Hi there, I wanted to understand what the differences between these 2 are. Data fabric seems to be relying on record object for what it does (from self-service analytics to AI Copilot, please add if I missed on any other offering), and hence would share the same limitations too? As for unifying data across different systems, that's something record has been doing for some time. So, what exactly does DF offers besides SSA and Co-pilot that wasn't already offered/done through Record object?
Stefan Helzle Harshit Bumb (Appyzie) Mathieu Drouin Shubham Aware Mike Schmitt
Discussion posts and replies are publicly visible
I agree with what others said but also wanted to give some context to why we have both terms. A lot of the reason is simply that "data fabric" is a well known term in the industry, while "record type" is the term that we use to specifically refer to our design objects within Appian.
If you do research on low-code application platforms or data management tools, data fabric is common across several industries - for example, here's Gartner's definition of data fabric: https://www.gartner.com/en/information-technology/glossary/data-fabric. Since Appian's feature set provide the capabilities of a data fabric, it's a common way to talk about functionality in a way that folks not familiar with the Appian will understand.
That being said, when you're actually developing in Appian, you won't see much mention of data fabric. Instead, you'll see the term "record type", since those describe the design paradigm we use to model and relate data.
So to specifically answer this question:
Aaryan said:So, what exactly does DF offers besides SSA and Co-pilot that wasn't already offered/done through Record object?
I wouldn't consider them different - record types are the way that Appian does data fabric, and that's how you get great new features like Self-Service Analytics and Co-pilot.