systems architecture

Charles T. Betz — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 20:17:50 +0000

Hopefully Rob won't mind this shameless link.

http://www.erp4it.com/erp4it/2011/01/updated-systems-architecture-overvi...

CMDB/CMS is not an architecture

Charles T. Betz — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 02:47:51 +0000

There are many kinds of systems marketed to improve IT management. Whether or not any given company needs them requires in depth business case analysis. And, for organizations of a certain size, an architecture for the IT capability itself is highly advisable. This architecture might cover any number of systems, e.g. project management, IT finance, help/service desk, incident management, change management, SDLC tooling, IT supply chain & asset management, availability, capacity, analytics, and a myriad of lower level element management systems (monitoring, provisioning, services like backup & scheduling, etc).

All of these systems share certain data entities and subjects. A CMDB can provide a useful master system of record for some of these entities and mitigate some "silo" tendencies compared to if these systems are implemented standalone. But the discussion should be framed as an overall architecture for the IT problem domain, and not prejudiced by prefixing the word "configuration" to it.

Charles T. Betz
http://www.erp4it.com

The IT Skeptic - Comments for "CMDB: what does it really mean"

systems architecture

CMDB/CMS is not an architecture