I have a couple questions regarding the three architecture patterns mentioned in this name. I’m having a little trouble trying to understand the benefits any one of them has over others, especially those first two.
So I will Begin each one off with a description of what I understand up to now and then I’ll ask questions below
Service Oriented Architecture
- Entails a customer, a service directory and only services
- the professional services enroll at the support directory
- the customer can ask for a service by providing a service specification into the directory. The service directory finds a fitting service and joins client and service, so they could communicate right
Here’s where my troubles start. As I know it is basically the same as SOA.
Which are the differences and what are the advantages within SOA or another way round? Is the only difference that the physical distribution of these components?
Within this routine the client only communicates with a Broker. The client sends a request to the Broker. The Broker knows components that could manage every request and returns the result of the client.
I’m presuming this functions pretty much like the Facade Design Pattern only on a system with distributed parts. Is that a fitting analogy?
The lecture which introduced me into these patterns especially stated the Broker may be a Single Point of Failure. This was not said for the Service Directory in SOA, but would not be a SPoF also? I had been thinking the same for the Dispatcher, however there it was said that a method might have multiple Dispatchers. Is this not the case for Brokers and Service Directories or did my Uni just forget to mention that?
Thanks in advance for any answers!
Originally posted 2019-03-09 22:05:11. Republished by Blog Post Promoter