a standards-based data integration building blocks
/ tools / approaches that could one day become the lingua franca for such
integrations in this business space… Eventually, COSMOS could
alleviate the need for MANY (but definitely NOT ALL) point-to-point
integrations. Thus, there will ALWAYS be need for SOME point to point
integrations, where blindingly fast and massive amounts of data exchange are
key criteria. Now the question: do we need to start to put some thresholds
/ guidelines in place that will enable adopters to determine if COSMOS is a
viable solution for them? These thresholds or guidelines or whatever
could be used by a potential adopter to determine if they should use a COSMOS-based
approach or go for a P2P integration. Or do we say that, “COSMOS
will impose minimal overhead due to its Data Managers and associated infrastructure,
and should be considered for ALL data centric integrations; and P2P
integrations must only be attempted as a last resort?” Or in other words, how brave should we be J in positioning our product? Interestingly,
this question comes up VERY frequently from data centric audiences, who are our
primary adopter target… Seems the data folks are very much data
performance focused, however, there are MANY use cases that do not entails
large amounts of data transfer between products. Thoughts
/ Feedback / Comments?, Jimmy
Mohsin Cell +1-609-635-1703 |