So how far has Microsoft reached with its Oslo vision and what is the future of BizTalk?
This was a common question amongst various people I met during Tech-Ed 2k8 in Florida a couple of weeks ago. I tried to extract as much as I could from Microsoft around this topic. Oliver Sharp (general manager, connected systems division) and David Chappell both hosted a couple of useful sessions which gave me some important insights. Here are some of my thoughts and concerns especially around the Oslo process server. I’ll follow the same pattern for other products in the Oslo stack in my subsequent blog posts.
Oslo product stack
Oslo Process Server
WF/WCF (windows workflow services/windows communication foundation) can be hosted under almost any process. However, there is a need to have a single powerful hosting environment that can provide features such as monitoring, support for long running transactions, transaction compensation, load balancing, centralized persistence, XML transformation and messaging. The Oslo Process server will provide these services as well as a standard host for WF/WCF.
A new concept of life cycle manager is being introduced which will allow monitoring of applications running under the Oslo Process Server. I feel that Microsoft may build this on top SharePoint services, however I would personally prefer it to be a light weight web app (with minimum licensing complications).
Life cycle manager along with the features of the process server listed above both cover the core features provided by Microsoft BizTalk server today. If this is the case, then where in picture does BizTalk Server fit in the Oslo product stack?
The Oslo Process Server will have the ability to support other hosts along with standard WF/WCF host. One of these hosts will be the new BizTalk host.
The BizTalk host will be able to support new applications containing workflows modelled using the new modelling language. In my opinion, it might possibly be able to utilize some of the existing investments such as BAM, accelerators and adapters. It may also possibly be able to host existing BizTalk applications.
A few questions that stuck my mind immediately were that if BizTalk host provides support for running WF based workflows then why is there a need for a separate WF/WCF host? The first impression you get is that there is an awful lot in common between them. Similar type of applications can be built and hosted on either of them. If the distinction isn’t obvious enough then it might become tougher to decide where to host what.
I am looking forward to October PDC when Microsoft is preparing to release initial CTP for Oslo. However the BizTalk host for Process Server is not planned to be released any time soon. According to David Chappell’s insight on Microsoft’s release plan, products will be shipped out as CTPs in three separate waves.
Oslo first wave: planned to ship the next version of WF, .Net framework 4.0, Visual studio 10
Oslo second wave: planned to ship repository, visual editor, process server (WF/WCF host only)
Oslo third wave: planned to ship life cycle manager, BizTalk host
References:
Presentations at Tech-Ed by David Chappell and Oliver Sharp
Microsoft Oslo web site: http://www.microsoft.com/soa/products/oslo.aspx