Hi,
I need to know about whether there is any use of rule engines like Inrule with Workflow engines.
All workflow engines are coming with their own rule engine like WWFetc.
So what is the need of seperate rule engine like Fair Issac, ILOG etc.
Regards
seperate rule engine need
Ethan Hunt
There are 2 reasons for seperate rule engines
1. not all applications need both a workflow and a rule engine (or any of them for that matter) - There are situations where rule engines makes perfect sense alone.
2. The fact that a company makes a decent workflow engine doesn't have to mean its rule engine is on par..
Arnon
Mark Leung
Tic,
A good starting point is Sandy Kemsley's column entitled "Seperating Rules from Process" as is James Taylor’s blog - http://edmblog.fairisaac.com/weblog/
Link to Sandy’s post - http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/column2/archives/2006/02/separating_rule.php
I'm still on the fence regarding independent BRE and BPM tools. I think the answer is that..... it depends.
- Some BPM tools actually license BRE technology from BRE vendors (iLog, Blaze, etc.)
- Some BPM rules engines are not accessible independent of the workflow.
- Some BPM and BRE tools do not integrate well and you may have a management nightmare dealing with separate vendors pointing fingers at each other.
- Most BRE tools include enhanced Rulesbase Management tools (ILog's .Net Rules is very nice.) A BPM vendor’s Rulesbase management may not be as flexible as a BRE management toolset.
- You may have a need to separate the BRE from your BPM due to security constraints or operational constraints (i.e. Change Management, Capacity Requirements, etc.)
I can probably think of a few other reasons to separate your BRE from BPM.
My recommendation is to select a BPM tool that allows you to access the Business Rules independent from the BPM. BizTalk is a good example. If you discover the BPM rules engine is inadequate or does not fit your needs, upgrade to a truly independent BRE.
-Dave Strommer