PI and RM-CA

[Former Member]

Hi everyone,

I need an opinion, about an architecture choice.

Would you put SAP PI 7.0 between R/3 and RM-CA? And why?

Best regards,

Pedro Pereira

[Shabarish_Nair · Accepted solution]

SAP RM-CA?

In that case this is also a SAP product and indeed you can interface with the system via Proxies, IDocs and RFCs. XI does fit in the landscape for sure

Hope my understanding is right!!!

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi,

It does fit, or not. It depends from the person who does the decision. I have a case, that PI was not used in one recent project, between SAP R/3 and SAP RM-CA. I am trying to understand this person, why the choice?

From an architectural point of view, you can use PI or not, you are just connecting machines.

Best regard,

Pedro Pereira

[Shabarish_Nair · Accepted solution]

well as per a good standard it is always expected that all messages that pass through a landscape go through the middleware. It helps in centralized monitoring one of the well known advantages of XI.

I have also seen XI being skipped when it comes to R3 to R3 data transfer esp. when it is IDoc to IDoc communication. This is a choice for the architectural team to make but as a consultant I have always recommended all traffic routed through XI/PI (centralized) unless another optimum alternative occurs.

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

PI gives you better control and manageability with monitoring on messages which makes your maintenance cost lower.

if PI is enterprise wide integration platform they it is better to use it.

otherwise you can use ALE/IDOC.

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi,

I have the same perception that all of you have. With a design like this one, you have one less hop. My personal opinion for this old fashion way to connect systems, and i am not saying it is wrong, it just doesn't fit, because we are talking about a big company that uses several integration systems PI, Tibco, Bizztalk...etc. I think who took this decision, is having some "difficulty" to accept a system in the middle like PI, either because they loose some perception or there is something they do, that is not correct. The reason why, is interesting.

Best regards,

Pedro Pereira

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hello,

Who have more opinions?

Best Regards,

Pedro Pereira

[JoelTrinidade]

Hi Pedro,

Its all about avoiding what you call as "integration spider" web or some also call it the "integration spaghetti". All routing if done through a centralized place things become easier to manage apart from the obvious benefits of ease of use etc.

The reason why PI was avoided could be cost implications.

Regards

joel