Getting different applications to talk to each other is a problem faced by many companies. Application integration is particularly troublesome when legacy systems are involved, and transferring data between old mainframe systems and more modern applications can be cumbersome and time-consuming. A good deal of time is spent on ensuring this happens, and software is often available to help with the process.
While middle ware exists to help overcome these issues, the permutations of languages, equipment, databases, and operating system are never ending, so it is impossible to cater for every eventuality. If proprietary tools are not available, the the solution is a home-grown procedure to do the job of communicating between systems. Here the skills shortage may affect the maintainability of such software bridges.
Originally it was felt that object oriented databases would overcome these problems for new applications. However, many applications are developed independently, and the problem of duplicate entities persists. The solution would be to have one database, with all applications making use of it, especially for common data.
Different application packages will still have their own databases, and this could easily lead to duplication of entities and redundancy. The need for middleware to capture or transfer common data is once more created. As it often happens that packages are acquired, this scenario is an ongoing problem for most organizations.
What is needed to resolve the situation today is a situation where an enterprise database with standard modules to update, maintain, and query the common data is created. Any new applications would then simply interface with that central database. Application specific data could be integrated with the enterprise database or kept separate, as appropriate.
Such a simplified view of company date is still completely futuristic. The power of computer hardware makes it possible for inefficient. Sub-optimal configurations to survive. Perhaps the IT professionals could learn from manufacturing, where the lesson was learned long ago that keeping older, inefficient, machinery because it had been paid for and was still work was an ineffective approach, which lowers quality and productivity.
A disproportionate amount of time and money is absorbed by application integration. Many smaller companies cannot deal with the complexities, and simply choose to live with the problem. In time it is possible that a move might be started towards rationalizing the whole approach to applications. Maybe one day everybody will look back and laugh at the current state of the art, after computers have fully emerged from the Dark Ages of systems development.
While middle ware exists to help overcome these issues, the permutations of languages, equipment, databases, and operating system are never ending, so it is impossible to cater for every eventuality. If proprietary tools are not available, the the solution is a home-grown procedure to do the job of communicating between systems. Here the skills shortage may affect the maintainability of such software bridges.
Originally it was felt that object oriented databases would overcome these problems for new applications. However, many applications are developed independently, and the problem of duplicate entities persists. The solution would be to have one database, with all applications making use of it, especially for common data.
Different application packages will still have their own databases, and this could easily lead to duplication of entities and redundancy. The need for middleware to capture or transfer common data is once more created. As it often happens that packages are acquired, this scenario is an ongoing problem for most organizations.
What is needed to resolve the situation today is a situation where an enterprise database with standard modules to update, maintain, and query the common data is created. Any new applications would then simply interface with that central database. Application specific data could be integrated with the enterprise database or kept separate, as appropriate.
Such a simplified view of company date is still completely futuristic. The power of computer hardware makes it possible for inefficient. Sub-optimal configurations to survive. Perhaps the IT professionals could learn from manufacturing, where the lesson was learned long ago that keeping older, inefficient, machinery because it had been paid for and was still work was an ineffective approach, which lowers quality and productivity.
A disproportionate amount of time and money is absorbed by application integration. Many smaller companies cannot deal with the complexities, and simply choose to live with the problem. In time it is possible that a move might be started towards rationalizing the whole approach to applications. Maybe one day everybody will look back and laugh at the current state of the art, after computers have fully emerged from the Dark Ages of systems development.
About the Author:
Peggie K. Lambert is an expert in data management and integration. Need to learn more about application integration services? If so the author recommends you visit www.liaison.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment