WebSphere configuration management practices are common items of conversation that comes up when I am talking with users about IBM Workload Deployer (formerly WebSphere CloudBurst). This conversation can take on so many different avenues that it is hard to capture all of them in a short blog post. So, for the sake of this post, let's consider two facets of WebSphere configuration management. The first facet is addressing the need to consistently arrive at the same configuration across multiple deployments of a given WebSphere environment. The second facet involves managing the configuration of a deployed environment over time to protect against living drift. What is the best way to tackle these two challenges? Well, it comes down to picking the right tool for the job.
When it comes to ensuring consistency of initial WebSphere configuration from deployment to deployment, there is really no better means than patterns-based deployments enabled by IBM Workload Deployer. Whether you are using a virtual system or virtual application pattern, the bottom line is that you are representing your middleware application environments as a single, directly deployable unit. When you need to stand that environment up, you simply deploy the pattern. The deployment encapsulates the installation, configuration, and integration of the environment, and your applications if you so choose. The benefit of this approach is that once you get your pattern nailed down, you can be extremely confident that the initial configuration of your environments is extremely consistent from deploy to deploy. Basically, no more bad deployments because someone forgot to run configuration step 33 out of 100!
Because we talk about the benefits of consistency provided by our IBM Workload Deployer patterns, users often ask what IBM Workload Deployer does in terms of configuration governance for deployed environments. In other words, they ask how IBM Workload Deployer helps them to track configuration changes or compare the configuration of a deployed environment to a known good one. The honest answer is that this is a bit beyond the functional domain of the appliance. While IBM Workload Deployer does allow you to manage the deployed environment (apply fixes, update deployed applications, snapshot, etc.), it does not layer some of the common configuration governance concerns on top of that. However, there is a good reason why the appliance does not focus on that. It's because Rational Automation Framework for WebSphere does!
If you find yourself wanting to actively track configuration changes, periodically (and automatically at specified intervals) compare configuration changes to a 'golden' baseline, import configurations of a known good environment, apply common configuration across a number of cells, then the capabilities of RAFW would likely be of interest to you. It can do all this and give you an incredible toolbox of out-of-the-box application deployment and configuration capabilities for WebSphere environments. In my mind, for those that spend a good deal of time dealing with WebSphere configuration, whether it be deploying applications, configuring containers, or debugging inadvertent changes, an examination of RAFW functionality is a must.
Now it is time for a bit of disclaimer/clarification. I am not suggesting that you pick one or the other when it comes to IBM Workload Deployer and RAFW. In fact, there are many scenarios where 1+1=3 with these two solutions, and I have written about it many, many times (including this article). That said, I think it is important to highlight the relative strengths of each product, so that it is easier to map it back to your pain points. In honesty, many of the users I talk with have challenges in getting the initial configuration right AND managing it over time. That kind of problem beckons for the integrated IBM Workload Deployer/RAFW solution.
Of course, technology only gets you so far when it comes to these kinds of problems. It would be disingenuous of me to suggest otherwise. It has always been and will continue to be important to establish clear and rigorous processes around the way you deploy, manage, and change environments. This just gives you an idea of some of the tools you can leverage to aid in the implementation of those processes.
One of the fundamental tenants of IBM Workload Deployer is a choice of cloud deployment models. Starting in v3.0, users will be able to deploy to the cloud using virtual appliances (OVA files), virtual system patterns, or virtual application patterns. The ability to provision plain virtual appliances is a way to rapidly bring your own images, as they currently exist, into the provisioning realm of the appliance. As such, I think the use cases and basis for deciding to use this deployment model are fairly evident. However, when comparing the two patterns-based approaches, virtual system patterns and virtual application patterns, the decision requires a bit more scrutiny.
Our pattern approach is a good thing for you, the user. Basically, when we refer to patterns in the context of cloud, we are referring to the encapsulation of installation, configuration, and integration activities that make deploying and managing environments in a cloud much easier. Regardless of what kind of pattern you end up using, you benefit from treating a potentially complex middleware infrastructure environment or middleware application as a single atomic unit throughout its lifecycle (creation, deployment, and management). In turn, you benefit from decreased costs (administrative and operational) and increased agility via rapid, meaningful deployments of your environments. That said, it is imperative to understand the differences between virtual system and virtual application patterns, and more importantly, it is important to understand what those differences mean to you. Let's start by considering the admittedly simple 'Cloud Tradeoff' continuum below.
In the above graph, the X-axis represents the degree to which you have customization control over the resultant environment. The degree of control gets lower as we move from left to right. The left Y-axis represents total cost of ownership (TCO), which decreases as we move up the axis. The right Y-axis represents time to value, which similarly decreases as we go up the axis. Naturally, enterprises want to move up the Y-axis, but, and it can be quite a big but, they are sometimes hesitant to relinquish much control (move to the right on the X-axis) in order to do so. In that light, I think it helps to explore our two patterns-based approaches a bit more.
The most important thing to understand about this continuum is that the X-axis really represents the customization control ability from the point of view of the deployer and consumer of the environment. An example is probably the best way to explain. Let's consider a fairly simple web service application that we want to deploy to the cloud. If we were to use a virtual system pattern to achieve this, we would probably start by using parts from the WebSphere Application Server Hypervisor Edition image to layout our topology. We may have a deployment manager, two custom nodes, and a web server. After establishing the topology, we would add custom script packages to install the web service application and then configure any resources the application depended on. Users that wanted to deploy the virtual system pattern would access it, provide configuration details such as the WAS cell name, node names, virtual resource allocation, and custom script parameters, and then deploy. Once deployed, users could access the environment and middleware infrastructure as they always have. That means they could run administrative scripts, access the administrative console provided by the deployed middleware software, and any other thing one would normally do. The difference in using virtual system patterns is not necessarily the operational model for deployed environments (though IBM Workload Deployer makes some things, like patching environments, much easier). Instead, the difference is primarily in the delivery model for these environments.
Using a virtual application pattern to support the same web service application results in a markedly different experience from both a deployment and management standpoint. In using this approach, a user would start by selecting a suitable virtual application pattern based on the application type. This may be one shipped by IBM, such as the IBM Workload Deployer Pattern for Web Applications, or it may be one created by the user through the extensibility mechanisms built into the appliance. After selecting the appropriate pattern, a user would supply the web service application, define functional and non-functional requirements for the application via policies, and then deploy. The virtual application pattern and IBM Workload Deployer provide the knowledge necessary to install, configure, and integrate the middleware infrastructure and the application itself. Once deployed, a user manages the resultant application environment through a radically simplified lens provided by IBM Workload Deployer. It provides monitoring and ongoing management of the environment in a context appropriate for the application. This means that there are typically no administrative consoles (as in the case of the virtual application pattern IBM ships), and users can only alter well-defined facets of the environment. It is a substantial shift in the mindset of deploying and managing middleware applications.
Okay, with that explanation in the bag, let's revisit the diagram I inserted above. I hope it's clear that, all things being equal, virtual application patterns indeed provide the lowest TCO and shortest TTV because of the degree to which they encapsulate the steps involved in setting up complex middleware application environments. So, let's get back to my assertion that the customization control continuum really applies to the deployer and consumer. Why do I say that? It's simple. In the case of either the virtual system pattern or the virtual application pattern, the pattern composer has quite a bit of liberty in how they construct things. Sure, we enable you right out of the chute by shipping pre-built, pre-configured IBM Hypervisor Edition images, as well as pre-built virtual system and virtual application patterns. The key is though, that the IBM Workload Deployer's design and architecture also enables you to build your own patterns -- be they the virtual system or virtual application type. With anywhere from a little to a lot of work, you can build virtual system and virtual application patterns tailored to your use cases and needs.
At this point, you may be saying, "Well now you have really confused things! How am I supposed to decide what kind of patterns-based approach fits my needs?" I have some advice in that regard. First, map your needs to things that we enable with the assets you get right out of the box with IBM Workload Deployer. If your application fits into the functional scope of one of the virtual application patterns that we ship, use it. If you can support the application by using IBM Hypervisor Edition images, virtual system patterns, and custom scripts, do it. In this way, you benefit most from the value offered by IBM Workload Deployer. However, if you find that you cannot use any of the assets we provide right out of the box (e.g. you want to deploy your environment on software not offered in IBM Hypervisor Edition form or in a virtual application pattern), then ask yourself one simple question: "What do I want my user's experience to be?"
In this sense, I primarily mean a user to be a deployer or consumer of your patterns. You need to decide whether you favor the middleware infrastructure centric approach afforded by virtual system patterns, or if you prefer the application centric approach proffered by virtual application patterns. There is no way to answer this generically for all potential IBM Workload Deployer users. Instead, you have to look at your use case, understand what's available to help you accomplish that use case, and finally, decide on what you want your user's experience to be. I hope this helps!
Application-centric cloud computing is the main thrust behind the new capabilities of IBM Workload Deployer v3.0. But what does that really mean? After all, application-centricity is really just a concept. Granted, it is an important concept, but it is fairly meaningless until it is put into action or implemented. IBM Workload Deployer does just that with its new Virtual Application Patterns (VAPs).
VAPs are the embodiment of the workload pattern approach I briefly discussed in an overview post a few weeks back. The idea with a VAP is to give the user an interface through which they can provide their application, specify dependencies, declare functional and non-functional requirements and then deploy. Of course application middleware is a part of the overall solution, but IBM Workload Deployer has the smarts to build, configure, and integrate the necessary infrastructure in order to support the user's application. This is completely hidden from the user, so they are liberated to focus on the application and its requirements.
If we scratch a bit further beneath the surface of a VAP, we see that these patterns contain three primary pieces. These primary pieces are components, links, and policies, and they are fundamental to understanding how virtual application patterns work. Let's start with the building blocks of VAPs, components. Put simply, components represent different resources and functionality profiles that make up your application environment. As an example, the IBM Workload Deployer Pattern for Web Applications is a VAP that contains components for an EAR file, WAR file, message queue, and any number of other components that are typical requirements for a web application. The components will certainly vary based on the workload type (i.e. the components included in a web application VAP would be different than those included in a batch application VAP), but they are the foundation of any VAP.
From the ground up, the next logical element we come to in the VAP is a link. A link is a way to declare a dependency or integration point between two components. As an example, consider a VAP with a WAR file component and a database component. You might draw a link between the WAR component and the database component to indicate that your web application uses or otherwise depends on the database. IBM Workload Deployer interprets this link, and takes it as a directive to configure the integration between the two components as a part of deployment. In this case, that may mean configuring a data source in the application's container. This is just a simple example, and an application may have any number of links between components.
Finally, we come to the policy element within the VAP. A policy is a way for a user to specify functional and non-functional requirements for their application environment. Users attach policies to the VAP, or to components in their VAP, and IBM Workload Deployer interprets and enforces those policies. In the context of a web application, one example of a policy could be a scaling policy. The scaling policy might indicate scaling requirements for the application that included minimum application instances, maximum application instances, and conditions that triggered scaling activities. IBM Workload Deployer would use the information in a scaling policy within a VAP to appropriately manage the deployed, running environment. Other examples of a scaling policy may include a JVM policy that provides configuration directives for the java virtual machines in your application environment or a logging policy that defines logging configuration options. In any case, the policy element allows VAP builders to influence the configuration and management of the application environment.
In the example VAP below you can see the use of components (Enterprise Application, Database, User Registry, Messaging Service), links (blue lines between components), and policies (Scaling Policy, JVM Policy):
In total, when I look at a VAP a particular word sticks out to me: declarative. VAPs really enable declarative, application-centric cloud computing. What do I mean? By declarative, I mean you are telling IBM Workload Deployer what you want, but not necessarily how you want it done. It is the job of IBM Workload Deployer to take care of the how. This shift in approach to application environments enables the potential for significant savings, and more importantly to me, lays the foundation for a more agile, flexible approach to deploying and managing application environments.
There will be more in the weeks and months to come on IBM Workload Deployer, so stay tuned. I also want to put a plug in for a new blog from Jason McGee. For those that do not know Jason, he is an IBM Distinguished Engineer, and the lead architect behind IBM Workload Deployer. Be sure to check out his blog for insights on this new offering, as well as for all things cloud.
Jason McGee will be leading the second GWC Lab Chat this week on Wednesday, 4/20. The very timely topic is related to recent announcements from IBM regarding the IBM Workload Deployer (see previous posts). Entitled "Application-Centric Cloud Computing" the discussion will focus on the concept of deploying and managing your application workloads in a shared, self-managed environment rather than manually creating and managing the application middleware topologies. It places the focus on the application rather than the infrastructure. This concept promises to deliver greater simplicity, elasticity, and
density among other things. It can position your business to react more
quickly and efficiently to the increasing demands of your customers and
free you from the managing all of the details.
Many of you may have already heard Jason speak last week at IMPACT 2011 in the cloud mini main tent or perhaps at any number of other sessions that Jason was involved in. Jason is the key architect behind IBM's WebSphere cloud activities. Obviously, Jason understands the cloud space very well and has a clear view of the evolution into Application-Centric Cloud Computing. This GWC Lab Chat will provide the opportunity to get your questions answered and share your perspective on this technology.
Jason will provide a brief introduction to the concepts and ideas and then lead an open discussion. Put it on your calendar and plan to attend - and please plan to bring your questions and comments to help foster a rich discussion. We want to hear from you.
If you haven't registered yet it is not too late - learn more and register here. It is easy to register and there is no cost. This is a very timely event and a great way to dig a little more deeply into concepts you first heard at IMPACT or perhaps hear them for the first time. Don't miss it!
IBM Impact 2011 was a wildly busy week! Customer meetings, entertaining keynotes, informative sessions, and hands-on labs packed the 6 days with more than enough action. I spent a lot of the week presenting sessions and conducting labs for the newly announced IBM Workload Deployer. As one would expect with any new announcement, we got tons of questions about IBM Workload Deployer. While I cannot capture all the questions and their answers here, I will try to cover some of the more prevalent ones below.
Question: What happened to WebSphere CloudBurst?
Answer: The short answer is, it simply went through a rename. WebSphere CloudBurst became IBM Workload Deployer v3.0. The version 3.0 acknowledges this is an evolution of what we started with WebSphere CloudBurst, which was at version 2.0. Why remove WebSphere from the name? The fact that this is now an IBM branded offering is more accurate as it is capable of deploying and managing more than just WebSphere software.
Question: What is new in IBM Workload Deployer?
Answer: While there are many new features that I will be talking about over the coming months, the most prominent new facet is the introduction of workload patterns (also referred to as virtual application patterns). As opposed to topology patterns (traditionally referred to as simply patterns in the WebSphere CloudBurst product), workload patterns raise the level of abstraction to the application level. Instead of focusing on application infrastructure and its configuration as you do with topology patterns, workload patterns allow you to focus on the application and its requirements. When using workload patterns, you provide the application, attach policies that specify functional and non-functional requirements, and deploy. IBM Workload Deployer handles deploying and integration the middleware infrastructure necessary to support the application, and it automatically deploys your application on top of that middleware. In addition, IBM Workload Deployer manages the application runtime in accordance with the policies that you specify in order to provide capabilities such as runtime elasticity.
Question: If I am a current WebSphere CloudBurst user, what does this mean for me?
Answer: Not to worry. You will be able to use all of your WebSphere CloudBurst assets (patterns, scripts, images) in the new IBM Workload Deployer. All of the capabilities previously in WebSphere CloudBurst are present in IBM Workload Deployer (terminology may vary slightly -- topology pattern instead of just pattern for instance). Additionally, we continue to expand on the functionality that you are familiar with from WebSphere CloudBurst. This includes updates for Environment Profiles, new IBM Hypervisor Edition images, new pattern building capabilities, and more. Stay tuned for more information about these new features and for information on how you can move your WebSphere CloudBurst resources to the new IBM Workload Deployer.
Question: How do I choose between using workload and topology patterns?
Answer: There are a number of factors that will lead you to using either workload patterns, topology patterns, or both. The primary decision point will be how much control you really need (not want). When using workload patterns, you sacrifice some customization control over the configuration, integration, and administration of the middleware application environment since the workload pattern and management model abstracts away the 'guts' of the system. Everything about the workload pattern is application-centric. On the other hand, topology patterns give you intimate control over the configuration, integration, and administration of the middleware application environment. As a general rule of thumb, if your application requirements match the capabilities of a workload pattern, that is the way to go as it can greatly reduce complexity and cost associated with deployment and management. If a workload pattern does not meet the needs of your application, topology patterns can still greatly reduce cost and complexity and you can tailor them to fit almost any need. Beyond generalities, there is no hard and fast rule for choosing one over the other. It comes down to understanding your application environment and its needs.
Question: Is IBM Workload Deployer an appliance like WebSphere CloudBurst?
Answer: Yes, it is still an appliance, but an updated one! The new appliance is 2U, and it provides more storage, processing power, and memory. It is still just as easy to setup, but just slightly bigger.
Well, that is all for now, but I will be back many times over the coming months with more information. In the meantime, if you have any questions, please leave them in a comment below.
One of the key benefits of WebSphere CloudBurst adoption is rapid -- seriously fast -- deployments of middleware application environments. Our users are leveraging the appliance to bring up enterprise-class middleware environments in mere minutes. If you know a little bit about WebSphere CloudBurst, that statistic may be a little surprising considering the appliance dispenses large virtual images from the appliance over the network to a farm of hypervisors. You may ask how the appliance can achieve such rapid deployments in light of the mere physics involved in transferring large amounts of data over a network. The simple answer is caching of course!
WebSphere CloudBurst creates a cache for each unique virtual image on datastores associated with the hypervisors in your cloud. On subsequent deployments of the same virtual image to the same datastore, WebSphere CloudBurst does not need to transfer the image over the wire. It simply uses the virtual disks that are in the cache on the datastore. In the context of the virtual image cache, the deployment process goes something like this:
WebSphere CloudBurst identifies the images necessary to deploy the pattern selected by the user.
WebSphere CloudBurst identifies the hypervisors and associated datastores that will host the virtual machines created during deployment.
WebSphere CloudBurst checks the selected datastores to see if they already have caches for the images it will be deploying. From here, one of two things happens:
WebSphere CloudBurst detects that there is no cache on the datastore and transfers the images over to the hypervisor, thereby creating the cache on the underlying datastore.
WebSphere CloudBurst detects that there is a cache on the selected datastore and uses that cache in lieu of transferring the disk over the wire.
The process may sound complicated, but it is completely hidden from you, the user. You do not need to know how the cache works since WebSphere CloudBurst handles all of these interactions. So, why am I telling you all of this then? As a WebSphere CloudBurst user, it is good to be aware of the cache for two main reasons. First, you need to account for the storage space the cache needs when doing capacity planning for your WebSphere CloudBurst cloud. Second, anytime you upload or create a new image through extend and capture, I would strongly suggest you automatically prime the cache for this new image. You can do this by simply deploying a pattern built on the image to each unique hypervisor/datastore in your environment. This may take a temporary re-arrangement of cloud groups, but it is a simple process, and it guarantees rapid deployments for all users of the new image.
I hope this sheds a little light on a subject we do not discuss too often. As always, if you have any questions, do not hesitate to let me know!
I hardly ever have a conversation about WebSphere CloudBurst, or generally cloud computing for application middleware, without the topic of databases coming up. Databases are such an important piece of nearly every application middleware environment, so users want to be sure that whatever they do for their application servers, they can also do for the databases on which their applications rely. That is why the capability to deploy DB2 from WebSphere CloudBurst has been around for as nearly as long as the capability to deploy WebSphere Application Server.
Even though DB2 deployment capability has been around for a while, there are still some common misconceptions regarding the offering. First, I have talked to a fair number of users who are under the impression that we only offer a trial version of DB2 for deployment via WebSphere CloudBurst. While that was true for the first few months of the offering, that is no longer the case. For several months now, a fully supported, 64 bit, production-ready DB2 image has been ready for use in WebSphere CloudBurst. If you were waiting for a DB2 image that you could go live with, wait no longer!
The other misconception, or rather, point of confusion, arises from the fact that the DB2 image for WebSphere CloudBurst is not, by name, a Hypervisor Edition image. I can assure you that is in name only. The DB2 image looks like and behaves like any other IBM Hypervisor Edition image once you load it into the appliance. You can use it to build and deploy patterns in the same way you use other images in WebSphere CloudBurst. You may just have trouble finding it if you search for 'DB2 Hypervisor Edition' as opposed to 'DB2 Server for WebSphere CloudBurst Appliance.'
Instead of going into further detail, I want to refer you to a blog entry from a fellow IBMer, Leon Katsnelson. Leon is a program director for DB2 and is responsible for the team that develops and delivers the DB2 image for WebSphere CloudBurst. In his most recent post, he provides a nice overview of the image and gives good information for those looking to use DB2 and WebSphere CloudBurst (there is also a bit on cloud computing at the beginning that I think is spot on). Check out Leon's post, and let us know what you think!
In last week's post, I put the spotlight on various aspects of bundles in the Image Construction and Composition Tool. I finished with a look at a WebSphere CloudBurst virtual image created from the bundle. However, you do not just magically go from a bundle to an image that you can use in WebSphere CloudBurst, Tivoli Provisioning Manager, or on the IBM Cloud. Today, I want to show you how to go from a bundle to a custom virtual image using the IBM Image Construction and Composition Tool.
Once you have defined at least one bundle and one base operating system image, you are ready to compose a custom image. We already talked about creating a bundle, but the base operating system image is a new topic. You can do this by either starting from ISO and kickstart configuration files, or you can import an existing Open Virtual Appliance (OVA) image that contains your operating system of choice. Once you have that base image imported or defined in the Image Construction and Composition Tool, you can extend it to create a custom image on top of the base OS image.
After creating your extended image, you can add bundles that represent the software you want to install in your custom image. Simply click on the Software tab of the new virtual image. Click the add icon, and select the bundle that you want to add. You can add as many bundles as you would like to your custom image.
After adding a bundle, it will show up in the Planned list of software for the image. Click on it to display its details in the right side of the screen. You will notice General, Install, and Configuration sections for the bundle. In the Install section, you will find a list of the installation parameters you defined for the bundle. You can provide values for the parameters at this time.
If you click on the Configure section, you will see all of the configuration paramters you specified for the bundle. You can provide default values, and you can specify whether or not these should be configurable by deployers of your custom image. If you mark them as configurable, users will be able to provide values for the parameters at image deploy time, regardless of whether they provision the image using WebSphere CloudBurst, Tivoli Provisioning Manager, or the IBM Cloud.
After you add the necessary bundles and specify installation and configuration data, you can save the image. Upon saving, the image status changes from Synchronized to Out of Sync.
Now you are ready to synchronize the image. To do this, simply click the synchronize icon. This will result in the creation of a virtual machine in the cloud envrionment (VMware or IBM Cloud) you defined in the selected cloud provider. The Image Construction and Composition Tool will then invoke the appropriate installation tasks (per the bundles you included in the image) within the running virtual machine. It will also copy over any configuration scripts you defined in the bundle.
After a while, the synchronization process completes, and the image returns to the Synchronized state. At this point, you are ready to capture the image by clicking the capture icon. This results in the creation of an OVA virtual image with your customizations. When the capture process completes, the image status changes to Deployable.
Once the image is in the deployable state, it is nearly ready to use. If you are using the IBM Cloud as your cloud provider, you can simply mark the image complete by clicking the complete icon. At this point, the image will show up in your private catalog on the IBM Cloud and it is ready to use. If you are using VMware as the cloud provider, you need to export the image. Click the export icon and provide information about an SCP-enabled server to which you want to export the image. Ideally, this location is directly reachable by the WebSphere CloudBurst or Tivoli Provisioning Manager environment into which you will import the image.
You can monitor the export status in a separate window by clicking on a link shown after clicking the OK button in the dialog above. When the export finishes, you are ready to import your new custom virtual image into WebSphere CloudBurst or Tivoli Provisioning Manager.
I hope the last three posts have given you a better idea of what the new IBM Image Construction and Composition Tool is all about. There will definitely be more to come about this tool in the near future, but in the meantime, if you have any questions or comments, please reach out to me. Until then, good luck and full speed ahead on your custom image compositions!
In previous posts, I have discussed the integration capability between WebSphere CloudBurst and Tivoli Service Automation Manager. Most recently, I discussed this in the context of integrating WebSphere and IBM CloudBurst. Today, I am happy to announce the publication of an article I co-wrote with Marcin Malawski from TSAM development on the subject of this integration.
If you are a WebSphere user interested in a holistic approach in building out a private cloud, I strongly recommend that you check the article out. If you are currently an IBM CloudBurst, IBM Service Delivery Manager, or Tivoli Service Automation Manager user and you provision a significant number of WebSphere environments, I strongly recommend that you check the article out. In fact, regardless of your current situation, do me a favor and check the article out!
As always, I look forward to feedback and comments. Good, bad, or indifferent. You can leave your comments here or on the article page. I look forward to hearing from you!
Though I feel like we've come a long way in some of the initial confusion surrounding IBM CloudBurst and WebSphere CloudBurst, I still get quite a few basic questions on the solutions. The two most common questions are, 'Are they different products?', and 'Can/should I use them together?'. I put together a really brief overview that answers these questions and talks about the basics of the combined solution. I hope it provides a good introduction!