Skip to Content

point-to-point connection bs direct rfc connection

Hello:

I can execute one RFC made on one SAP System (sys1) in other SAP System (sys2) only by the creation of the corresponding RFC destination, so I don't know that's the utility for direct connections between two SAP Systems. Could someone explain me what's the advantages of using direct connections bs RFC connections ?. The unique factor I can thinks is that RFC protocol is more restrictive than WS protocol so In some cases if it's not possible to communicate both systems via RFC connection we can use direct connections. (HTTP/SOAP) . Is there any other factor for using direct connection ?

In the second case (Direct Connections) I suppose that the messages can't be monitored in SAP PI (RW or sxmb_moni) because the communication is made witout the participation of the IS. It's that true ?

Thanks in advance.

Add comment
10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

  • Get RSS Feed

1 Answer

  • Nov 10, 2011 at 02:57 PM

    the are two differents things.

    During the direct communication process, two systems directly communicate with one another through the Web services runtime, without switching between a central integration server. Accordingly, process integration runtime services, such

    as mapping or routing, cannot be used.

    You can make the configuration settings required for both systems involved centrally in the Integration Directory. They are then propagated to the back-end systems through cache notifications. Currently, this mechanism is used to completely provide only back-end systems with configuration data based at least on the ABAP 7.10 application server.

    Using direct communication optimizes your performance during message processing, as you switch off the components of middleware software. At the same time, however, your administration effort for processing this point-to-point connection using direct communication increases as the connections are normally not centrally configured.

    Add comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

    • you can monitor the message in boths in sxi_monitor or RWB in your case.

      if you want to know how to monitor an scenario RFC to RFC the better aproach is with a pass-throught scenario and not with direct connection. thats because whats the blogs says:

      When an environment contains many point-to-point connections, the administration and maintenance of connections becomes quite cumbersome to support. This is where the benefit of SAP Netweaver 7.1 Process Integration (PI) becomes obvious. PI provides a tool and infrastructure to centrally design, configure and support of the point-to-point connection. With PI, message types and interface can be designed in the Enterprise Service (ES) Repository, and connection configurations and communication channels can be done in the Integration Directory (ID).

      Direct Connection applys better, for example if you go for WS-RM protocol o allows a much greater message throughput performance, simply because a middleware is not involved in message processing. However, because of this, services such mappings, dynamic receiver determination, ccBPM (as provided by the middleware) are no longer available during the message exchange.

      Rgds

      Edited by: Rodrigo Alejandro Pertierra on Nov 10, 2011 1:19 PM