Service Instance... Why Is It Called That?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
3 hours ago
Isn't it supposed to represent an instance of the business application?
Why not make it simple and definitive "Application Instance"?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
3 hours ago
Hi @Robert Campbell,
your question doesn't seem clear to me, can you please provide some of more context to it??
/* If my response wasn’t a total disaster ↙️ ⭐ drop a Kudos or Accept as Solution ✅ ↘️ Cheers! */
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2 hours ago
Application Services are now Service Instances however, they are representations of a deployed instance of the business application.
There should be service instances to represent deployed services such as cleaning services at a specific location although they should fall into the facilities services but application instances are deployed instances of applications. An application instance would be an application deployed at a given location or in a particular environment or even a particular version (where you aren't upgrading from one to another but running multiple at a time).
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
an hour ago
CSDM naming conventions for different classes and domains has never been unanimous and there will always be a section of people who think it is not the best fit. Renaming of Application Services to Service Instance is one such case where there were debates about naming conventions and finally they adopted Service Instance.
You can go through the reason for name change and why they opted Service Instance from CSDM 5 documentation [page 37]
If this helped to answer your query, please mark it helpful & accept the solution.
Thanks,
Bhuvan
