in

ASP.NET Weblogs

Tiago Pascoal's WebLog

Hello Good Evening and welcome to nothing much.

Enterprise Architecturing

Sam Gentile, has written a *must read* post about why .Net developers don't grok scalable distributed systems. He cites lack of literature,among other things.

I don't totally agree with him, i usually choose to scale my applications horizontally. Either have subsystems living on different machines (preferably with their own data), or equally configured machines that are load balanced (can be easily replicated and when more horsepower is needed,you just need to add some iron to cope with the higher load). From what i've seen, this is easily acomplished but the database seems to be (invariantly) the bottleneck. If you don't acommodate this from the start [replication,data partitioning,etc], you are doomed sooner or later. (from my experience the later seems to happen when the database server vertically scalable is not feasible anymore (or no budget to do it :-))].  Adrian Bateman seems to share the same opinion and describes it much better then me. :-)

But there is something i would really love to see. A blueprint of the architecture him and Robert have been writing for the last few months.

I would really like to understand .Net Enterprise Services, and their advantages but i've failed to do it so far, i guess as sam says no sufficient literature. :-)

Maybe Sam will write a book about it? send me the amazon link, and i will surely pre-order it today. :-)

Perhaps an english version of Clemens book is in order? or Ingo rammer's next book will cover this gap?

Meanwhile TheServerSide.Net is compiling a top 50 list, on Who's Who in the Enterprise .NET World?

 

Comments

 

Scott Galloway said:

I agree, I also feel it's one of the reasons that more large corporates aren't moving to .NET - J2EE is seen as the 'enterprise' platform, .NET is seen as the next version of ASP - which really wasn't ever seen as an enterprse solution. I think it's wrong but there is a real lack of information around for building truly enterprise class systems in .NET
February 13, 2004 8:25 AM
 

angry joe said:

Enterprise services still has a lot of COM+ baggage, so we avoid it like the plague where I work.

Smart caching your database data on the web servers (or an app server) is the cake. Everything else is icing. There's simply no substitute for it. Enterprise sevices buys you nothing if you don't attend to how you utilize your database first.

February 13, 2004 9:18 AM
 

Robert Hurlbut said:

There is a book currently being written on Enterprise Services that Sam and I are currently reviewing. I also have my share of articles I have been wanting to write and publish in magazines that tell of some of the trials we have seen.
February 13, 2004 10:38 AM
 

tspascoal said:

Great. Is there already an expected publication date?

Looking forward for the articles.
February 13, 2004 10:43 AM
 

Robert Hurlbut said:

Christian Nagel (http://weblogs.asp.net/cnagel/) is the one who is writing the next ES book, and mentions what chapters he has completed on his blog.
February 13, 2004 11:00 AM
 

Sam Gentile said:

> But there is something i would really love to see. A blueprint of the architecture him and Robert have been writing for the last few months

While I am sure you mean well and you are enthusiastic in learning you do realize how unreasonable a request or statement this is. We are working for a client and they own all rights to our work. This would not only be illegal but totally improper.

Even if it weren't a client, these are details of propreitary work and don't belong in the public.
February 13, 2004 9:57 PM
 

tspascoal said:

Perhaps i misexpressed myself.

I was not asking (wishing :-)) you would release any details about the client's system nor any details about it. Just a simple explanation of the architecture, it's layers & tiers, how they are hooked together,how you feel such an architecture is better and how you made the choices that you made. I feel an implementation and an architecture are somewhat different, and while it is improper to talk about a specific system i don't think it would be improper to share (and both you and robert already said some tidbits on your weblog) a high level architecture and share with us some choices you made for academic purposes.

But if that is your opinion, i understand you and respect your point of view.

Anything that you add is fine with me, and i just hope in the future i can continue to learn a lot by reading your blog, just as i have in the past.


February 13, 2004 11:19 PM
 

TrackBack said:

February 15, 2004 3:12 AM
 

Robert Hurlbut said:

As Sam mentioned, we can't divulge everything about the client, but I did write a more elaborate treatment of the options available in .Net for distributed data security yesterday. I welcome comments to continue the discussion.
February 15, 2004 8:07 AM
 

TrackBack said:

February 17, 2004 11:38 PM
 

TrackBack said:

February 18, 2004 12:07 AM
 

TrackBack said:

March 25, 2004 11:52 AM
 

TrackBack said:

April 21, 2004 1:00 PM

Leave a Comment

(required)  
(optional)
(required)  
Add