Oracle Service Bus Reviews

We are an IT solution provider and this is one of the products that we implement for our clients. We have competencies in different ESB products including Mulesoft ESB, Oracle Service Bus, and Microsoft BizTalk. 

The most valuable feature is the adapters.

This solution can be easily integrated.

The reporting is very good.

This solution would benefit from having more cloud-based adapters. 

I am a solution architect and while my background is mostly in Microsoft solutions, I am familiar with the Oracle products as well. Our company has dedicated teams that are specialized in many different solutions. The choice is driven by the client. For example, if a customer mostly has Oracle products then that is the solution that we implement.

This client for Oracle Service Bus was having trouble with point-to-point integrations, so everything was being done at the back end and it affected the ability to do jobs. This is the reason that they adopted this solution.

The initial setup is a little bit complex. One of the ways it is complex is that there are a lot of features and the customer may not want all of them. Once you figure out which ones the customer doesn't want, they have to be disabled.

The price of this solution is better than the subscription-based Mule ESB.

Mule ESB is another solution that we have a dedicated team for and a lot of experience with. It is very powerful and we felt that in this particular scenario, Oracle had an edge. Mule out-of-the-box is missing a lot of features that Oracle has, and we see this year that Oracle is getting much better than Mule.

Another reason that Oracle was selected over Mule ESB is because of the pricing.

The suitability of this solution depends on the customer's environment and requirements. For situations where they are many integration points, whether they are on-premises or in the cloud, this is a good solution.

Overall, this is a good solution from the user's perspective, but it is a little bit complex to manage.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use the solution for message processing. 

From a technical perspective, the interface is fine and the solution is quite robust.

There are several improvements that could be made to the product. Security needs to be more integrated, there are so many new security techniques on the market that could be integrated. They should also be embedding API key and other security mechanisms. I find the solution to be somewhat lightweight. 

The solution is scalable although sometimes there is a memory bottleneck and the solution crashes. 

I carried out the deployment and it took a maximum of two hours. We have five users and one specialist who deals with maintenance. 

To choose this solution would depend on company priorities. If someone is looking for a highly scalable solution with security features embedded there are many other options available. If the case scenario is a customer who is already using Oracle Stack and has a good relationship with Oracle then I would recommend OSB if they can survive with the built-in security model. I would definitely recommend it for some customers.

I rate this product seven out of 10. 

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.

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.

I use this solution for development with complex integration.

This product is not complicated and very easy to learn.

Integrating this solution with other technologies is not difficult.

There are times when I select components in composite and they do not appear, and I cannot figure out why. This can happen when you develop a big project and clone it, then look for a service. Sometimes, you cannot find your work. It's a big problem.

This solution is stable, although sometimes we see some strange behavior in the developer, where some parts do not appear. In cases like this, we need to reset.

I have not contacted technical support.

Prior to this solution, we used Java and Java Brains suite. Using Java is more complicated, and these things are taken care of by Oracle Service Bus.

Overall, this product is quite good and I feel comfortable when I use it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

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.

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.

We use Service Bus to expose our service endpoints.

Service Bus is good at routing and transformation. 

The weak point of OSB is that it is not suitable for modern application implementation like microservices which need smart endpoints. With a dumb pipe through and rest API or lightweight message, Bus is not. 

I've used Service Bus for one or two years.

For a microservices solution, we preferred to use rest APIs and a lightweight message Bus such as Kafka or RabbitMQ for integration.

I rate Oracle Service Bus six out of 10. OSB isn't suitable for working with modern applications. We can use it for a monolithic application, not in microservices techniques.