Skip to Content

For the past couple of weeks, i have spent time in evaluating, comparing and moving some of the ccBPM processes to NW BPM processes. Here is my view of differences between ccBPM and NW BPM. I have tried to include even the high level differences like future direction, installation and performance in this comparison. Many of these are not tested by me but are well publicized by SAP in various forums.

Area of comparison

ccBPM (Integration Process)

NW BPM

SAP’s stated future direction

SAP will not make any major investment in ccBPM

SAP is heavily investing in NW BPM compared to ccBPM

Installation

Dual stack installation is a must.

Can be installed as a java only single stack that contains AEX, BPM and BRM

Installation time

Multiple days

Multiple hours

Total cost of operations

High cost of operation due to dual stack installation

Lower cost of operations due to single stack installation

Performance

Comparatively lesser performance

Comparatively better performance

Standards

Business Process Execution Language (BPEL) based.

Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) based.

Human and System centric processes

Supports only system centric processes

Supports both system centric and human centric processes

Development Objects

Abstract interfaces are required

Abstract interfaces are not required. Regular interfaces can be used.

Development Objects

Operation maps are required

Operation maps are not required

Adapter / Protocol

XI protocol is used to communicate between integration engine and ccBPM

SOAP adapter with XI protocol is used to communicate between integration engine(AEX) and NW BPM Process

Development environment

ccBPM is developed in Enterprise service Builder

NW BPM is developed in Netweaver developer studio (NWDS).

Development environment Enterprise service Builder does not have support for process debugging.
NWDS provides support for process debugging. You will be able to step through each activity of a process for a new or an already started process.

Repository / Storage

ccBPM is stored in Enterprise Service Repository

With NWDI, process can be stored in DTR.
Without NWDI, a separate server based location need to be used.

Versioning

No additional tool is required. ESR and ESB can handle the versioning needs.

NWDI is required to control the versioning, Third party tools available in customer landscape can also be leveraged to meet the versioning needs.

Build

Build of the ccBPM is not required.

A separate build of the NW BPM process is necessary.

Transport to Quality, Production

File based or CTS+ can be used to transport ccBPM process

NWDI with CTS+, CMS or manual methods can be used to transport the process

Deployment to run-time

ccBPM process is available in run-time upon activation of the process.

Process must be built and deployed to the run-time.

Run-time engine

Business Process engine(BPE) is used to execute the process

Process server is used to execute the process

Run-time environment

Web AS ABAP

Web AS Java

Process as a web service?

ccBPM is not available as a webs ervice

NW BPM Process is available as a web service upon deployment. Any client capable of making a web service call can directly invoke the process.

Process API

No API’s are available

API’s are available to handle processes remotely

Process start

The process can only be started by a message

The process can be started manually in process repository or by a message.

Tools to handle human centric tasks

Not applicable

Process desk, BPM Inbox,  UWL

Monitoring tools

SXMB_MONI_BPE, PIMON

Process Manager, Task Manager

Quality of service support ccBPM supports BE, EO and EOIO. NW BPM supports BE and EO. NW BPM does not support.
Acknowledgement support ccBPM supports acknowledgement handling. NW BPM does not supports acknowledgement handling.
Attachment support ccBPM supports message attachment handling. NW BPM does not support message attachments.

Version information – SAP Process Orchestration 7.31 was used as BPM system. So NW BPM in this article refers to PO 7.31 SP04.

Warning: This blog contains my views as of now based on current information available to me. Some of these points might be open for interpretations and discussion. Take caution while using this information.

Please feel free to disagree, ask questions, provide your views.

Update 17-Aug-12:

Added Development Environment – Debugging difference. Details on process debugging are available System centric processes using NW BPM – Process Debugging.

Added Quality of support, Acknowledgement support and attachment support differences.

Thanks to BPM 7.31 Java only – SOAP Payload attatchments.

To report this post you need to login first.

34 Comments

You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.

  1. Raja S Malledi

    I appreciate your precise and nice information.

    Please try to build a small document with screen shots on different Area of Comparison like Standards, Human and System centric processes, Development Objects, Development Objects, Adapter / Protocol, Transport to Quality, Production, Process API, Tools to handle human centric tasks, Monitoring tools. I am looking forward for your great work.

    (0) 
    1. Nageshwar Reddy Post author

      Hi Raj M,

      Thanks for your comments. I agree with you that additional information on many of these points will be very interesting.I will keep enhancing the information…

      (0) 
  2. Holger Himmelmann

    Thanks for the good overview!


    Some comments:

    • “Tools to handle human centric tasks”:
      Since PI release 7.1 ccBPM supports the step type “user decision”.
      But the functionality and usability is indeed very limited.
    • “Operation maps are required”:
      Do you mean operation mappings?
    • One difference is currently that a ccBPM process could be initially triggered by different service interfaces, whereas BPM currently (SPS04) only supports one. This could be relevant for the use case that a process should collect different kind of messages (e.g. to be merged into one file), which are sent in random order.
    • Especially for messages with small size and high frequency the BPM performance and CPU utilization looks much better than ccBPM.
    • So far there is no real integrated monitoring view neither for ccBPM nor BPM, which shows the steps of a system-centric process together with its PI-based message flow.

    Regards, Holger

    (0) 
    1. Nageshwar Reddy Post author

      Hi Holger Himmelmann,

      Thanks a lot for your inputs. I am on the same page on all the comments.

      Yes. I meant operation mappings.

      • “Operation maps are required”:
        Do you mean operation mappings?

      Having an integrated monitoring tool will be a great feature. I think we should raise this as Idea in Ideaplace

      • So far there is no real integrated monitoring view neither for ccBPM nor BPM, which shows the steps of a system-centric process together with its PI-based message flow.
      (0) 
      1. Holger Himmelmann

        Hi Nageshwar,

        just created the idea for the monitoring on Idea Place:

        https://cw.sdn.sap.com/cw/ideas/12318

        Votes are welcome.

        One additional point just came into my mind:

        • For some SAP standard scenarios, ccBPM processes are shipped as part of the ESR standard content. So far, SAP doesn’t ship corresponding content for BPM. Apart from a few very specific cases, this is no serious problem, since the BPMs could be easily built without too much effort or even completely avoided. But when planning a migration, it should at least be checked and considered.

        Regards, Holger

        (0) 
  3. Madhu B

    Thanks for this clear comparison..

    after reading this, came across following points/queries:

    1. is the ccBPM outdated or going to be outdated soon.

    2. can NW BPM replace ccBPM.

    (0) 
    1. Nageshwar Reddy Post author

      Hi Madhu,

      Thanks for your comments.

      I believe it is going to be outdated, But when is it going to happen is the real question…

      1. is the ccBPM outdated or going to be outdated soon.

      Yes, NW BPM can replace ccBPM.

      2. can NW BPM replace ccBPM.

      (0) 
    2. Sascha Wenninger

      Hi Madhu,

      in my opinion, ccBPM is definitely outdated and received the “Kiss of Death” with release 7.3 when SAP released a Java version of the IDoc adapter and stated that a Java-only deployment option is in the future for PI.

      Sascha

      (0) 
    3. Holger Himmelmann

      Hi Madhu,

      I’m still a bit cautious to recommend an immediate migration from ccBPM to BPM in every case. If you have currently no or only a limited number of ccBPMs, it definitely makes sense to go for BPM. If you have a large number of ccBPM scenarios and/or a large message volume in combination with complex ccBPM processes, I would better wait for further improvements especially in the area of monitoring or at least take a phased approach.

      Regards, Holger

      (0) 
  4. Vijay Reddy

    Hi Nagesh,

    I have gone through the comparision between CC BPM and NW BPM.

    Many of my doubts clarified.

    I really appreciate your great work.

    Thank You,

    Vijay

    (0) 
  5. Anand Shankar

    Hi Nagesh,

    A basic query from me. We still have Integration process in ESR of AEX server, what is the use of this? Can we create BPM in ESR and use it in ID as we used to do in 7.11?

    Is it mandatory to have NWDS to continue with BPM in AEX server?

    Regards

    Anand Shankar

    (0) 
    1. Nageshwar Reddy Post author

      Hi Anand,

      You can not use BPM created in ESR as there is no integration server (run time environment).

      We still have Integration process in ESR of AEX server, what is the use of this? Can we create BPM in ESR and use it in ID as we used to do in 7.11?

      Yes. It is mandatory to use NWDS to build BPM that can run on AEX server.

                             

      Is it mandatory to have NWDS to continue with BPM in AEX server?

                         

      (0) 

Leave a Reply