Introducing the Alumio Route Builder
Now connect, orchestrate, and govern integrations at scale from one visual interface
The team consuming this asks for what it needs rather than receiving what somebody decided to publish, which is the difference between asking and being sent, and the whole reason for doing it.
A team building something on top of the business wants one place to ask questions. What it is usually given is a list of endpoints, each returning a fixed shape decided by whoever built it, so the app makes four calls to assemble one screen and a fifth because the first four did not include the price. SAP was never designed to be asked questions that way, which is nobody's fault and everybody's problem. Connecting SAP and GraphQL puts a single place to ask in front of it, so the consuming team describes what it needs rather than learning what is available.
DATA THAT FLOWS BETWEEN THEM
Customers
Materials
Prices
Stock
Orders
Order status
A consuming team asks once for what a screen needs instead of assembling it from four separate calls, which is where most of the latency in these applications comes from.
A second application does not mean a second arrangement, because it asks for a different shape of the same thing rather than needing something built especially for it.
How far a single question may reach into SAP is set deliberately, so a convenient request does not quietly become an expensive one that somebody notices at the end of the quarter.
What SAP holds does not have to be reorganised for the benefit of an application, because the translating happens between the two rather than inside either of them.
When an application needs a customer, their prices and their open orders, it asks for those together and receives them together, so the screen is built from one exchange rather than from four that have to be stitched.
When another team starts building something, it asks for the shape it needs rather than waiting for somebody to publish something for it, so the second application costs a small fraction of what the first one did.
When a request asks for more than it should, the scope that you set is what answers rather than the request itself, so a single convenient question cannot quietly turn into one that pulls half the ERP along with it.
Alumio sits between sales channels and fulfillment systems as a governed integration backbone. Orders are routed, transformed, and validated, while status updates return to every channel.
Authenticate your systems using Alumio's pre-built connectors. Choose from 200+ connector packages in the marketplace, plus unlimited custom integrations.
Define how data fields map between systems in a visual interface. Adjust formats, enrich records, and apply business logic, no custom code required.
Configure flows to run in real time on events, on a schedule, or both. Reduce manual data entry and let Alumio handle movement and transformation between systems.
.svg){kind=icon}
Once your first integration is live, adding your ERP, PIM, WMS, or CRM connects to the same hub. Existing flows keep running. No rebuilding from scratch.
The applications asking these questions rarely want only the ERP. A screen showing a customer usually wants what they bought, what they were sent and what they last asked support about, and those are three systems. Alumio holds those connections alongside this one, so one question can be answered from more than one place without the consuming team knowing where each part came from.
Yes, and the direction is what makes this different from the rest: the consumer asks and Alumio answers, rather than something being published on a timer and collected later. Nothing is pushed anywhere. What a question may reach for, and how deeply, is what you configure, and what can be answered at all is whatever SAP exposes for it.
No, and the second connection costs a fraction of the first, because the shapes and the scopes are already agreed by the time the next team arrives. That is not true of an endpoint somebody builds per consumer, which is why estates accumulate them. Where a value has to be assembled rather than read, the Code Transformer assembles it.
Narrower than a developer would like and wider than an ERP team would prefer, which is why it has to be settled rather than left to whoever happens to be writing. A question that fetches a customer with every order they have ever placed is easy to write and expensive to answer. Setting the scope in one place means the limit is a decision rather than something discovered under load.
The one that misleads is a question answered with less than it asked for, because the application renders and the screen simply looks emptier than it should. Alumio names the scope the response was limited to, so a partial answer is visible as one. Each exchange is monitored live and logged with what it carried, a refusal alerts with the reason, retries run where configured, and nothing is lost silently.
Talk to an Alumio integration specialist. We'll map the right architecture for your systems, at the right scale, so your operations stay reliable through every change.
.svg)
