Jon Flanders did a session (sold out) last night on building a Service Monitoring Infrastructure with BAM. Great talk! He highlighted one thing that has been drifting on the edge of my consciousness over the past year; that is where is the sweet spot for BAM and where does the BizTalk tracking database play well.
After BAM was released in BizTalk 2004 it became obvious to M$ that the BAM product had as much traction with the operational people as it did as it did on the business side. The first signs of this were the embedding of BAM functionality with the M$ Operations Manager (MOM 2005 Resource Kit). The most recent evidence is that the new EDI functionality is supported from a tracking perspective by BAM. I felt compelled to ask the question then as to what to choose
- BAM and Tracking
or
- Just BAM
The answer yesterday was BAM only. I'm still weighing the implications of this. Ponder for a second what happens when you turn off all tracking in BizTalk. BizTalk would scream along enabling support for lower (not low-low) latency solutions, the downside seem all related to compliance and auditing. Now the questions is how to address these gaps with BAM.
My gut feel is that Jon is onto something here. Because BAM extends the reach of how we implement tracking in a really flexible way the power to track what's interesting to your business moves back into your control. BAM really provides a more holistic approach that reflects the reality of tracking.
No comments:
Post a Comment