6

Is SAP PI/PO now considered a true ESB? I've read various sources claiming it was not quite there 4-5 years ago.

And what if you have a very SAP-centric environment, would it be very strongly suggested to use PI/PO instead of the more standard integration platforms such as Mule ESB, Jboss Fuse, BizTalk and Oracle ESB?

If you primarily have expertise with the platform agnostic ESB's mentioned, would it still be worth integrating with SAP Pi? What are the advantages of PI?

I see they all have some option to integrate with SAP, but unbiased information seems hard to come by in the SAP-scene.

Boghyon Hoffmann
  • 17,103
  • 12
  • 72
  • 170
NegatioN
  • 667
  • 2
  • 9
  • 24

2 Answers2

1

If your entire landscape consists of SAP modules then probably better to use PI.

If however you want to connect to other systems in the cloud, internally or externally then I would not choose PI.

PI is not an integration platform (better to use this phrase an an ESB). In this case it is better than have something fronting your SAP backend such as Biztalk, Fuse, Mule or other. They are more flexible and have more functionality when it comes to communicating with other systems and protocol. They are probably far easier to use as well.

Most of these integration platforms have commercial adapters that can connect to SAP. IBM's Integration Bus has SAP adapters, so does Fuse and others.

Like I said, it depends on your landscape and your integration requirements.

Souciance Eqdam Rashti
  • 3,143
  • 3
  • 15
  • 31
  • Thank you for the input, really appreciate it. In what sense is PI not an integration platform? And on a different note; would you still need in-depth knowledge of SAP in order to integrate it with external systems? – NegatioN Nov 20 '15 at 15:56
  • Well an integration platform is a very broad term, but it should handle a variety of different protocols such as file, http, socket, ftp etc. I don't think PI can do this. PI should also be able to map from any to any format. It should have sophisticated error handling for asynchronous and synchronous communication. There are also many more aspects which make PI not suitable for a general integration platform. – Souciance Eqdam Rashti Nov 20 '15 at 16:11
  • You would not need in depth knowledge just for connecting SAP to Salesforce but you would need to know the SAP interfaces i.e. idoc, host, port etc. So some knowledge is required you don't need to know the internal processes. – Souciance Eqdam Rashti Nov 20 '15 at 16:12
  • "no integration platform" is somewhere between wrong and unfair. SAP PI covers the whole range of adapter connectivity one would expect from a modern integration platform. Due to the strong SAP integration, it is often used to integration SAP and non-SAP systems. Integration between SAP systems can be achieved by other means (eg SAP ALE). – Axel Kemper Jan 19 '16 at 15:35
  • If you have SAP PO (not PI), you also could use BPM facilities with wide range of tools, including possible human activities or just cross-system background processing. – Iliya Kuznetsov Jan 19 '16 at 16:34
  • @Axiel Kemper, SAP PI is primarily used when you have a heavy SAP system landscape. Nobody uses SAP PI on its own as an independent integration product, hence why I don't consider it as an integration platform but rather SAP connector between different SAP modules. – Souciance Eqdam Rashti Jan 20 '16 at 08:52
  • I would second @AxelKemper here: PI covers all the protocols like file, http, ftp, ssh. However, I also would second Souciance when saying that virtually nobody would purchase an SAP PI without being an SAP customer already. You would need to have people with SAP administration knowledge (commonly referred as "Basis") to run the underlying AS Java Server from SAP. I would consider it an integration platform as i is quite mature when it comes to things like versioning, deployment, error handling, alerting, monitoring (Solution Manager), zero downtime, scalability (but not quite to IoT scales) – Tschenser Oct 05 '17 at 11:27
1

Today, as SAP NetWeaver 7.5 released, SAP PO is common ESB. It is based entirely on Java8 and JEE5 standards, with optional old-fashioned ABAP usage.

Someone could implement integration scenarios with many tools (simple mappings, SOJO or EJB, or even your own JCA-adapter). Now SAP PO is really fast and reliable.

Iliya Kuznetsov
  • 310
  • 3
  • 15
  • That is in fact true. See my comment to the accepted answer. – Axel Kemper Jan 19 '16 at 15:36
  • Appreciate the input. I wish there was a more open communication-channel into the SAP community, so people could have access to more nuanced information. – NegatioN Jan 19 '16 at 18:46
  • 1
    A common ESB? Sorry but define common. I have taken parts many SAP integration projects and only place SAP PO/PI is used is when you have a SAP dominated system landscape. Otherwise nobody uses SAP PO as an integration platform. Its not like you can just download it and start building your integrations. – Souciance Eqdam Rashti Jan 21 '16 at 08:25
  • technically SAP PO is ordinary ESB plus BPM capabilities. – Iliya Kuznetsov Jan 21 '16 at 13:54
  • 1
    An ordinary ESB? SAP PO is primarily used in an SAP landscape. In 11 years of consulting I have never come across clients who use SAP PO outside of an SAP environment. Even big companies with SAP heavy landscape often use IBM integration bus, Mule, Tibco or something else in between. – Souciance Eqdam Rashti Feb 03 '16 at 06:48
  • Your experience is sound. For my 15 years of ABAP (IDoc, RFC) and XI/PI/PO integration, I was involved into number of projects where Oracle Bus was turned into SAP PI or vice versa some working PO-scenarios were reimplemented under IBM WebSphere. All the requirements to change integration bus were not technical but mostly business: licensing issues, contract terms and so on. For one SAP implementation project, client (regional russian bank) started from SAP PI as central bus for non-payments integration, and SAP ERP was the next, so at first PI used for non-SAP integration. – Iliya Kuznetsov Feb 04 '16 at 07:45