I could not find any documentation about Human Tasks in WSO2 Micro Integration 7.X.
Is it still available. If yes - where can I find a documentation.
If not - which tools do you use for such cases?
Human Tasks are not available in the 7xx series. You have to use the latest product in 6xx series (ie Enterprise Integrator 6.6.0) if you want to use Human Tasks
Related
I have a little bit of confusion about the Stream Processor.
I've previously used the CEP and now I'm using the Stream Processor.
if I'm not mistaken, the Data Analytics Server, the CEP and the Machine Learner merged into the Stream Processor, is it true?
Because I found some inconsistencies, for example the SP can't publish directly in the dashboard, while CEP could.
So, my question is, all the feutures in the CEP and in the ML, are going to flow in the SP?
DAS, CEP and ML have not been completely merged into the Stream Processor.
In DAS, the real time analytics were handled by Siddhi and the batch analytics were done through Spark. However, in Stream Processor, only Siddhi acts as the core processor and Spark is not used.
Stream processor processes data in streaming manner through siddhi. In order to fulfill the requiremnts for batch analytics, incremental processing[1] which has been introduced to Siddhi 4.0.0 can be used.
Also ML support is provided through ml extentions written for Siddhi 4.0.0.
In das/cep it is required to define several artifacts like receivers, execution plans, publishers etc.. in order to create a analytic work flow.
But in Stream Processor,it is possible to define the whole flow in a single Siddhi-App.
For further clarification, please refer to the DAS to SP migration guide[2] and WSO2 analytics site[3].
[1] https://wso2.github.io/siddhi/documentation/siddhi-4.0/#incremental-aggregation
[2] https://docs.wso2.com/display/SP4xx/Upgrading+from+a+Previous+Release
[3] https://wso2.com/analytics
WSO2 Stream Processor is the latest WSO2 analytics offering. It has a super set of functionalities that WSO2 CEP had. Following is a comparison of capabilities of WSO2 CEP vs WSO2 SP.
General
The core of SP 4.x is the latest siddhi 4.x which is more stable and has improved performance. While CEP is powered by Siddhi 3.x.
SP is based on C5 and it's lean and light weight than CEP which was based on C4.
SP is designed to be container friendly and could native. Where as CEP had some challenges when deployed in containerised environments.
Everything is now contained in a Siddhi App, which is a single file which can be deployed and executed on it's own.
Incremental Analysis
New siddhi has the incremental analysis feature which is designed to cater batch analytics. With this feature users can easily do time series aggregations without having to integrate with other platforms such as Spark.
Incremental analysis smoothly federates real time analytics with batch analytics by allowing both forms of analytics to be done in the same message flow.
Distributed Deployment
SP 4.x has a distributed architecture which is highly scalable. SP's container friendly nature let's it be scaled massively.
The distributed deployment is fault tolerant and it supports exactly once processing with the aid of Apache Kafka.
CEP distributed architecture was based on Apache Storm.
Also, SP has in build support for Multi data center deployment. While CEP does not.
Tooling
SP has a rich editor which supports auto completion, event simulation, debugging of siddhi queries, etc. CEP only has the query editor UI in the management console.
Status Dashboard of SP let's users monitor their deployment with comprehensive set of statistics related to performance, resource consumption etc of Siddhi Apps and JVM. CEP had the carbon metric support which shows only JVM stats.
Business Rules
SP has Business rules feature where non-tech users can build processing logics through a graphical wizard-like UI without having to rite queries.
Developers can use this feature to present complex problems in a abstract manner which is understandable to business users.
CEP did not have feature focusing on business users.
So, my question is, all the feutures in the CEP and in the ML, are going to flow in the SP?
I don't believe so. StreamProcessor has only subset of capabilies of CEP, DAS or ML. IMHO it t is promoted currently as it is new, more lightweight and faster
As we know, Google Cloud Speech API is in Beta now.
Will it be safe to use it in a application on production server?
I was also searching for the applications which is using Google Cloud Speech API, So far I have found the following,
VoiceBase, Hyperconnect, InterActiveTel
Does anyone know of any other applications that could give us more confidence in using it on production server?
The official definition of GCP launch stages, such as Beta, can be found in our documentation here.
Beta is the point at which we are ready to open a release for any customer to use. There are no SLA or technical support obligations in a Beta release, and charges may be waived in some cases. Products will be complete from a feature perspective, but may have some open outstanding issues. Beta releases are suitable for limited production use cases.
Emphasis is mine: Limited production. Ultimately, it is going to come down to your risk appetite.
As of Tuesday, April 18, the Cloud Speech API has reached General Availability, meaning all features are open to developers and are to be considered stable.
Voicebase provides more than just speech recognition and it is currently used in production by large customers. Take a look at some of the features
http://voicebase.readthedocs.io/en/v2-beta/index.html
I've started my journey with cloud related technologies very recently. I'm trying to understand the basics as to be able to prepare the foundation for a basic cloud setup in my Internet of Things oriented company.
While browsing the Internet I've stumbled upon the following two groups of open source projects:
WSO2 / Mule / ...
OpenStack / CouldStack / Eucalyptus / ...
I'm trying to understand:
what kind of service do they offer? (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS, other?)
what are the differences between them?
what do they have in common?
how do the play with other cloud related technologies like Amazon AWS?
which one would you recommend to get some basic experience and for some early proof-of-concept? (I'm looking for the easiest option first)
Cloud stack and Open stack are open source softwares designed to manage, deploy virtual machines and networks which can deliver cloud services. Mainly these provide Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS). There are alot of comparisons on the internet on these two. So these softwares needs to be intalled on your hardware and maintain it and you provide a cloud service from it. When it comes Amazon AWS it is a readily available service where you don't do installations or maintain hardware, you just take service from them.
WSO2 and MuleSoft are different from above two and they are software platforms where several products(such as ESB). Both provide cloud platform facilities to deploye their products.
We cannot say which one to use but base on your requirements you may choose one or two (WSO2 products deployed on Amazon AWS or WSO2 products deployed on CloudStack VM's). Since you are willing to set up Internet of things, i think you may need to refer about products provided by above providers. Following source [1] will give you an idea about Iot platform setup by several free open source WSO2 products.
[1] http://wso2.com/landing/internet-of-things/
I want to deploy an event processing stack, based on WSO2, but can't figure the Feature installation process.
I've downloaded latest Carbon (4.0.2) and want to install probably ESB, BRS, CEP, BAM and maybe later API Management.
I've connected to the Turing feature repository
2 questions:
in the available features list I don't see BAM or BRS, although ESB, CEP and API are there. What do I need to see these other parts ?
when I select CEP and ESB for installation I get a "install modified" and no features are selected.I imagine this is something to do with feature version incompatibility
if I just select ESB, the installation seems to proceed but the server won't restart (hangs waiting for one of the Synapse services.
It feels like I have the wrong process to determine what set of features/versions I need. How should I proceed ?
Carbon does not like to play well with it's other components. I've never been able to successfully use Carbon to manage any WSO2 stack. Each time I've setup/deployed a WSO2 stack I've ended up manually configuring the separate components config files individually. Usually starting with the ESB first, then adding in the CEP then the BAM.
You must also make sure they start in the correct order and that the config files don't stomp on each other (make sure your port offsets are set).
You don't need Carbon to run any instance of the WSO2 stack, simply 'install' it (unzip the wso2X.zip file) then make sure the service starts (call wso2X/bin/wso2server.sh start) and that's about it for the general setup, after that you need to configure each component to play nice with each other component (meaning you need to hook your BAM and CEP into your ESB, etc.) there isn't a lot of 'auto' config or discovery so it's usually easier to go the manual route with WSO2.
Also note that WSO2 products are Java extensions (essentially wrappers) around other Apache products (like Tomcat/Synapse) so usually if you are having a problem with WSO2, its because the underlying system (Tomcat/Synapse) was not properly configured (though that is no fault of your own as the WSO2 documentation does not make any mention of ensuring the base system is configured properly).
Also note that in my testing of WSO2 products, they consume huge amounts of memory (could not run more than the ESB and BAM on one machine because of the 8GB+ memory eaten by each) and a trouble ticket had to be put in to rectify a memory leak found in WSO2's Java modules, not sure if that was ever fixed.
Not trying to negate WSO2, but just be warned that it's not a pretty undertaking and you might fare better with other 'cloud' options if you have a choice.
edit: I've had to test out different 'cloud' stacks (with different types of 'plugins' or web services if you will) and how interoperable they were; as it turns out, they're pretty interoperable if YOU have total control over the individual stacks, otherwise the biggest downfall of any of the stacks that I found was simply documentation ... I don't care if a program has bugs or issues, as long as they are properly documented with possible workarounds (if any) so that I am aware of what is happening on my stack. Since WSO2's products were just Java wrappers for the Apache versions of their offerings (i.e. WSO2's ESB == Apache Synapse), any problems that occurred where usually solved in Apache's documentation (what little they had for certain problems) while WSO2's documentation had a lot of copy/paste issues (if they had any documentation beyond version 1). It was usually easier to just download and install the actual Apache offerings over WSO2's offerings then afterwards install WSO2's products and point them to the valid Apache configs/installs.
I did some testing with the Microsoft stack with Azure and general IIS/.NET offerings of equivalent services (The IIS/.NET equivalents of an ESB/CEP/BAM/etc. for what could be found). On the MS side, the documentation was enough (and there's enough people buying into the hype of cloud right now) that I could stand up most of the services semi-easy. I say semi-easy because of the misnomer (or my misunderstanding) of the 'ease of use' of 'cloud' services. I also found a product called Neuron ESB which is a .NET ESB offering, though I didn't do any thing with it during my testing so I can't speak to it.
Testing Amazon's offerings turned out the be some of the easier to setup and configure; the biggest issue with what I was testing for AWS was general internet latency.
Most of this is personal conjecture and I highly recommend you evaluate each as the 'cloud' space is constantly changing and each cloud platform has something slightly different to offer.
TLDR: the cloud space has a lot to offer and one should really consider what it is they are trying to achieve in the long run then evaluate each platforms offerings to see which fits. That being said, documentation and internal vendor interoperability (i.e. the vendor's products ability to easily communicate with each other) definitely help a product's 're-usability' factor.
Turing feature repository is not compatible with Carbon kernel 4.0.2. You can download Carbon kernel 4.2.0 and connect to Turing feature repository.
I just learned today about the System Center AVIcode product, which is a .net application monitoring tool. I don't know much about it and I was wondering how it would compare to AppFabric. The latter also has monitoring features as well as other useful features. How much do these two product overlap and for which scenario is each one better suited?
Thanks for any insights!
AVIcode (now simply called "APM" feature in System Center 2012 - Operations Manager) and AppDynamics are monitoring products playing in the same space/market.
They both provide visibility into code-level performance issues with your application. If you are interested in AVIcode technology you can watch my talk at TechEd 2012 to see APM in Operations Manager in action http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/TechEd/NorthAmerica/2012/MGT302
AppFabric provides hosting and activation services, so it is orthogonal to the above - while it provides some "infrastructure" monitoring capability (i.e. the host running your code being up or down) it doesn't go to the code level showing "what was slow" or "what threw exceptions" in your code.
App Sight is applicable only to .NET framework 4.0 in terms on monitoring WCF transactions and Workflows. It's integrated into IIS Mgr thru extensions.
AVICode monitors a more broader range of .NET frameworks and protocols and is available as standalone or through integration with SCOM.
So the overlap would be the visibility they both provide for apps that leverage WCF and Workflows.
If you're interested in .NET application monitoring you might want to checkout http://www.appdynamics.com/. We're currently in the middle of our .NET beta program and have had a great response so far from users. I can sign you up for a no hassle free trial if you want to have a play and see what visibility we can provide . Drop me a line at appman#appdynamics.com if your keen.