Can Microsoft Logic Apps re- place Microsoft BizTalk?

Link?ping University | Department of Computer Science Bachelor thesis, 16 ECTS | Datateknik

2017 | LIU-IDA/LITH-EX-G--17/082--SE

Can Microsoft Logic Apps replace Microsoft BizTalk?

An evaluation of integration platforms Anton Berglund Oscar Fredriksson

Supervisor : Rouhollah Mahfouzi Examiner : Ahmed Rezine

Link?pings universitet SE?581 83 Link?ping

+46 13 28 10 00 , liu.se

Upphovsr?tt

Detta dokument h?lls tillg?ngligt p? Internet ? eller dess framtida ers?ttare ? under 25 ?r fr?n publiceringsdatum under f?ruts?ttning att inga extraordin?ra omst?ndigheter uppst?r. Tillg?ng till dokumentet inneb?r tillst?nd f?r var och en att l?sa, ladda ner, skriva ut enstaka kopior f?r enskilt bruk och att anv?nda det of?r?ndrat f?r ickekommersiell forskning och f?r undervisning. ?verf?ring av upphovsr?tten vid en senare tidpunkt kan inte upph?va detta tillst?nd. All annan anv?ndning av dokumentet kr?ver upphovsmannens medgivande. F?r att garantera ?ktheten, s?kerheten och tillg?ngligheten finns l?sningar av teknisk och administrativ art. Upphovsmannens ideella r?tt innefattar r?tt att bli n?mnd som upphovsman i den omfattning som god sed kr?ver vid anv?ndning av dokumentet p? ovan beskrivna s?tt samt skydd mot att dokumentet ?ndras eller presenteras i s?dan form eller i s?dant sammanhang som ?r kr?nkande f?r upphovsmannenslitter?ra eller konstn?rliga anseende eller egenart. F?r ytterligare information om Link?ping University Electronic Press se f?rlagets hemsida .

Copyright

The publishers will keep this document online on the Internet ? or its possible replacement ? for a period of 25 years starting from the date of publication barring exceptional circumstances. The online availability of the document implies permanent permission for anyone to read, to download, or to print out single copies for his/hers own use and to use it unchanged for non-commercial research and educational purpose. Subsequent transfers of copyright cannot revoke this permission. All other uses of the document are conditional upon the consent of the copyright owner. The publisher has taken technical and administrative measures to assure authenticity, security and accessibility. According to intellectual property law the author has the right to be mentioned when his/her work is accessed as described above and to be protected against infringement. For additional information about the Link?ping University Electronic Press and its procedures for publication and for assurance of document integrity, please refer to its www home page: .

c Anton Berglund Oscar Fredriksson

Abstract

Integration has always been an important and tricky task for IT-businesses. There are several products available for solving integration issues, one of them is the long developed platform BizTalk from Microsoft. As cloud computing has grown in recent years, Microsoft has been putting more focus towards the cloud. With their cloud, named Azure, expanding a new integration platform have been released, the iPaaS (integration Platform as a Service) Logic Apps.

This report aims to evaluate the integration platforms Logic Apps and BizTalk with the purpose of finding out if the new Logic Apps can replace the long developed BizTalk. The evaluation is performed by implementing an application in both platforms, then evaluating selected parameters by giving each a score to concretize our assessment on quantify whether Logic Apps can replace BizTalk.

Contents

Abstract

iii

Acknowledgments

iv

Contents

iv

List of Figures

vi

List of Tables

1

1 Introduction

2

1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.2 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.3 Aim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.4 Research questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.5 Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.6 Thesis Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2 Theory

4

2.1 Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2.2 Cloud computing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

2.3 Azure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2.4 Logic Apps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.5 BizTalk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

2.6 Miscellaneous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3 Method

18

3.1 Choice of the parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

3.2 Defined parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

3.3 Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

4 Implementation

21

4.1 Message Relay Scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

4.2 Logic Apps implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

4.3 BizTalk implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

5 Evaluation and Result

33

5.1 Evaluation of parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

5.2 Evaluation rating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

5.3 Side Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

6 Discussion and Conclusion

46

6.1 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

6.2 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

iv

Bibliography

49

List of Figures

2.1 Many to many connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2 One to many connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.3 Cloud Service Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.4 Azure Function development in Azure portal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.5 Logic Apps Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.6 BizTalk components overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2.7 BizTalk orchestration overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4.1 Message-relay overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4.2 Message-relay operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4.3 Logic Apps Parent workflow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 4.4 Logic Apps Child workflow 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 4.5 Logic Apps Child workflow 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 4.6 Logic Apps Child workflow 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 4.7 Logic Apps Child workflow 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 4.8 Try-Catch scope in BizTalk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 5.1 Logic Apps Resubmit run . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 5.2 Logic Apps Map to messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 5.3 Logic Apps Run History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 5.4 Logic Apps Detailed Run History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 5.5 BizTalk Server map editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

vi

List of Tables

3.1 Rating definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 5.1 Rated exception handling parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 5.2 Rated functionality parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 5.3 Rated rest of parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 5.4 Evaluation Total rating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 5.5 Side Study Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

1

1 Introduction

1.1 Introduction

In IT-businesses, the process to connect individual systems to become a larger system working together is called integration.

As the systems used by companies become more complex. As a result the applications developed that exchange information needs to be integrated in the system. To integrate these systems, engineers often use software called integration platforms.

In recent years cloud computing has grown bigger. With cloud computing, many services has appeared, such as the Software-as-a-Service (SaaS), where a user can use a software which is not installed on user machines. Using cloud services has many benefits compared to using software installed locally (on-premise). On-premise software is often more expensive and requires more configuration and maintenance which can be time consuming. As new cloud integration platforms emerge, they might be more beneficial for solving integration problems.

Several companies are considering to migrate to the cloud. However, as the new cloud services are being released, it is interesting to see how these new kind of software can replace the well developed, stable, on-premise software. Or are they still too immature to be used?

1.2 Background

The host company is a global corporation with around 2000 employees spread across the world. With employees developing systems on different locations, the systems need to be integrated.

The company has started to migrate some of its applications and services to the cloud, where it is building a platform. The office in Link?ping has around 50 employees and is mainly working with development and integration. Microsoft BizTalk is the current platform used to solve integration issues. The platform is stable, and has been developed since its release in year 2000.

However, as cloud computing is growing, there may have appeared other solutions to solve integration problems. One of the solutions could be the newly released Microsoft Logic Apps which could ease the integration in terms of implementation and maintenance.

2

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download