Workload and performance requirement
The Engineering of Consolidation is a physical architecture effort which is driven by Enterprise business workload and performance requirment as describe in the following drawing :Enterprise Workload and perforamnce requirement analysis overview
3 Driven by workload and performance requirment
3.1 Mission workload
The enterprise infrastructure must be designed based on enterprise workload analysis rather than by each application system to eliminate the waste of redundant infrastructure. The traditional EA approach , workload and performance requirement is consider as the operational characteristic by each application system. The operational characteristics is not an engineering calculation rather, it is frequently over estimated to be on the safe side. As a result, most of enterprise infrastructure are over designed over and over by each application system. A simple calculation to add up all the users estimation by each application system, it is not difficult to find that the estimate users are far exceed the total users in the enterprise
Enterprise workload and performance analysis is essential in enterprise strategic planning , most of enterprise have established their workload and performance analysis from statistic data and future projection for their strategic planning purpose. The engineering of sharing leverage on the existing resources to establish the technology workload and performance requirement without substantial investment as it is in enterprise wide business process engineering effort. For example :
3.2 IT workload distribution
3.3 Performance requirement
3.4 Performance measurement
^ TOP
Why Enterprise Service Architecture?
2.0 WHY ENTERPRISE INFRASTRUCTUREEnterprise infrastructure keep EA simple for building consensus to earn architecture buy-in from the stakeholders and enable the agility for business owners support the dynamic of local business process reengineering,
In the people oriented civil community, there are difference between people, it is difficult for them to agree on every thing all the time. However, there is also a common denominator they can all agree upon with. The enterprise infrastructure is a the design of the common foundation and building blocks.
2.1 The value of EA is to enable the agility
The value of enterprise infrastructure is to enable the agility for automation development in time for practical use rather than a central planned architecture in a command and control approach. The stakeholder need the agility to support their locally reengineering business process . The enterprise infrastructure architecture establishes the common resources and building blocks for the business owners to take advantage of technology in time for their need. In a analogy of a restaurant, the chef in the restaurant does not wait for the customers to place order to prepare the ingredients. They have prepared their ingredient based on the food they offered on their manual so that they can serve their hungry customer in time for their need. If a restaurant operate business based on waterfall approach where the chief take the order from hungry customers and go to the market for ingredient , there will be disgruntle customers the restaurant business will come and go.
2.3 It is futile for EA in a command and control approach
It is futile to design a central planned blueprint in a command and control approach to impose enterprise architecture in a militaristic/totalitarian style. EA is all about people and business processes in an enterprise subject to local business reengineering based on geographical location and culture difference. The command and control approach do not serve well in a people community. The experience of central planned economy in socialism country by the social architects has very limited success. To the IT community, EA is a notion of command and control and they would like to pay for EA to go away.
It is futile because the central planed EA approach does not provide values in time for practical use. The traditional EA approach requires significant investment of time and resource to design the entire architecture blueprint. In many EA projects, the enterprise architects simply walk way to design the most efficient architecture for a long time and resurface with a architecture blueprint without stakeholder participation. The business owners can not afford to wait for a long time due to their immediate of automation .. The great promise from architecture is only a promise without practical value. They have no choice but develop the stovepipe systems.
It is futile because the central planned EA approach is lack of architecture buy-in from the stakeholders. After the hard work of design the entire architecture blueprint, the enterprise architects find out that architecture buy-in from the stakeholders is actually more difficult. The central planned EA approach does not provide enough value to earn the architecture buy-in from stakeholders. It overlook the fact that EA is all about people [] and the fact that the central planned architecture does not support the stakeholders need due to that business processes subject local business process reengineering.
EA is all about people, it is the engineering of reuse and sharing among many different business owners. In the people oriented civil community, there are always many difference due to human nature and culture. In the human society, central planed architecture in a command and control approach have very limited success for example : the experiment of Marxism and communism country in a central planned command and control approach have limited success.
Business processes subject to local business reengineering. Enterprise architecture is not an factory automation effort where business process can be optimism under the factory environment in a mechanical process. The central planned architecture approach is based on the assumption of optimized business process design and standardization as if it is in a factory automation environment. It overlook the fact that business processes subject to local business process reengineering in an enterprise based on geographical distribution and culture difference in the human community. For example : The best way for you to come to work is not necessary the best way for me because of different geographical location and culture.
3.0 HOW TO ESTABLISH THE ENTERPRISE INFRASTRUCTURE
The enterprise infrastructure approach has raised the question of how to align the infrastructure with business without the overall architecture design? From the aspect of traditional EA approach, based on the waterfall concept without learning the experience from the others, the common foundation and building blocks are derived via pattern recognition from the overall architecture design. In this approach, EA effort has to design the overall architecture as the mean to achieve the goal of resolving the challenge of stove pipe system. It requires significant investment of time and resource to design the entire architecture that the EA community has confused the mean to the end and EA is better know as the enterprise architecture blueprint.
In the LEA approach, the enterprise infrastructure is established by learning the experience from the others in the same lines of business. It is a pattern adoption effort instead of pattern recognition effort. There is nothing new under the sun, it is very unlikely that you are the first one to face new challenge. Instead of reinventing wheel, it is more practical to align the enterprise infrastructure with business by learning from the solution patterns under the same line of business.
^ TOP
EA to define the services
The challenge of SOA is which service to provideAs SOA become the diretion of application technology evolution in the industry, the need of EA have become obvious. A major chanlenge in service oriented architecture is how to qualify the proper services for the enterprise need.
EA define the proper services
EA is the effort to identify common foundation by looking for commonality.
The services must be selected from enterprise wide consideration rather then put together in pieces. EA, which enable the agility and simplicity, provide common services via the engineering of consolidation from the enterprise wide consideration.
Many SOA projects are initiated in a stovepipe approach to catch up with technology evolution with limited consideration from the aspect of the true benefit of SOA to enable agility and simplicity.
SOA do not replace EA
SOA do not replace EA. The confussion is due the different interpretation of EA. Technical community interpret EA as the enterprise solution such as the enterprsie wide collaboration system. The enterprise wide solution can be easly interpreted as SOA.
SOA in stovepipe appraoch
Implement SOA in a stovepipe approach has totally overlook the basic of SOA to share common services. As a result, the stovepipe oriented SOA approach does not benefit from SOA in sharing resources but also pay for the overhead of SOA. To achieve the purpose of sharing common services, SOA is designed as lose coupled with wrap around, there is an overhead effort for encapuslating the services which contribute to the general concern of SOA perforamnce issue. The overhead concern can be offset via the benefit of sharing common resources in an EA environment. Howerver, It become an extraburden to the stovepipe oriencte approach.
^ TOP
Enterprise Workload and performance Analysis
5.0 DRIVEN BY BUSINESS PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT5.1 Mission workload
The enterprise infrastructure must be designed based on enterprise workload analysis rather than by each application system to eliminate the waste of redundant infrastructure. The traditional EA approach , workload and performance requirement is consider as the operational characteristic by each application system. The operational characteristics is not an engineering calculation rather, it is frequently over estimated to be on the safe side. As a result, most of enterprise infrastructure are over designed over and over by each application system. A simple calculation to add up all the users estimation by each application system, it is not difficult to find that the estimate users are far exceed the total users in the enterprise
Enterprise workload and performance analysis is essential in enterprise strategic planning , most of enterprise have established their workload and performance analysis from statistic data and future projection for their strategic planning purpose. The engineering of sharing leverage on the existing resources to establish the technology workload and performance requirement without substantial investment as it is in enterprise wide business process engineering effort. For example :
5.2 IT workload distribution
^ TOP
Sevice Area Selection based on workload and performance requirments
5.0 DRIVEN BY BUSINESS PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT5.1 Mission workload
The enterprise infrastructure must be designed based on enterprise workload analysis rather than by each application system to eliminate the waste of redundant infrastructure. The traditional EA approach , workload and performance requirement is consider as the operational characteristic by each application system. The operational characteristics is not an engineering calculation rather, it is frequently over estimated to be on the safe side. As a result, most of enterprise infrastructure are over designed over and over by each application system. A simple calculation to add up all the users estimation by each application system, it is not difficult to find that the estimate users are far exceed the total users in the enterprise
Enterprise workload and performance analysis is essential in enterprise strategic planning , most of enterprise have established their workload and performance analysis from statistic data and future projection for their strategic planning purpose. The engineering of sharing leverage on the existing resources to establish the technology workload and performance requirement without substantial investment as it is in enterprise wide business process engineering effort. For example :
5.2 IT workload distribution
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The engineering of sharing is better known as enterprise consolidation effort to share resource which include application services and data services within the enterprise.
2.0 DESIGN SERVICE AREAS
Geographically distributed enterprise are divide into technology services areas for enterprise infrastructure design based enterprise technology workload and performance requirements which is derive from the mission workload and demographic distribution. The technology service areas can be substantially different for administration area due to the nature of network technologies, the service areas are designed to balance the enterprise workload
2.1 Workload and performance requirement modeling
2.2 Service area design
2.3 Service area selection
^ TOP