I did create a slide show on using ESB as the backbone for orchestrating web services both inside the firewall and external to the firewall into composite services. The real trick is finding the right granularity to allow services to be useful independent entities with contracts that allow them to form higher level useful composite services.
This was done using OpenESB and java based web-services but as noted by others, the languages used to build the services is agnostic and in fact polyglot is probably desirable to play into the strength of different languages. Scala and other functional languages are good examples because they more of less delegate the difficult task of multi-threading to background services (to take advantage of multi-core processors) which is inherent to the language - much as we don't worry about garbage collection anymore. Currently I work with an ERP suite that is built entirely on top web services - every feature and architectural service is invoked by calling either a service or a higher composite based on services. This is built on top of a Progress ESB platform. The cool thing is the same services can be used in client sever mode or by a Web based front end. This is a big paradigm shift as you need to be concerned with cross platform security and transactional integrity - can a set of composite operations be rolled back? - and how to deal with permissions in such an environment. There is also the choice of REST or SOAP and other protocols to consider - they all have pros and cons. I did use Sinatra as the glue for exposing and consuming services on one project and it was a good fit for that solution. ---- Ian Young <[email protected]> wrote: > On this note, has anyone done a talk on Service-Oriented Architecture? I > know it's a thing, and I like the idea of it, but I don't have very much > real experience with it. I'd be interested in hearing about the pros, cons, > and implementation details of doing a full app with SOA in Rails. > > Ian > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Ben Hughes <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Matt hits on an important point - we're talking about Rails here, yet Ruby > > as a language is still wonderfully powerful within the ecosystem of > > alternatives. I don't think the value of building things in Ruby and > > quasi-Ruby (CoffeeScript ;-) has waned at all. We may just be building > > different things and architecting things differently. > > > > Ben > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Matt Aimonetti > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > >> I mostly agree with the article. But it will take a little bit before > >> everybody's on the same page. > >> Rails for me is yet another tool in my toolbox when I need to create "web > >> 2.0" site, mainly dynamically generated on the server side. > >> > >> The one thing tho, even when I try hard, I almost always come back to > >> Ruby even when working in a Ruby/Scala shop and having a thing for Lisp and > >> Go. > >> > >> - Matt > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Chris McCann <[email protected]>wrote: > >> > >>> An interesting post about where Rails fits in with the current web- > >>> enabled application landscape. > >>> > >>> http://broadcastingadam.com/2011/11/moving_on_from_rails > >>> > >>> Thoughts? > >>> > >>> Chris > >>> > >>> -- > >>> SD Ruby mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby > >> > >> > >> -- > >> SD Ruby mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby > >> > > > > -- > > SD Ruby mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby > > > > -- > SD Ruby mailing list > [email protected] > http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby -- SD Ruby mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby
