Oracle Service Bus Reviews

It becomes the platform for all managed file transfers. If you're looking at a high-speed managed file transfer or solution around that, it becomes a basic layer, or especially in use cases in payment gateways, or API-based types of solutions, probably this becomes a default there.

The solution will provide a visual view of your total process, which is where, and why it is stuck somewhere and probably where it is. You gain a real-time understanding of where the process is. The reporting around what is happening and if it is stuck, where it is stuck, and what actions to be taken is useful.

Overall, the solution is quite good and has lots of great features. There are always continuous improvements that are happening. 

The solution is quite expensive. 

It would be ideal if they could optimize it a bit. 

I've worked with Oracle for the last seven-and-a-half years.

Any new deployment I've seen has been stable. It's not a problem. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The solution is scalable. I've seen banking institutions use it and scale it quite well. 

If we are putting this up on the cloud, now they've released something similar to a support cost. They have to give us yearly support. You can actually buy the cloud credits probably if somebody wants to be on the cloud. However, normally you will get support, yearly support. What they've done is you buy back that support using Oracle cloud. With the cloud, you don't need support the way you do with the on-prem models. Support contracts are offered yearly with an annual subscription. 

When you need support, you raise a ticket. It's very simple. You follow up and send the logs. It's a long process. People may sometimes try to take Oracle Consulting Services which can also help with various types of things.

The initial setup process depends on project to project, however, typically, everything is paid for. Probably if you want to sell something, everything which is currently being sold in Oracle is specific to the cloud. If they want to move their on-prem to cloud, or they have services, free services, lift and shift services, and of course open-source. You name it and within a month maybe, or three months, depending on the type of job but other than that, everything is costed. Basically, everything, whatever resources you have to buy from Oracle is available and can be taken care of.

Any maintenance requirements are related to whatever package the client decides on. 

Oracle can deploy engineers to help with the deployment. 

This is a very, very expensive solution. It will cost a company a lot. 

It only is available on-premises; it is not subscription-based. These are perpetual licenses. Whether you take it to the cloud or not, with Oracle, you have to pay perpetual licensing. Oracle does not have the cloud as a subscription model.

This was a company that was acquired earlier, from DevLogic. Now people are asking for microservices-based architecture which currently is not an option. Especially, they use SOA services. Everything is not microservices-based architecture today. People who have been in banks, telcos, finance companies, even the government, those who have been using it for a long time, are the people probably who are the target audience right now. However, in the future, people are looking at types of services with architecture systems, which currently, SOA is not.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

The solution is primarily used for the ESB. When we want to integrate applications with each other, they want to communicate with each other, we use this. If one application wants to send a message to some other applications. It's used for transformation and integration.

The solution is very stable.

The scalability is very good. 

The installation is quite straightforward. 

We've been pleased with the level of technical support.

The pricing of the product could be better. It's a bit high.

We started using the solution around 2014. We've used it for quite a few years now. It's been a while. 

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The scalability is very good. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. It's not a problem.

Due to the fact that the solution is technical, there are not that many people on it. We are only a few specialized people that work on this ESB. In development, there are around five to seven people. They are a mix of engineers, managers, and admins.

Technical support has been good. We're satisfied with the level of service on offer. 

The initial setup is very straightforward and simple. It's not overly complex or difficult to implement.

In our systems, we install it for our local development. It's easy for us. It takes minutes to install it. The deployment process is quick.

We have five or six technical people that can handle deployment and maintenance tasks.

The pricing could be better.

We pay for the solution on a yearly basis. 

The product is a part of the Fusion Middleware. We have the full suite including the SOA and WebLogic.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

If a company wants to go to the Oracle stack, I'd recommend this solution. If a company wants to use it, it should first evaluate their requirements and whether they need to expand or if they have the capacity.

I am a part of the software developing team and I mainly use this solution for the integrating applications.

The features most valuable are all of the features relating to the integration of applications.

The connectivity with the solution is an area that needs to be improved. On occasion, requests are lost due to losing connectivity. 

Also, there should be proper monitoring of what is coming into and going out of the Service bus and it should be logged. 

Every request should be logged.

Technical support on the Oracle site needs improvement. When we have an issue, we create an SR for Oracle. The read the request, but they do not respond properly. When creating the SR, they ask for a lot of information from us. The requested information is provided to them but still, a solution is not provided.

It would be a benefit to have proper instruction on the different types of configuration or to have an example or suggestion for different types of Scenarios and how to configure them.

I would like the configuration information provided to us.

I have been using this solution for ten years.

The solution is stable.

We have a lot of customers and we have several enterprise applications.

This solution is scalable. We can add to it and we have multiple interfaces. 

We have a lot of users, although I am not sure how many.

We have a team of thirty people working and maintaining this solution. Some are developers and some are part of the administrative team.

The technical support is good.

Technical support on the Oracle site is not as good, sometimes we will get our issues resolved but not always.

It may not be for others but I feel that the initial setup is straightforward. It is not complex. 

Once I put in a request and it is approved by a manager, it takes ten to fifteen minutes to deploy.

We deploy both on-premises and Cloud. It's a private company cloud, not public.

Oracle a good product. It can be used for the integration of this solution.

I have only received positive feedback for this solution. The features are good. It's sufficient for us.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

The middleware provides the service from our core banking and manages the equipment from the satellite system to the core banking SMS or to any other system. Any system can communicate to another system through the solution.

The most valuable feature is the monitoring feature, where we can track the web's UI development.

The tracing. Some unknown errors will sometimes happen and the error message isn't clear. The security process to protect the servers also needs improvement. Sometimes, you need to open the whole project and complete another setup in the server, then hurry back and go through the service application to complete the security setup. If Oracle SB had one button to complete this process in one step, it would be better.

For the next update, I'd like to see event-driven architecture.

I've been using Oracle Service Bus for five years.

The solution is stable.

It's easy to scale mostly from the Oracle side. We added another node in the cluster but we haven't yet tried it.

When we've contacted support, they haven't always resolved the issue. We've then tried from our end to find a workaround and ended up finding a solution.  Their support service could be improved.

The setup was simple and deployment was managed on my own. It took only a few minutes.

I would give this solution a seven out of ten. My advice is to be aware of the amount of space to collect all the requirements because sometimes, maintenance on existing setups can rebuild the servers from the beginning.

We are using Oracle Service Bus to connect between API management and microservices. For example, we use it for data transformation, bringing data from a specific form in one service to another form in a different service.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that you can connect with different applications.

I had a problem with one of my projects because OSB cannot send cookies to the RESTful services.

This solution should work better with RESTful services.

I have been working with Oracle Service Bus for two years.

This solution is stable.

We have four developers who are using this solution.

The technical support for this solution is not very good. I have not been able to get problems resolved because I do not have a professional account. The support is not very useful for developers.

Prior to using Oracle Service Bus, I was using webMethods Integration Server, by AG.

It was not my decision to switch and I am comfortable working with either of these solutions.

webMethods is very easy to use but it does not offer the same level of capability for personalizing your development. With respect to ease of use, for data transformation in OSB, we had to write a function but with webMethods it was just a drag and drop.

The initial setup is not complex. It takes less than one minute to deploy.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to study the architecture that they want to implement very well. That way, they won't have to have repeated flows that do the same work.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

• It’s a lightweight tool compared to Oracle BPEL
• The design of the product.

Because it can handle JSON inputs, we can now use JSON.

The logging and error-handling framework can be improved.

Usage of DVMs, MDS and other additional features that are possible in XSLT in BPEL are missing in this product.

I have used it for the past three years and I am satisfied with it.

There were no issues with deployment; it was very straightforward.

I have not encountered any stability issues. The product is highly stable.

I have not encountered any scalability issues. The product is highly scalable.

Technical support is 3 out of 5; availability of materials and support related to OSB 11g is less commonly available.

Even though we had been using Oracle BPEL, we had to go with Oracle Service Bus because it is able to handle JSON inputs. We tried to implement one scenario using Oracle BPEL but couldn’t achieve it in BPEL, so we had to go for OSB and were amazed by its flexibility in accepting incoming messages.

Initial setup involves a learning curve; it’s not as straightforward as Oracle BPEL. For example, defining custom variables, assigning and replacing different activities is a bit intriguing compared to BPEL.

We implemented it through Zensar. Their level of expertise is 4 out of 5.

ROI is not tangible, but we have benefited highly from this product.

I heard it’s available free with Oracle SOA Suite 11g, so don’t worry about additional licensing costs for this product.

Before choosing this product, we did not evaluate other options. We only explored different Oracle alternatives.

It is a very lightweight product and has great processing speeds.

We are currently primarily using the solution for an energy company that is looking to remove the endpoint integration that they have. They want to move to an Applications Federation BOT. That's how we are seeing critical severity loss into the solution. Instead of having the point-to-point integration, we want to implement it as an Enterprise Service Bus.

The solution is quite stable overall. We haven't witnessed any performance issues so far.

The features on offer are very complete. It's a very good product overall.

I can't recall coming across any missing features. There isn't anything glaring that is lacking in the product.

The initial setup is likely complex for many organizations.

In terms of the solution itself, they should be more open with the information that they provide about the licensing process. It's incredibly difficult to understand the licensing for Oracle Service Bus and it's a whole long process to get the information from Oracle itself. 

This is a very stable solution. Mostly it's focused on attending companies with high availability. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very reliable.

We have about ten users engaged in the solution currently.

It's my understanding that the solution isn't straightforward. It's actually quite complex.

The setup and onboarding process is hard, and it's made more difficult by a murky licensing process that needs to be clarified.

The licensing process needs to be simplified. It's confusing and tedious. It's very hard to get concrete details out of Oracle in a timely manner. It would be ideal if they could be more exact and specific.

I'm not a customer. I represent a company in charge of integrating solutions for customers, specifically for our customers. We're a partner and implementor.

In general, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten. Even with the difficulties around licensing, the solution itself is quite good and reliable.

Integration. Writing of services. It's a proxy layer.

It helps in building reusable, well-defined services. 

It is lightweight and one can easily integrate with different applications, databases, JMS, or Web services through different protocols. 

It needs to support more adapters, because the integration points keep changing and new things keep coming up. It also needs to be more scalable.

Stability is very good.

I have seen that it is able to perform under high-load transactions. It was very good at supporting high transactions, up to 300 transactions per second. That requires more servers, obviously.

Sometimes we have issues, so we'll raise them with Oracle. I would say their support rates eight out of 10.

It needs some knowledge of different artifacts and you also need to have some knowledge of Web servers, the application server, something about the database; at least some knowledge. It is not very difficult and not easy. I would put it somewhere between easy and medium complexity.

When selecting a vendor, at least from the architecture and the developer's standpoints, looking at the implementation and scalability are the two most important things.

Oracle provides good documentation, look through that. This solution is advisable when you need some kind of layer in between, so that it acts as middleware for different systems. That's where you will need to use this.