Server side forwarding vs DIL

[C82028302]

hello!

hoping to receive some clarity around the differences of using adobe analytics server side forwarding (SSF) to send data into AAM compared to just using the DIL code. Specifically from an ingestion / time proceasing stand point. If I implement SSF will my analytics information reach the AAM servers faster than if I were to use DIL?

main point of consideration is performing same page personalization. Solutions in use for this scenario are adobe analytics, AAM, target and the ID service enabled for sharing segments from AAM to target.

Thansk so much.

[snehaa30982388]

Hi,

As per my understanding same page/hit personalization is only possible with audiences created within Target. With AAM -analytics audiences next hit personalization can be done via target. I think DIL code will cost you for additional calls as compared to SSF.

[shweta_singh]

Hi caseyo84500701

In case you have adobe analytics the recommended way of data transfer is SSF. Using DIL in addition with SSF would end up just doubling your billable server calls.

Regards,

Shweta

[C82028302]

Hi Shweta,

Yes, thank you. I'm aware that it would result in double signal processing. Any opinion on if SSF or DIL captured will reach the AAM Data collection servers (DCS) faster?

[shweta_singh · Accepted solution]

Hi caseyo84500701​,

I don't think there is any difference between the two because ultimately data is getting captured in traits and segments. SSF also instantiates audience management module and DIL code also instantiates audience manager.

For instance ,you can utilize DCS server to server APIs, if you directly want to send in data to DCS servers.