Genesys CTI User Forum

Genesys CTI User Forum => Genesys CTI Technical Discussion => Topic started by: Noufal on March 21, 2018, 06:09:20 AM

Title: IRD VS Composer
Post by: Noufal on March 21, 2018, 06:09:20 AM

HI ,

Why do we use Composer based IVR instead IRD ?

Is there and advantage in Composer ?

Even if we user composer we need to IRD to play Composer developed IVR ?

Title: Re: IRD VS Composer
Post by: PFCCWA on March 21, 2018, 09:15:23 AM

I think the difference is that within composer all voice and routing apps can be created, developed and deployed within the same solution including ivr and routing strategies.
In addition composer allows development through scxml , so if you have familiarity with this code then the possibilities could be endless.

IRD is limited in comparison, but yes you can develop voice app in composer and use it in your IRD strategy.  I have done both and work well so depends on your requirements.

Also remember you can import IRD strategies into composer as part of a migration plan.

Title: Re: IRD VS Composer
Post by: Genesys CTI Guy on March 23, 2018, 12:24:59 PM

SCXML apps are also managed by a multithreaded orchestration server vs a single threads URS. There is a vast difference between potential capabilities of a composer app vs a URS app in the real world.

Once you start looking at the session management vs simple like for like routing capabilities I think that you’ll understand how game changing orchestration truly can be.

Title: Re: IRD VS Composer
Post by: cavagnaro on March 23, 2018, 01:03:10 PM

[quote author=Genesys CTI Guy link=topic=10917.msg49568#msg49568 date=1521807899]
Once you start looking at the session management vs simple like for like routing capabilities I think that you’ll understand how game changing orchestration truly can be.
[/quote]


We have debated for this in the past and there was no actual example or something we could feel as Wow! That is a change...
Can you please explain a scenario that could be done in ORS and not in URS?

Title: Re: IRD VS Composer
Post by: jarrod on May 01, 2018, 12:14:03 AM

From my understanding, there is very little functional difference from the callers experience on what can be done. Hence alot of people are not migrating their strategies away from URS in a hurry.

Using SCXML moves into the world of software development which does bring advantages. This is a mind shift which many old-school Genesys engineers will feel the learning curve. But this allows DevOps tools to be used such as VCS for the IVR which was not possible with IRD strategies. If you have in-house web devs they can tool up to this task relatively quickly.

Title: Re: IRD VS Composer
Post by: eugene on May 01, 2018, 01:08:07 AM

having a javascript engine & native json friendly support is enough for me to make the switch. 

i also think long running session based workflow would be pretty hard to implement in IRD.  eg. Callback Activity Service Entry workflow.


Furthermore moving to ORS development at least gives you a chance to implement some sort of a continuous development culture since you could technically use Jenkins.

Title: Re: IRD VS Composer
Post by: jarrod on May 02, 2018, 01:21:33 AM

Good point.

To me continuous development should be a large driver to moving off URS, but many organisations are not realised the value of this.

But the effort to migrate can be large and hard to justify to the business. But all new works should seriously consider it.