WLS - more than JEE implementation. - Maciej Gruszka, Oracle

1,091 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,091
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

WLS - more than JEE implementation. - Maciej Gruszka, Oracle

  1. 1. <Insert Picture Here>WLS – more than JEE implementation.Innovations and roadmapMaciej Gruszka, Senior Principal Product Manager, EMEA,
  2. 2. The following is intended to outline our general product direction. It is intended for information purposes only, and may not be incorporated into any contract. It is not a commitment to deliver any material, code, or functionality, and should not be relied upon in making purchasing decisions. The development, release, and timing of any features or functionality described for Oracle’s products remain at the sole discretion of Oracle.2 Copyright © 2011, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. 2
  3. 3. Are All Java App Servers Created Equal? Java EE Compatible Implementations 3
  4. 4. Agenda• Not all App Servers Created Equal• Customers’ Evaluation of Application Servers• Application Server Total Cost of Ownership• WebLogic Innovations• Roadmap 4
  5. 5. Oracle Leads the App Server Market Gartner 2010 Worldwide #1 Market Share Application Server Market #1 Innovation Share report shows (*): #1 Performance #1 Growth • Oracle strengthened its Lead in 2010 with 43.4% share • Oracle’s application server market share grew at a rate #1 Market Share of 17.8%, faster than the #1 Performance industry average of 12.1% #1 Innovation #1 Growth • Oracle’s market share is higher than its three closest competitors combinedSource: “Market Share: All Software Markets, Worldwide, 2010” 30 March 2011© 2011 Oracle Corporation 5
  6. 6. Oracle Leads the App Server Market • IDC’s 2011 Worldwide #1 Market Share Software Market #1 Innovation Forecaster Reports 39.2% #1 Performance Share for Oracle* #1 Growth • Oracle has increased its lead in application servers • Oracle’s growth is above that of the industry average #1 Market Share • Number two player is #1 Performance #1 Innovation growing in market-share #1 Growth below that of the industry average 14.9%*Source: “2011 Worldwide Software Market Forecaster – Historical Worldwide Market Levels,” IDC, May 11, 2011© 2011 Oracle Corporation 6
  7. 7. Real Customer Findings: Free App Servers Are Complex & Difficult to Manage Free App Server Stack“The JBoss people really have catching up to JBoss Network Apache Tomcat Operations do with their management tooling none of Deployment and Configuration Developer them go anywhere near to the depth that Productivity Monitoring and Diagnostics JBoss Application Server [Oracle] Grid Control does.” WebLogic Server 3rd Party Mgmt Sr. Middle Tier Admin Hotspot Large vehicle loan provider Capacity Troubleshooting Red Hat Enterprise and Tuning Linux Management, Ongoing Disaster Recovery Administration Satellite MySQL/PosrGreSQL Server KVM/3rd Party Virtualization“It is much easier to diagnose performance problems, determine where the bottlenecks are, and resolve them quickly with the tools that WebLogic provides than with JBoss. Free application servers lack common We spend 35 percent less time on these runtime management, and require 3rd activities in WebLogic as compared to our party products for comprehensive JBoss environment.” management. Systems Admin Telecom Provider 7
  8. 8. Real Customer Findings: Free App Servers Offer Weak Enterprise Support & Maintenance• Customers find that free “They kept talking about upcoming patches and this application servers have is fixed in the next release.” backward compatible issues Systems Architect, Technology Services Provider• Customers find that when “I know that if I have trouble there are many places they really need support, they that I can go to contact people at Oracle And can’t rely on free software there’s a big difference from the kind of support that you get from JBoss.” IT Manager, Global Financial Services Company 8
  9. 9. Real Customer Findings: Free App Servers Are Not Ready for Mission-Critical Deployments• Customers find that Oracle “Their [WebLogic] scalability across nodes is superior WebLogic offers superior to JBoss in many, many respects.” scalability and reliability compared to free application IT Manager, Top 3 Global Ratings Agency servers• Customers find that they can rely on Oracle WebLogic to “Oracle WebLogic really is our application platform. run their mission-critical So we’re able to take all of our custom Java applications but not so with applications, deploy that on the Oracle WebLogic free application servers Suite, and get bulletproof reliability and scalability.” Chief Architect Safety and Security Service Provider 9
  10. 10. Real Customer Findings:Free App Servers Don’t Provide a Complete Stack• Free middleware vendors rely on un-integrated partner products beyond the application server• Throughout the entire application lifecycle, Oracle’s stack is integrated: – Coherence, SOA Suite, BPM Suite, WebCenter, BI/Analytics, Identity & Access Management, Oracle Database & RAC, Exalogic Elastic Cloud, and enterprise applications“Red Hat doesnt have the full gamut those other two guys [Oracle & IBM] have.They didn’t have all the pieces, they don’t do the whole thing.” Chief Architect, National Supermarket Chain 10
  11. 11. Real Customer Findings: Free App Servers Have a Higher TCO“Actually what I found [is] that the Red Hat product is actually more expensive than WebLogic And that was really based on the fact that over time license costs go down. With the Red Hat model it’s a subscription, so it never [goes down] they’re based on you keep paying over and over and over again. We priced it out 5 years.” IT Manager, Large Logistics Company• Free application server vendors “Pricing comparisons do only talk about software costs not include the which are a fraction of the total entire range of costs or the cost of ownership differences in time to train• Consider the lifecycle of your developers and administrators, application and estimate your development time, and costs appropriately – at least 5 deployment year TCO time.” 11
  12. 12. Methodology• Interviewed 10 customers representing 16 unique application server deployments that included Oracle WebLogic Server and JBoss AS.• Interviewees, primarily system admins, developers and technical managers, were selected based on their hands-on operational experience with each application server, and in many cases, with both application servers.• Customer profiles: • 4 active WebLogic Server and JBoss app server deployments of comparable size and scope • 2 active WebLogic Server deployments and recently performed in-house evals of JBoss • 2 active WebLogic Server deployments only • 2 active JBoss deployments only• Industries including financial services, government, oil and gas, technology, and telecommunications, etc. 12
  13. 13. Total Cost of Ownership Five-Year Cumulative Total Cost of Ownership Comparison (in $000s) • JBoss is 35% more costly than WebLogic Server over 5 years • WebLogic Server becomes less expensive on a TCO basis within 2 years from acquisition • JBoss has higher TCO due to immature and weak GUI tools • Software license cost is a small portion of the TCO • People costs in operations drive the bulk of long-term costsSource: “Cost of Ownership Analysis Oracle WebLogic Server Costs versus JBoss Application Server”, Crimson Consulting, August 2011 13
  14. 14. TCO Categories Cost Category WebLogic Server JBoss App Server Cost Difference ($000s) Acquisition Costs JBoss is 86% (Hardware & $212 $30 lower Software) JBoss is 119% Implementation Costs $83 $182 higher Ongoing Application JBoss is 48% Deployment & Testing $226 $335 higher Costs Ongoing 80% JBoss is 108% of Administration & $423 $880 higher Management Costs TCO Ongoing Monitoring, JBoss is 23% Diagnostics & Tuning $346 $424 higher Costs Ongoing Vendor JBoss is 20% $206 $166 Support Costs lower JBoss is 35% TOTAL $1,496 $2,017 higherSource: “Cost of Ownership Analysis Oracle WebLogic Server Costs versus JBoss Application Server”, Crimson Consulting, August 2011 14
  15. 15. Don’t just look at License CostsDo a Comprehensive Analysis• Implementation Costs• Ongoing Application Deployment & Testing Costs• Ongoing Administration & Management Costs• Ongoing Monitoring, Diagnostics & Tuning Costs• Ongoing Vendor Support Costs• Look at the fine print! 15
  16. 16. What makes WebLogic #1Investment in Innovations Spring/ Maven/Java EE • Developer Experience New Jan 2011 WebLogic RAC Integration • Active GridLink for RAC New Jan 2011 Partitioned Distributed • Messaging Topics New Jan 2011 Coherence3 2 1 • ActiveCache Integration New Jan 2011 • Java Virtualization Assembly Builder New March 2011 • Operations Java SE New May 2011 Suite/EM 11g • Exalogic Elastic Cloud Hardware/ New Jan 2011 Software Optimized 16
  17. 17. Active GridLink for RAC• Simpler Configuration: single data source• Event-Based Model (ONS and FAN) for Adaptive Pool Management• SCAN Support• Fast Connection Failover• Runtime Connection Load Balancing• Affinities for Connection Routing (XA, Session, Data)• WebLogic Connection Labeling• Data Guard Support• RAC One Node Support WebLogic Domain Oracle Database Notification Service Oracle WebLogic Cluster Datasource Node Manager Managed GridLink Server1 Data Source RAC Node 1 RAC Node 2 Database Service Managed RAC Aware Oracle Server2 Connection Pool RAC Node 3 RAC Node 4 17
  18. 18. WebLogic UCP-RAC Module WebLogic Server RAC (1) Single WLS connection Service A Polling pool for service A ONS Daemon Advisories ONS Daemon ONS client UCP-RAC module RAC (2) Service A 18
  19. 19. Current Guidance for DisasterRecovery Architectures Global Load Balancer Active Site Standby Site Web Tier Web Web Web Web Web Tier Serve Serve Serve Serve r r r r Middle Tier Middle Tier Binaries Binaries Configuration Configuration File Replication Transaction Technology Transaction Logs Separate replication Logs JMS Messages technologies JMS Messages Hard to keep in sync Data Tier Data Tier Possible limited transaction loss Datagard or Application Data Application Data GoldenGate 19
  20. 20. New Disaster Recovery Architectureswith WebLogic Server 10.3.6 Global Load Active Site Balancer Standby Site Web Tier Web Web Web Web Web Tier Serve Serve Serve Serve r r r r Middle Tier Middle Tier Non-critical files replicated Binaries File Replication separately from critical Binaries Configuration Technology data. Configuration No need to struggle to synchronize file and data replication Data Tier Data Tier Transaction Transaction Logs Critical data stored, Datagard or Logs JMS Messages managed, and GoldenGate JMS Messages replicated together Application Data Application Data 20
  21. 21. HA with Side by Side Deployment Zero Application Downtime Existing External New External Client Client Connections Connections When Activated Newer version of application deployed side-by-side with older version in same JVM Clients already connected continued to be served by Application Application older version Version Version One Two New clients connect to newer Managed WebLogic Server version Single Java VM• Test versions before opening up to users Test First in• Rollback to previous versions Administrative Mode• Automatic retirement – graceful or timeout Internal Client Connections 21
  22. 22. HA with Rolling Upgrade Zero Server Infrastructure Downtime Node 1 Node 3 Node Mgr Node Mgr• Upgrade a running cluster with Managed Server Managed Server a patch, maintenance pack, or App 1 App 1 minor release without shutting down the entire cluster Maint Pack x.y Maint Pack x.y• During the rolling upgrade of a cluster, each server in the cluster is individually upgraded and IP restarted while the other servers Unicast in the cluster continue to host your application• You can also roll back the patch, Node 3 Node 4 maintenance pack, or minor Node Mgr Node Mgr release in a similar fashion Managed Server Managed Server App 1 App 1 Maint Pack x.y Maint Pack x.y 22
  23. 23. ActiveCache Coherence Operations and Administration with WebLogic• Install integration Coherence installable as part of WebLogic Server distribution• WebLogic Server and Coherence management integration Configuration of Coherence clusters from console or WLST Monitoring of Coherence clusters from console Lifecycle management for application scoped Coherence clusters WebLogic Domain WebLogic Server/Coherence Node Manager logging integration WebLogic Cluster 1 WebLogic Cluster 2• WebLogic Server and Coherence WebLogic+Coherence WebLogic+Coherence runtime integration Storage Disabled 1 Storage Disabled 1 Programming model integration with WebLogic+Coherence WebLogic+Coherence annotations Storage Disabled 2 Storage Disabled 2 WebLogic JNDI integration with Common Management, Configuration, Scripting Coherence Caches Coherence Cluster Coherence Storage Coherence Storage Enabled Cache 1 Enabled Cache 2 23
  24. 24. Oracle Public Cloud Complete, Open, Hybrid Fusion Fusion Fusion CRM HCM TalentDatabase Cloud Java Cloud Social Network Service Service 24
  25. 25. Java Cloud Service• Hosted, Self-Service, and Elastic• Open, Portable, and Standard • Java EE, EclipseLink, Spring • On-premises public cloud• Integrated • IDM and Data Management • Web Services • IDE Support• Enterprise • Oracle Exalogic • WebLogic Server • Oracle Database 25
  26. 26. Oracle Public CloudExtremely Easy-to-Use 1. Pick Service 2. Select Plan 3. Configure Service 6. Use and Manage 5. Get Credentials 4. Submit Request 26
  27. 27. Java Cloud Service Choices +Throughput +Capacity +App Availability Java Cloud Java Cloud Java Cloud Service Service Service Basic Standard Enterprise• 1 Managed Server • 2 Managed Server • 4 Managed Server• 1.5GB Heap • 3GB Heap • 6GB Heap• 50GB Data Transfer • 250GB Data Transfer • 500GB Data Transfer• 5 GB File Storage • 10 GB File Storage • 25 GB File Storage •Clustered • Clustered• Best For: • Best For: • Best For: • Dev for all apps • Test-to-prod QA • Test-to-prod QA envs envs • QA or Prod for non- • Prod for departmental critical, tactical apps • Prod for apps departmental apps• User Base: Small •User Base: Small-Large • User Base: Small- Medium 27
  28. 28. WebLogic Server roadmapApril 2011 CY11 CY11 H1CY12WebLogic Server • Release of •WebLogic Server 12.1.1 •WebLogic Server 10.3.5 WebLogic Server • 12.1.2 10.3.6 •- Java EE 6 Support - Non feature • * Full Platform •- Fusion Middleware bearing -- Session affinity * Full API on bug fixes with •- JDK 6 and 7 Support WebLogic Server 12 Active GridLink for •- Standard OUI RAC • Installer - Transaction logs in •- Standard OPatch Database Support - Support for Oracle •- Updated Maven Traffic Director Support - Foundation for •- Native Coherence Oracle Public Containers Cloud •- JMS XA Client Support - JDK 6 and 7 •- JDK 7 Support Support 28
  29. 29. 29
  30. 30. Backup 30
  31. 31. Implementation & Deployment Costs Initial Implementation and Deployment Costs $100 000 • JBoss costs 119% more than $94 787 WebLogic Server to implement and deploy $76 091 $75 000 • Significant difference in WebLogic’s GUI tools vs. JBoss’ $52 439 custom/manual scripting for server $50 000 & cluster config. and deployment $25 650 • Cost of JBoss is within 33% of the $25 000 cost of WebLogic Server after $10 946 implementation (inclusive of $4 650 acquisition cost) $0 Install Configure/Customize Test/Deploy WebLogic Server JBossSource: “Cost of Ownership Analysis Oracle WebLogic Server Costs versus JBoss Application Server”, Crimson Consulting, August 2011 31
  32. 32. Administration & Management Costs Five-Year Management & Administration Costs $250 000 • JBoss costs 108% more than WebLogic Server to administer $212 876 $193 084 $202 739 and manage $200 000 $183 890 • JBoss has higher annual admin & management costs due to weak $150 000 tooling and lower productivity $102 285 $100 000 $87 567 $88 358 $92 775 $97 414 • WebLogic offers time saving automation, including: $50 000 $42 075 • Ease of cluster admin & config • Rolling upgrade of servers $0 • Side-by-side deployment Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 WebLogic Server JBossSource: “Cost of Ownership Analysis Oracle WebLogic Server Costs versus JBoss Application Server”, Crimson Consulting, August 2011 32
  33. 33. Monitoring, Diagnostics & Tuning Costs Five-Year Monitoring, Diagnostics and Tuning Costs $120 000 • JBoss costs 23% more than WebLogic Server to monitor, $102 541 $100 000 $97 658 diagnose and tune $93 007 $88 579 $83 688 $75 907 $79 702 • JBoss AS and JBoss Operations $80 000 $72 293 Network lack ability to perform: • Ease of monitoring of clusters $60 000 • Ease of performance diagnostics $42 180 $40 000 • Deep JVM diagnostics $34 425 • Self-tuning $20 000 • Death detection and failure recovery $0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 WebLogic Server JBossSource: “Cost of Ownership Analysis Oracle WebLogic Server Costs versus JBoss Application Server”, Crimson Consulting, August 2011 33
  34. 34. Overall On-Going Operational Costs Five-Year Operating Costs (Costs of Administration and Management as well as the costs of Monitoring, Diagnostics, and Tuning) • JBoss costs 70% more than WebLogic Server to operate • JBoss has higher annual operating costs – every year from 1 to 5 • JBoss requires more technical knowledge and Do-It-Yourself skills to manage servers and clusters throughout the lifecycle • As a result, TCO of JBoss is 35% > WebLogic Server by end of Year 5Source: “Cost of Ownership Analysis Oracle WebLogic Server Costs versus JBoss Application Server”, Crimson Consulting, August 2011 34
  35. 35. Takeaways Five-Year Cumulative Total Cost of Ownership Comparison (in $000s) • Cost of software license (CapEx) in an enterprise deployment can be as little as 5% of TCO over 5 years • Annual operating costs outweigh the initial acquisition costs by end of Year 2 • People costs in operations (OpEX) drive bulk of long-term costs • Developer productivity • Administrator efficiency • IT managementSource: “Cost of Ownership Analysis Oracle WebLogic Server Costs versus JBoss Application Server”, Crimson Consulting, August 2011 35

×