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.
Related
I would be starting ft in one company, where i was been told that the application is developed using 'Sas' and 'salesforce'. What is the difference between two?
And which are recommended online resource which I can use to learn more about it.
SAS is software for statistical analysis. If your company/job description doesn't look like working with large sets of data & complex reporting that's probably not it.
They probably mean SaaS (Software as a Service) model, also known as "the cloud", cloud computing etc. You write the program (or use / modify existing one) but you don't buy servers, worry about network connection, electricity costs, load balancing (spikes in traffic will not cause your website to go down). Many apps operate in this model. Microsoft's Azure cloud (or even online wersions of MS Office). There's Siebel Oracle on Demand CRM, Microsoft Dynamics, SAP I think also has SaaS offering...
It's a big topic, I'm simplifying a lot here. And then there are Platform as a Service things too (PaaS) where they give you "just" the hosting etc but no base application to build on top of. You write everything you need from scratch and upload it. Think Heroku or Amazon Web Services (AWS).
Salesforce is "just" one more SaaS application. You start with base application & database, similar to all other clients in the world. You can install plugins to it (some free, some paid), configure it yourself, write custom code if your functionality is too complex... You can do a lot with just clicks & drag & drop but if you need to code stuff then JavaScript (for client-side) and Apex (for server-side) will be your friend. Apex is bit similar to Java.
Where to start... Trailhead is good source of self-paced trainings. You can sign up for a free Salesforce Developer Edition (has almost all features as the paid one but limited storage space), try to pass some courses... Or in SF help&training there should be tons of videos (actually in that link whole left menu "getting started with salesforce" might be good).
From what I know, Parse offers convenient communication stacks for various platforms such as iOS, so it is easy to build clients that use your web app.
But Parse also seems to be tightly integrated with Facebook. If you were to build a web app that does not need Facebook, but that may integrate with Facebook in the long term, is Parse the clear winner over deploying directly to AWS, or are there important disadvantages to consider?
As far as I understand their page Parse is a PaaS (platform as a service) provider like Heroku and others while AWS is a IaaS (infrastructure as a service) provider.
Pros for PaaS:
They care about the infrastructure
You build your app on an existing platform
For the start you don't need "ops-guys" as you don't do ops
You can take their knowledge and prebuilt tools for your advance
Pros for IaaS:
You have full control about the underlaying infrastructure
You can start with a greenfield and build what ever you want
You can use tools like Puppet / Chef / ... to control your servers
You don't have to pay for the additional stuff you get when using PaaS
(but have to pay your people for it)
So there is not a winner of this "battle" but you have to decide whether you want to use prebuilt tooling and give some independence for this or whether you want to have the absolute control over everything (nearly as you can't touch the hardware) and invest time and manpower into building your own tooling.
"Better, Faster, Cheaper.."
If you are pursuing mobile first strategy, Parse is a great tool for bootstrapping a mature, full web-presence from nothing more than an original beta app.
I dont have direct experience with AWS.
I have used Heroku/Parse integrating (very quickly) a stand alone mobile app with the back-end where the back end needs to cover following:
DB/persistence/noSql
Workflow - async tasks
REST API interface HTTP
Once the mobile app existed with only stubbed local data , Parse allowed a single engineer to build out ALL infrastructure mentioned above very quickly, taking the app from single user to multi-user with full DB and workflow that backs client side events with considerable server-side and cloud side business logic and process. Scaling related startup stuff that used to take weeks took only days.
The compression (time&money) when scaling up an app stack is really something. The Parse API did almost everything that i needed with one small exception (remuxing UGC media).
Personally, i abandoned the parse/android SDK in favor of a more robust REST API (threading on client-side and heavy HTTP activity ).
Developers used to Curl/REST dev stacks will take to Parse.
The project I'm currently involved requires that business logic must be implemented in Web Service that will be consumed by the Presentation Tier Components (i.e. Web Applications).
The company has an Enterprise Service Bus, and up-to-date almost every Web Service developed is exposed through this bus. I asked some colleagues around about when to expose Service through ESB and I got this answers:
If there's an ESB, expose everything through it: There are several benefits like Load-Balancing and location transparency
If the ESB will only act as a Proxy -i.e no message transformation- just don't use it: You'll overload the ESB and lose performance. You'll better do a point-to-point connection.
You should expose a component through ESB if there's a protocol transformation (like exposing a Stored Procedure as a SOAP Service). If this isn't present you better go Point-to-Point.
So I'm curious if there's a general agreement or best-practice of when to expose a Web Service through it or not. Any reading/reference would be a great help.
From my point of view and after 4 years of experience with SOA technologies, using an ESB will always overload the system since you are adding a new layer and making all your communications go through it. Transformation (either messaging or protocol) and routing aren't to hard to accomplish without an ESB and point to point communication will have a bit higher throughput. Same happens also with business process automation, there are ways to get there without the need of an ESB.
In the other hand, the use of an ESB has several benefits in the scope of a corporation but it must be within a vision and strategy. One of the best examples is a company that has been working for a long time with a wide range of tools, each of them for a specific purpose and that made the company be distributed in teams which work in silos, ones isolated from the others. After a long time that makes interaction between teams complex and slow. A well planned SOA strategy will help to integrate all those tools and start replacing them for more meaningful lightweight items.
So, IMHO, Using an ESB just to solve a couple of "issues" in a single project without a corporate strategy isn't a good idea and, eventually, the word SOA will be banned in your company, when the problem isn't SOA by itself by rather the lack of vision and corporate strategy.
The only rule of thumb that I found regarding the use of ESBs is: The requirement of transformation, routing, business process automation (with or without human interaction), etc. in a single project is not a symptom of going SOA (almost every project has to perform transformations, routing and business process automation), but when those needs are the ones for a whole corporation then it's worth to think about it from a business point of view, never a technical one. If there isn't a business perspective, then SOA will fail.
This is a really wide topic and discussion can last for ages, I will suggest you a couple of links for further reading:
Some SOA Case Studies
Top 10 Reasons why SOA fails
We have a (AJAX heavy) web application hosted in cloud across servers and we need to monitor the availability of this service. Requires logging in to the application with a username-password, perform some searches as that user etc.
Since we plan to use Nagios for some other monitoring tasks, we decided to use Nagios for web application monitoring too.
I came across three such solutions:
Webinject: I don't feel like using this. Project not under active development. It was last released in Jan 2006. I can't see any support/help available. Also I suspect how will it behave with Ajax.
Cucumber-Nagios:
I tried using this. It involves many Ruby components and found that you have to have in-depth knowledge of Ruby platform to make all these components work together. I am not a Ruby guy and having tough time making all these components work together. Also even this project is not under active development and I don't see support/help options available. I posted a bug 4 days back and don't see any response yet.
Selenium plugin for Nagios: Haven't tried it yet. Will try now.
Any more solutions available?
Also, since I don't see any good actively developed solutions for monitoring web applications using Nagios, I suspect if it's really a good approach to use Nagios for this? If not, what alternatives do I have? In short what is the best approach to monitor web applications availability?
Edit 1: We can't afford the Nagios XI paid version and will prefer open source solutions.
If not, what alternatives do I have?
Although Nagios was one of options that we've considered, we've chosen OpenNMS for monitoring purposes. Rationale for our decision is that OpenNMS is highly reliable and configurable free open-source tool and additionally, most of our applications are Java-based; OpenNMS offers integration with JMX. However, bear in mind that if you're demanding very complex tests for your Web site maybe it's better to look elsewhere. OpenNMS can be set to check for HTTP status codes etc., but if you're looking for complex scenarios take a look at:
Apache JMeter (we're using it mainly during the testing phase)
Selenium (can be well used even in production phase)
Sorry for the very involved question, but this is something I've been researching for a while now and it is really frustrating me. I feel like in today's age we have a million and one ways to implement services tat are cross-platform (SOAP) and easy to build (thanks to .NET, java, and other frameworks). However, these technologies have been in the community for 5-10 years, but we are (or at least I am) constantly plagued with the same issues:
Identification (Tracking services) - UDDI; e.g., had to remind a co-worker the 3 times this month where a service is at, despite the fact there is a wiki that discusses the service and a PDF version of the same documentation that lives in a repository where we keep our service docs.
Scalability - Out of the box clustering; As organizations, we spend a lot of money on paying our admins just to watch the utilization of our services and make decisions like, does this service need more RAM, more CPU, more interfaces? How do I load balance this?
Monitoring - error logging, etc; I can't count how many times I have to set up tracing on services in order to see why a bug is happening that only seems to affect one customer, or have to code logic into the service to serialize exceptions, log exceptions to dbs, fail gracefully, etc.
Deployment - easy to deploy; none of this deploying DLLs to 5 load balanced servers
Each one of these problems requires some type of custom solution implemented by the organization. Documentation and UDDIs for #1. Virtualization and load balancing hardware / software for #2. Tracing, writing exceptions to databases / logs, etc for #3. Custom deployment software for #4. I work for a mid-sized organization. I can't even imagine how a company the size of Sun, Google, or Microsoft would tackle these dilemmas.
Maybe my vision is unrealistic, but I dream of having a Framework per se that lives on top of a server cluster that manages all of the above. I was ecstatic to read about Microsoft's AppFabric since it really seems to extend some of the functionality of BizTalk to WCF service implementors: Caching, Hosting, Monitoring, etc. However, from what I've seen, I still don't feel it lives up to my dream for an all-in-one solution that assists the developer and organization in writing services that are scaled across clusters easily, deployed into the cluster easily, and identifiable, possibly even version-able.
So, I don't mean this post to be about my dream. I do actually have a question. For starters, is my dream / want completely unrealistic? Furthermore, what solutions are there available that attempt to solve these problems without confining us to a new and more proprietary way (BizTalk) of developing services? An lastly, in concern to a complete SOA / ESB solution, where do we see the most potential in the market right now or in the future?
I think that you are talking about different kinds of problems here.
1). Developers who don't read documentation. This is an endemic problem, not limited to SOA - just look at some questions on StackOverflow. At least the developer is asking you whether there is a service, rather then just duplicating logic in their own code. I don't see any technical solution to these kinds of problems, you've already provided good registries and documentation, but some developers prefer to talk to people. Maybe, even, this is actually a good thing - human interaction has value above the technical content of the interaction. Or maybe, you're too nice: "No, I won't answer that question, look it up."
2). Scaling. There are technologies addressing this issue. (Disclaimer I work for IBM, who sell some, so I'll reference these - I'm not intending to imply that IBM are the only vendor with solutions in this space.) There are products such as this that can provision a new machine, install a software stack and add it to a cluster to address workload changes. Then at a finer grained level of control in the Java EE world the Application Server can dynamically shape traffic and adjust clusters. See WebSphere Virtual Enterprise
3). Monitoring. I don't "get" what you expect here. In all likelyhood such tricky bugs will require application level trace. For some problems such as finding memory leaks and performance bottlenecks there are very good tools, at least in the Java EE world.
4). I can't speak to the .Net world, but I'd say that Java EE app servers do a reasonable job of deploying the apps across clusters smoothly, and in the cases where we use JNI and need DLLs deploying then we can use products such as the Tivoli stack I mention to manage this.
So, in summary, I do think that vendors are trying to address these issues. And I don't think your life would be simpler without SOA. Imagine instead the same problems applied to myriad separate, independent applications.
Here's my two cents.
I've been a developer at a company that used SOA incorrectly. The worst solution they implemented was field level validation of form elements on a desktop app using SOA. To perform acceptably these require very low latency. A 2-4 second wait to change to a new field gets old fast. The service ran over the network on a biztalk server. Everyone hated it.
If you're going to do this you really need to spend a lot of time dealing with network latency, service failure, timing, and timeout issues.
Don't get carried away and think SOA is the solution to every problem. Used at a high level it's great, used at a low level it makes your applications fragile, slow, and impossible to debug.
If you talk to IBM or one of the big SOA vendors, they got a products that cover each scenario.
Identification (Tracking services) - UDDI; e.g., had to remind a co-worker the 3 times this month where a service is at, despite the fact there is a wiki that discusses the service and a PDF version of the same documentation that lives in a repository where we keep our service docs.
Registry and Repository server. Nice thing is that it does governance (promotion, demotion, versioning, approval) and your ESB typically does a "lookup" for the latest and greatest against the register server.
Scalability - Out of the box clustering; As organizations, we spend a lot of money on paying our admins just to watch the utilization of our services and make decisions like, does this service need more RAM, more CPU, more interfaces? How do I load balance this?
Transaction monitoring software like IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager for SOA. Basically, it tracks things from a horizontal point of view and to see if there is a service disruption from a end user/end app point of view.
As far as your clustering.... you have to pick good middleware and architecture. Personally speaking, get stuff that is "cloud" ready. App Servers with NoSQL connected by MOM.
Monitoring - error logging, etc; I can't count how many times I have to set up tracing on services in order to see why a bug is happening that only seems to affect one customer, or have to code logic into the service to serialize exceptions, log exceptions to dbs, fail gracefully, etc.
Enterprise standards for your developers and for your vendors. Integration of all business and system events into a single dashboard. (Most companies spilt them). This is done already at most enterprise shops.
Deployment - easy to deploy; none of this deploying DLLs to 5 load balanced servers
Ahh.. Microsoft IIS Web Deployment Tool 2.0. You can sync 100s of MS servers by just updating the master. It's really easy.