This document discusses architectural integration styles for large-scale enterprise software systems. It proposes using architectural styles as a way to generalize common integration solutions at the enterprise system level, similar to how styles are used in traditional software architecture. The document defines key terms and presents a structure for describing architectural integration styles. It then describes several example styles, and presents a case study applying the style selection process to an energy company's system integration project. The goal is to provide an approach for selecting integration solutions based on the characteristics of existing systems and desired quality attributes.
This document discusses an approach to assembling software products using a product line approach. It presents a separation continuum that separates concerns both vertically (from abstract to implementation layers) and horizontally (between human-facing and machine-facing aspects). An application assembly approach is then discussed where a product line architecture is tied to this separation continuum, allowing high productivity by reusing pre-built software assets to realize new product lines. The approach aims to facilitate experimentation in building large-scale application assembly capabilities.
This document discusses the importance of documenting software architecture and provides guidance on how to do it effectively. It explains that architectural documentation is important so that stakeholders understand the system design. It recommends choosing relevant views to document, such as structure, behavior, and interfaces. It also suggests including an element catalog, context diagram, and other details in the documentation. The goal of the documentation is to explain the architecture in a way that is easy to read and understand for stakeholders.
This document compares the J2EE and .NET platforms using a separation continuum model. It defines key terms related to J2EE, .NET, and distributed application architectures. The document outlines a logical tier model and a service-based architecture model for conceptualizing large distributed solutions. It aims to map the technologies provided by J2EE and .NET to the separation continuum for analysis and comparison.
The document discusses domain-specific software engineering and product lines. It defines domain-specific software architectures and product lines, and explains their relationship. It provides examples of using the Koala architecture description language and xADL 2.0 to model product line architectures for lunar lander games and software defined radios. Variation points are used to capture alternative products and versions.
IRJET- Software Architecture and Software DesignIRJET Journal
This document discusses software architecture and design. It defines software architecture as the strategic design of a system that addresses global requirements, while software design is the tactical design that addresses local requirements of what a solution does. The document outlines key characteristics of software architecture like serverless and event-driven architectures. It also discusses principles of software design like the single responsibility principle. Finally, it explains that while architecture focuses on structure and high-level design, design delves into implementation details, and there is overlap between the two.
This document provides an outline for a lecture on software design and architecture. It discusses key concepts like classes and objects, visibility, class diagrams, sequence diagrams, and design patterns. The document also includes disclaimers about the source of the material and its intended educational use.
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ON SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURE STYLESijfcstjournal
Software architecture is the structural solution that achieves the overall technical and operational requirements for software developments. Software engineers applied software architectures for their software system developments; however, they worry the basic benchmarks in order to select software architecture styles, possible components, integration methods (connectors) and the exact application of each style. The objective of this research work was a comparative analysis of software architecture styles by its weakness and benefits in order to select by the programmer during their design time. Finally, in this study, the researcher has been identified architectural styles, weakness, and Strength and application areas with its component, connector and Interface for the selected architectural styles.
Safety-driven Software Product Line architectures Design, A Survey PaperEditor IJCATR
Software architecture design is an important step of software development. Currently, there are various design methods
available and each is focusing on certain perspective of architecture design. Especially, quality-based methods have received a lot of
attentions and have been well developed for single system architecture design. However, the use of quality-based design methods is
limited in software product line (SPL) because of the complexity and variabilities existing in SPL architecture. With the increasing
attention to software safety, improving software safety has already become a more important issue, especially for safety-critical
systems. This study aims at surveying existing research on Software Product Line Architecture (SPLA) design based on quality
attributes, and to give an overview of the intersection of the areas of software product line architecture design and Safety Driven
Design in order to classifying existing work, and discover open issues for further research. Also this study investigates safety analysis
at the architectural level, and Safety-based Software Product Line Architecture Design (SSPLAD) approaches. Safety-driven software
product line architecture design seems to be a ‘‘discussion” topic. The study shows that there are a large number of SPLA design
methods. However, the use of safety-based design methods is limited in software product lines (SPL) due to the variability property
that can potentially result in a large number of possible systems and because of the complexity existing in safety attribute itself.
This document discusses an approach to assembling software products using a product line approach. It presents a separation continuum that separates concerns both vertically (from abstract to implementation layers) and horizontally (between human-facing and machine-facing aspects). An application assembly approach is then discussed where a product line architecture is tied to this separation continuum, allowing high productivity by reusing pre-built software assets to realize new product lines. The approach aims to facilitate experimentation in building large-scale application assembly capabilities.
This document discusses the importance of documenting software architecture and provides guidance on how to do it effectively. It explains that architectural documentation is important so that stakeholders understand the system design. It recommends choosing relevant views to document, such as structure, behavior, and interfaces. It also suggests including an element catalog, context diagram, and other details in the documentation. The goal of the documentation is to explain the architecture in a way that is easy to read and understand for stakeholders.
This document compares the J2EE and .NET platforms using a separation continuum model. It defines key terms related to J2EE, .NET, and distributed application architectures. The document outlines a logical tier model and a service-based architecture model for conceptualizing large distributed solutions. It aims to map the technologies provided by J2EE and .NET to the separation continuum for analysis and comparison.
The document discusses domain-specific software engineering and product lines. It defines domain-specific software architectures and product lines, and explains their relationship. It provides examples of using the Koala architecture description language and xADL 2.0 to model product line architectures for lunar lander games and software defined radios. Variation points are used to capture alternative products and versions.
IRJET- Software Architecture and Software DesignIRJET Journal
This document discusses software architecture and design. It defines software architecture as the strategic design of a system that addresses global requirements, while software design is the tactical design that addresses local requirements of what a solution does. The document outlines key characteristics of software architecture like serverless and event-driven architectures. It also discusses principles of software design like the single responsibility principle. Finally, it explains that while architecture focuses on structure and high-level design, design delves into implementation details, and there is overlap between the two.
This document provides an outline for a lecture on software design and architecture. It discusses key concepts like classes and objects, visibility, class diagrams, sequence diagrams, and design patterns. The document also includes disclaimers about the source of the material and its intended educational use.
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ON SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURE STYLESijfcstjournal
Software architecture is the structural solution that achieves the overall technical and operational requirements for software developments. Software engineers applied software architectures for their software system developments; however, they worry the basic benchmarks in order to select software architecture styles, possible components, integration methods (connectors) and the exact application of each style. The objective of this research work was a comparative analysis of software architecture styles by its weakness and benefits in order to select by the programmer during their design time. Finally, in this study, the researcher has been identified architectural styles, weakness, and Strength and application areas with its component, connector and Interface for the selected architectural styles.
Safety-driven Software Product Line architectures Design, A Survey PaperEditor IJCATR
Software architecture design is an important step of software development. Currently, there are various design methods
available and each is focusing on certain perspective of architecture design. Especially, quality-based methods have received a lot of
attentions and have been well developed for single system architecture design. However, the use of quality-based design methods is
limited in software product line (SPL) because of the complexity and variabilities existing in SPL architecture. With the increasing
attention to software safety, improving software safety has already become a more important issue, especially for safety-critical
systems. This study aims at surveying existing research on Software Product Line Architecture (SPLA) design based on quality
attributes, and to give an overview of the intersection of the areas of software product line architecture design and Safety Driven
Design in order to classifying existing work, and discover open issues for further research. Also this study investigates safety analysis
at the architectural level, and Safety-based Software Product Line Architecture Design (SSPLAD) approaches. Safety-driven software
product line architecture design seems to be a ‘‘discussion” topic. The study shows that there are a large number of SPLA design
methods. However, the use of safety-based design methods is limited in software product lines (SPL) due to the variability property
that can potentially result in a large number of possible systems and because of the complexity existing in safety attribute itself.
Architectural models use views to document a system's architecture from different perspectives. Views describe a system's structure and can be used to design and implement more detailed designs. There are four fundamental views in software architecture: the logical view shows key abstractions and objects, the process view shows system components and interactions, the development view decomposes software into components, and the physical view maps software to hardware. Together these views form the "4+1" model for documenting a system's architecture.
This document provides an overview of software architectures and architectural structures. It discusses different types of architectural structures, including module structures, component-and-connector structures, and allocation structures. Module structures focus on modules and their relationships, component-and-connector structures examine runtime components and connectors, and allocation structures show how software elements map to environments. The document then examines specific architectural structures like modules, layers, classes, processes, repositories, and deployment. It emphasizes that an architect should focus on a few key structures like logical, process, development, and physical views to validate that the architecture meets requirements.
The 4+1 view model provides a framework for documenting software architecture using multiple views. It addresses the different concerns of various stakeholders. The 4+1 view model includes logical, process, development, physical views plus a use case view. Each view is described from the perspective of different stakeholders and uses various UML diagrams. The views are interconnected and together provide a comprehensive architectural description of the system.
An architecture is very complicated and involves three types of decisions: how the system is structured as code units, how it is structured as runtime components and interactions, and how it relates to non-software elements. The document discusses several common architectural structures, including decomposition, uses, layered, class/generalization, process, concurrency, shared data/repository, client-server, deployment, implementation, and work assignment structures. It also discusses Kruchten's four views of logical, process, development, and physical.
The document presents the "4+1" view model for describing software architectures. It consists of five views: the logical view, process view, physical view, development view, and use case scenarios. Each view addresses different stakeholder concerns and can be described using its own notation. The logical view describes the object-oriented decomposition. The process view addresses concurrency and distribution. The physical view maps software to hardware. The development view describes module organization. Together these views provide a comprehensive architecture description that addresses multiple stakeholder needs.
Software Architecture: views and viewpointsHenry Muccini
This is an introductory lecture to Software Architecture Views and Viewpoints, part of the Advanced Software Engineering course, at the University of L'Aquila, Italy (www.di.univaq.it/muccini/SE+/2012)
Architectural styles and patterns provide abstract frameworks for structuring systems and solving common problems. [1] An architectural style defines rules for how components interact and is characterized by aspects like communication, deployment, structure, and domain. [2] Examples include service-oriented architecture, client/server, and layered architecture. [3] Similarly, architectural patterns are reusable solutions to recurring design problems documented with elements, relationships, constraints, and interaction mechanisms.
Can “Feature” be used to Model the Changing Access Control Policies? IJORCS
Access control policies [ACPs] regulate the access to data and resources in information systems. These ACPs are framed from the functional requirements and the Organizational security & privacy policies. It was found to be beneficial, when the ACPs are included in the early phases of the software development leading to secure development of information systems. Many approaches are available for including the ACPs in requirements and design phase. They relied on UML artifacts, Aspects and also Feature for this purpose. But the earlier modeling approaches are limited in expressing the evolving ACPs due to organizational policy changes and business process modifications. In this paper, we analyze, whether “Feature”- defined as an increment in program functionality can be used as a modeling entity to represent the Evolving Access control requirements. We discuss the two prominent approaches that use Feature in modeling ACPs. Also we have a comparative analysis to find the suitability of Features in the context of changing ACPs. We conclude with our findings and provide directions for further research.
This document provides an introduction to software architecture concepts. It defines key terms like software architecture, architectural styles, patterns, elements and stakeholders.
It describes software architecture as the set of principal design decisions about a system. The main elements are components, connectors and configuration. Architectural styles and patterns provide general and specific design decisions to organize systems. Models are used to capture architectural designs. Architecture influences various software development processes. Stakeholders in architecture include architects, developers, testers, managers and users.
The document discusses object-oriented analysis and design concepts like refinement, extensibility, and design for reusability. It provides details on different types of extensibility like white-box, black-box, and gray-box extensibility. It also discusses object-oriented database management systems and compares relational databases with object-oriented databases.
Evolution of Modelling Techniques for Service Oriented ArchitectureIJERA Editor
Service-oriented architecture (SOA) is a software design and architecture design pattern based on independent pieces of software providing functionality as services to other applications. The benefit of SOA in the IT infrastructure is to allow parallel use and data exchange between programs which are services to the enterprise. Unified Modelling Language (UML) is a standardized general-purpose modelling language in the field of software engineering. The UML includes a set of graphic notation techniques to create visual models of object-oriented software systems. We want to make UML available for SOA as well. SoaML (Service oriented architecture Modelling Language) is an open source specification project from the Object Management Group (OMG), describing a UML profile and meta-model for the modelling and design of services within a service-oriented architecture. BPMN was also extended for SOA but there were few pitfalls. There is a need of a modelling framework which dedicated to SOA. Michael Bell authored a framework called Service Oriented Modelling Framework (SOMF) which is dedicated for SOA.
The document discusses product line architecture and the separation of concerns. It introduces the concept of a separation continuum, which separates architectural elements based on their use and applicability both vertically and horizontally. Vertically, elements are separated based on levels of abstraction from business models to implementation. Horizontally, elements are separated based on whether they are customer-facing or infrastructure-facing. The document argues that applying the separation continuum to a product line architecture can help achieve high levels of reuse and productivity when developing product lines by clearly separating concerns.
Software architecture reconstruction is the process of analyzing an existing software system to produce an architectural representation of it. It involves extracting information from various sources like code, documentation, and profiles. This information is converted into a standard database format and combined from different sources through view fusion. The main activities of reconstruction are visualization and interaction with the views, and recognizing patterns in the code. It is an iterative process requiring both technical expertise and architectural skills to understand dependencies and evaluate how an implemented system conforms to its intended architecture.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) aims to cover the latest outstanding developments in the field of all Engineering Technologies & science.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is a team of researchers not publication services or private publications running the journals for monetary benefits, we are association of scientists and academia who focus only on supporting authors who want to publish their work. The articles published in our journal can be accessed online, all the articles will be archived for real time access.
Our journal system primarily aims to bring out the research talent and the works done by sciaentists, academia, engineers, practitioners, scholars, post graduate students of engineering and science. This journal aims to cover the scientific research in a broader sense and not publishing a niche area of research facilitating researchers from various verticals to publish their papers. It is also aimed to provide a platform for the researchers to publish in a shorter of time, enabling them to continue further All articles published are freely available to scientific researchers in the Government agencies,educators and the general public. We are taking serious efforts to promote our journal across the globe in various ways, we are sure that our journal will act as a scientific platform for all researchers to publish their works online.
Comparative Study of Object Oriented Design and Component Based Software Engi...ijsrd.com
Object Oriented Approach and Component Based Software Engineering are two of the popular software paradigms. In this paper we have shown how these two paradigms differ from each other by conceptual comparison. This paper will cover the property comparisons of these two concepts and will also conclude a better concept in a particular situation. It will also cover the future work possible in this field.
Systems Analysis,
Systems Design,
Systems Modelling,
Systems Architecture,
System Development and Testing,
System Maintenance and Evolution,
SDLC example (Cloud Service life cycle)
This document outlines the course objectives and content for a software architectures course. The key topics covered include:
- Understanding what constitutes software architecture, architectural drivers, styles and views.
- Examining quality attribute workshops, architectural views, styles and documenting architectures.
- Exploring specific architectural styles, views, patterns and how they are used to specify system architecture.
- Analyzing architectures for emerging technologies like service-oriented architectures, cloud computing and adaptive structures.
The course aims to help students understand how to design architectures that meet requirements and explain the influence of architecture on technical and business activities. It covers important architectural concepts and how to apply styles and views.
FRAMEWORKS BETWEEN COMPONENTS AND OBJECTSacijjournal
Before the emergence of Component-Based Frameworks, similar issues have been addressed by other
software development paradigms including e.g. Object-Oriented Programming (OOP), ComponentBased Development (CBD), and Object-Oriented Framework. In this study, these approaches especially
object-oriented Frameworks are compared to Component-Based Frameworks and their relationship are
discussed. Different software reuse methods impacts on architectural patterns and support for
application extensions and versioning. It is concluded that many of the mechanisms provided by
Component-Based Framework can be enabled by software elements at the lower level. The main
contribution of Component-Based Framework is the focus on Component development. All of them can be
built on each other in layered manner by adopting suitable design patterns. Still some things such as
which method to develop and upgrade existing application to other approach.
An Empirical Study of the Improved SPLD Framework using Expert Opinion TechniqueIJEACS
Due to the growing need for high-performance and low-cost software applications and the increasing competitiveness, the industry is under pressure to deliver products with low development cost, reduced delivery time and improved quality. To address these demands, researchers have proposed several development methodologies and frameworks. One of the latest methodologies is software product line (SPL) which utilizes the concepts like reusability and variability to deliver successful products with shorter time-to-market, least development and minimum maintenance cost with a high-quality product. This research paper is a validation of our proposed framework, Improved Software Product Line (ISPL), using Expert Opinion Technique. An extensive survey based on a set of questionnaires on various aspects and sub-processes of the ISPLD Framework was carried. Analysis of the empirical data concludes that ISPL shows significant improvements on several aspects of the contemporary SPL frameworks.
Best practice business analyse (KAM201302)Crowdale.com
Deutsche Essent GmbH is an energy company based in Düsseldorf, Germany with approximately 2,500 employees. It is a subsidiary of Essent N.V. and focuses on natural gas transport and storage, renewable energy trade and distribution, and partnering with municipal utilities. Deutsche Essent has majority stakes in utility companies and is expanding its wind and gas power generation capacity. It aims to grow its market position in electricity, gas, and renewable energy in Germany. Key opportunities for Deutsche Essent include further investing in wind and gas power, partnering with municipalities, and contributing to Germany's transition to renewable and low-carbon energy sources.
Lectura 2.2 the roleofontologiesinemergnetmiddlewareMatias Menendez
The document discusses the role of ontologies in supporting emergent middleware. Emergent middleware is dynamically generated distributed system infrastructure that enables interoperability in complex distributed systems.
Ontologies play a key role by providing meaning and reasoning capabilities to allow the right runtime choices to be made. They support various functions throughout an emergent middleware architecture, including discovery, composition, and mediation. Two experiments provide initial evidence of ontologies' potential role in middleware by enabling semantic matching and process mediation. However, challenges remain around generating ontologies and addressing interoperability between heterogeneous ontologies.
Architectural models use views to document a system's architecture from different perspectives. Views describe a system's structure and can be used to design and implement more detailed designs. There are four fundamental views in software architecture: the logical view shows key abstractions and objects, the process view shows system components and interactions, the development view decomposes software into components, and the physical view maps software to hardware. Together these views form the "4+1" model for documenting a system's architecture.
This document provides an overview of software architectures and architectural structures. It discusses different types of architectural structures, including module structures, component-and-connector structures, and allocation structures. Module structures focus on modules and their relationships, component-and-connector structures examine runtime components and connectors, and allocation structures show how software elements map to environments. The document then examines specific architectural structures like modules, layers, classes, processes, repositories, and deployment. It emphasizes that an architect should focus on a few key structures like logical, process, development, and physical views to validate that the architecture meets requirements.
The 4+1 view model provides a framework for documenting software architecture using multiple views. It addresses the different concerns of various stakeholders. The 4+1 view model includes logical, process, development, physical views plus a use case view. Each view is described from the perspective of different stakeholders and uses various UML diagrams. The views are interconnected and together provide a comprehensive architectural description of the system.
An architecture is very complicated and involves three types of decisions: how the system is structured as code units, how it is structured as runtime components and interactions, and how it relates to non-software elements. The document discusses several common architectural structures, including decomposition, uses, layered, class/generalization, process, concurrency, shared data/repository, client-server, deployment, implementation, and work assignment structures. It also discusses Kruchten's four views of logical, process, development, and physical.
The document presents the "4+1" view model for describing software architectures. It consists of five views: the logical view, process view, physical view, development view, and use case scenarios. Each view addresses different stakeholder concerns and can be described using its own notation. The logical view describes the object-oriented decomposition. The process view addresses concurrency and distribution. The physical view maps software to hardware. The development view describes module organization. Together these views provide a comprehensive architecture description that addresses multiple stakeholder needs.
Software Architecture: views and viewpointsHenry Muccini
This is an introductory lecture to Software Architecture Views and Viewpoints, part of the Advanced Software Engineering course, at the University of L'Aquila, Italy (www.di.univaq.it/muccini/SE+/2012)
Architectural styles and patterns provide abstract frameworks for structuring systems and solving common problems. [1] An architectural style defines rules for how components interact and is characterized by aspects like communication, deployment, structure, and domain. [2] Examples include service-oriented architecture, client/server, and layered architecture. [3] Similarly, architectural patterns are reusable solutions to recurring design problems documented with elements, relationships, constraints, and interaction mechanisms.
Can “Feature” be used to Model the Changing Access Control Policies? IJORCS
Access control policies [ACPs] regulate the access to data and resources in information systems. These ACPs are framed from the functional requirements and the Organizational security & privacy policies. It was found to be beneficial, when the ACPs are included in the early phases of the software development leading to secure development of information systems. Many approaches are available for including the ACPs in requirements and design phase. They relied on UML artifacts, Aspects and also Feature for this purpose. But the earlier modeling approaches are limited in expressing the evolving ACPs due to organizational policy changes and business process modifications. In this paper, we analyze, whether “Feature”- defined as an increment in program functionality can be used as a modeling entity to represent the Evolving Access control requirements. We discuss the two prominent approaches that use Feature in modeling ACPs. Also we have a comparative analysis to find the suitability of Features in the context of changing ACPs. We conclude with our findings and provide directions for further research.
This document provides an introduction to software architecture concepts. It defines key terms like software architecture, architectural styles, patterns, elements and stakeholders.
It describes software architecture as the set of principal design decisions about a system. The main elements are components, connectors and configuration. Architectural styles and patterns provide general and specific design decisions to organize systems. Models are used to capture architectural designs. Architecture influences various software development processes. Stakeholders in architecture include architects, developers, testers, managers and users.
The document discusses object-oriented analysis and design concepts like refinement, extensibility, and design for reusability. It provides details on different types of extensibility like white-box, black-box, and gray-box extensibility. It also discusses object-oriented database management systems and compares relational databases with object-oriented databases.
Evolution of Modelling Techniques for Service Oriented ArchitectureIJERA Editor
Service-oriented architecture (SOA) is a software design and architecture design pattern based on independent pieces of software providing functionality as services to other applications. The benefit of SOA in the IT infrastructure is to allow parallel use and data exchange between programs which are services to the enterprise. Unified Modelling Language (UML) is a standardized general-purpose modelling language in the field of software engineering. The UML includes a set of graphic notation techniques to create visual models of object-oriented software systems. We want to make UML available for SOA as well. SoaML (Service oriented architecture Modelling Language) is an open source specification project from the Object Management Group (OMG), describing a UML profile and meta-model for the modelling and design of services within a service-oriented architecture. BPMN was also extended for SOA but there were few pitfalls. There is a need of a modelling framework which dedicated to SOA. Michael Bell authored a framework called Service Oriented Modelling Framework (SOMF) which is dedicated for SOA.
The document discusses product line architecture and the separation of concerns. It introduces the concept of a separation continuum, which separates architectural elements based on their use and applicability both vertically and horizontally. Vertically, elements are separated based on levels of abstraction from business models to implementation. Horizontally, elements are separated based on whether they are customer-facing or infrastructure-facing. The document argues that applying the separation continuum to a product line architecture can help achieve high levels of reuse and productivity when developing product lines by clearly separating concerns.
Software architecture reconstruction is the process of analyzing an existing software system to produce an architectural representation of it. It involves extracting information from various sources like code, documentation, and profiles. This information is converted into a standard database format and combined from different sources through view fusion. The main activities of reconstruction are visualization and interaction with the views, and recognizing patterns in the code. It is an iterative process requiring both technical expertise and architectural skills to understand dependencies and evaluate how an implemented system conforms to its intended architecture.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) aims to cover the latest outstanding developments in the field of all Engineering Technologies & science.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is a team of researchers not publication services or private publications running the journals for monetary benefits, we are association of scientists and academia who focus only on supporting authors who want to publish their work. The articles published in our journal can be accessed online, all the articles will be archived for real time access.
Our journal system primarily aims to bring out the research talent and the works done by sciaentists, academia, engineers, practitioners, scholars, post graduate students of engineering and science. This journal aims to cover the scientific research in a broader sense and not publishing a niche area of research facilitating researchers from various verticals to publish their papers. It is also aimed to provide a platform for the researchers to publish in a shorter of time, enabling them to continue further All articles published are freely available to scientific researchers in the Government agencies,educators and the general public. We are taking serious efforts to promote our journal across the globe in various ways, we are sure that our journal will act as a scientific platform for all researchers to publish their works online.
Comparative Study of Object Oriented Design and Component Based Software Engi...ijsrd.com
Object Oriented Approach and Component Based Software Engineering are two of the popular software paradigms. In this paper we have shown how these two paradigms differ from each other by conceptual comparison. This paper will cover the property comparisons of these two concepts and will also conclude a better concept in a particular situation. It will also cover the future work possible in this field.
Systems Analysis,
Systems Design,
Systems Modelling,
Systems Architecture,
System Development and Testing,
System Maintenance and Evolution,
SDLC example (Cloud Service life cycle)
This document outlines the course objectives and content for a software architectures course. The key topics covered include:
- Understanding what constitutes software architecture, architectural drivers, styles and views.
- Examining quality attribute workshops, architectural views, styles and documenting architectures.
- Exploring specific architectural styles, views, patterns and how they are used to specify system architecture.
- Analyzing architectures for emerging technologies like service-oriented architectures, cloud computing and adaptive structures.
The course aims to help students understand how to design architectures that meet requirements and explain the influence of architecture on technical and business activities. It covers important architectural concepts and how to apply styles and views.
FRAMEWORKS BETWEEN COMPONENTS AND OBJECTSacijjournal
Before the emergence of Component-Based Frameworks, similar issues have been addressed by other
software development paradigms including e.g. Object-Oriented Programming (OOP), ComponentBased Development (CBD), and Object-Oriented Framework. In this study, these approaches especially
object-oriented Frameworks are compared to Component-Based Frameworks and their relationship are
discussed. Different software reuse methods impacts on architectural patterns and support for
application extensions and versioning. It is concluded that many of the mechanisms provided by
Component-Based Framework can be enabled by software elements at the lower level. The main
contribution of Component-Based Framework is the focus on Component development. All of them can be
built on each other in layered manner by adopting suitable design patterns. Still some things such as
which method to develop and upgrade existing application to other approach.
An Empirical Study of the Improved SPLD Framework using Expert Opinion TechniqueIJEACS
Due to the growing need for high-performance and low-cost software applications and the increasing competitiveness, the industry is under pressure to deliver products with low development cost, reduced delivery time and improved quality. To address these demands, researchers have proposed several development methodologies and frameworks. One of the latest methodologies is software product line (SPL) which utilizes the concepts like reusability and variability to deliver successful products with shorter time-to-market, least development and minimum maintenance cost with a high-quality product. This research paper is a validation of our proposed framework, Improved Software Product Line (ISPL), using Expert Opinion Technique. An extensive survey based on a set of questionnaires on various aspects and sub-processes of the ISPLD Framework was carried. Analysis of the empirical data concludes that ISPL shows significant improvements on several aspects of the contemporary SPL frameworks.
Best practice business analyse (KAM201302)Crowdale.com
Deutsche Essent GmbH is an energy company based in Düsseldorf, Germany with approximately 2,500 employees. It is a subsidiary of Essent N.V. and focuses on natural gas transport and storage, renewable energy trade and distribution, and partnering with municipal utilities. Deutsche Essent has majority stakes in utility companies and is expanding its wind and gas power generation capacity. It aims to grow its market position in electricity, gas, and renewable energy in Germany. Key opportunities for Deutsche Essent include further investing in wind and gas power, partnering with municipalities, and contributing to Germany's transition to renewable and low-carbon energy sources.
Lectura 2.2 the roleofontologiesinemergnetmiddlewareMatias Menendez
The document discusses the role of ontologies in supporting emergent middleware. Emergent middleware is dynamically generated distributed system infrastructure that enables interoperability in complex distributed systems.
Ontologies play a key role by providing meaning and reasoning capabilities to allow the right runtime choices to be made. They support various functions throughout an emergent middleware architecture, including discovery, composition, and mediation. Two experiments provide initial evidence of ontologies' potential role in middleware by enabling semantic matching and process mediation. However, challenges remain around generating ontologies and addressing interoperability between heterogeneous ontologies.
E-commerce provides several benefits such as access to global markets, 24/7 trading capabilities, and low start-up and running costs. However, it also faces weaknesses like lack of consumer trust, lack of human contact, and product description problems. These issues can be addressed by ensuring security, providing contact details, and carefully writing accurate descriptions. The technologies that support e-commerce include databases, browsers, web authoring software, and domain names. Promotion methods involve search engine optimization, forums, banners, loyalty programs, and direct marketing. Security relies on strong passwords, virus protection, and identity theft precautions.
Lectura 3.5 word normalizationintwitter finitestate_transducersMatias Menendez
This document describes a system for normalizing Spanish tweets using finite-state transducers. The system consists of three main components: 1) An analyzer that tokenizes tweets and identifies standard words, 2) Transducers that generate candidate words for out-of-vocabulary tokens by implementing linguistic models of spelling variation, 3) A statistical language model that selects the most probable sequence of words. The transducers are based on weighted finite-state automata and implement models of texting features such as logograms, shortenings, and non-standard spellings. An evaluation shows the system is effective at normalizing Spanish tweets.
This document provides an overview of service oriented architecture (SOA) and directions for SOA. It introduces a conceptual framework for understanding software integration as different layers, from the communication layer to the presentation layer. It then evaluates existing SOA realization approaches like WS-* specifications, ebXML, semantic web services, and RESTful services based on this framework. The document concludes by outlining future directions in SOA to further simplify the problem of integration.
The document discusses the benefits of exercise for mental health. Regular physical activity can help reduce anxiety and depression and improve mood and cognitive function. Exercise causes chemical changes in the brain that may help protect against mental illness and improve symptoms.
The document discusses the logos of several companies including EA Sports, Coca-Cola, Xbox 360, Manchester United, and Vodafone. It describes key design elements and symbolism for each logo such as the "E" in the EA Sports logo representing sports, the consistent use of the Coca-Cola logo since 1885, the "X" representing Xbox, and the speech mark in Vodafone representing phones. Overall, the document examines how these company logos effectively communicate their brands through simple yet symbolic design.
Sistema de denúncia de desperdício de água - Etapa de SínteseCRISLANIO MACEDO
O documento apresenta um sistema de denúncia de desperdício de água, descrevendo sistemas similares, legislação, pesquisa realizada e protótipo desenvolvido. A pesquisa avaliou a disposição das pessoas em denunciar e usar o sistema, e o protótipo inclui modelos de tarefas, interação e ferramentas como Moqups e Cacoo.
The document discusses the importance of continuous improvement for business applications to maintain responsiveness to changing business needs and technologies. It identifies four key categories of continuous improvement: 1) business empowerment through tools that allow business users to directly change applications, 2) application enhancements and integration projects, 3) planned and unplanned maintenance, and 4) version upgrades for off-the-shelf applications. The document emphasizes that a continuous improvement strategy can both reduce maintenance costs and open new opportunities for business responsiveness compared to solely focusing on maintenance. It provides recommendations for balancing business empowerment with controls and avoiding building up technical debt through enhancement projects.
Software Archtecture.
Software design is a process to transform user requirements into some suitable form, which helps the programmer in software coding and implementation.
Software design is the important step in SDLC (Software Design Life Cycle), which moves the concentration from problem domain to solution domain. It tries to specify how to fulfill the requirements mentioned in SRS.
Software design plays an important role in developing software: during software design, software engineers produce various models that form a kind of blueprint of the solution to be implemented
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ON SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURE STYLESijfcstjournal
Software architecture is the structural solution that achieves the overall technical and operational
requirements for software developments. Software engineers applied software architectures for their
software system developments; however, they worry the basic benchmarks in order to select software
architecture styles, possible components, integration methods (connectors) and the exact application of
each style.
The objective of this research work was a comparative analysis of software architecture styles by its
weakness and benefits in order to select by the programmer during their design time. Finally, in this study,
the researcher has been identified architectural styles, weakness, and Strength and application areas with
its component, connector and Interface for the selected architectural styles.
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ON SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURE STYLESADEIJ Journal
Software architecture is the structural solution that achieves the overall technical and operational
requirements for software developments. Software engineers applied software architectures for their
software system developments; however, they worry the basic benchmarks in order to select software
architecture styles, possible components, integration methods (connectors) and the exact application of
each style.
The objective of this research work was a comparative analysis of software architecture styles by its
weakness and benefits in order to select by the programmer during their design time. Finally, in this study,
the researcher has been identified architectural styles, weakness, and Strength and application areas with
its component, connector and Interface for the selected architectural styles.
Coupling based structural metrics for measuring the quality of a software (sy...Mumbai Academisc
This document discusses measuring the quality of software modularization using coupling-based structural metrics. It proposes dividing a large codebase into fine-grained modules at the leaf directory level and applying four metrics - module interaction index, non-API function closedness index, API function usage index, and implicit dependency index - to measure coupling between modules. The existing system divides a codebase into two large modules, making analysis difficult, while the proposed system allows for easier maintenance and analysis by dividing files into individual modules and applying the metrics to different software versions.
The document discusses the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and its role in object-oriented analysis and design. It describes UML as a graphical language used to visualize, specify, construct, and document software systems. UML provides tools and features to support complex systems using object-oriented concepts and methodology. UML diagrams are used to model system designs, with the key UML diagrams being class, sequence, use case, state machine, and activity diagrams. The document also briefly mentions some criticisms of UML regarding when diagrams should be used and how frequently they need to be updated.
This document discusses software product lines and component-based software architecture. It defines a software product line as a set of software systems that share common features to satisfy market needs. Product lines allow for significant reuse of common assets across products. The document also discusses challenges like architectural mismatch that can occur when integrating components, and techniques for avoiding, detecting, and repairing mismatches. It frames architecture development as an ongoing business process and discusses how commercial components impact architectural design decisions.
Reverse Engineering for Documenting Software Architectures, a Literature ReviewEditor IJCATR
Recently, much research in software engineering focused on reverse engineering of software systems which has become one
of the major engineering trends for software evolution. The objective of this survey paper is to provide a literature review on the
existing reverse engineering methodologies and approaches for documenting the architecture of software systems. The survey process
was based on selecting the most common approaches that form the current state of the art in documenting software architectures. We
discuss the limitations of these approaches and highlight the main directions for future research and describe specific open issues for
research.
The document discusses key concepts in software design, including:
- Design involves modeling the system architecture, interfaces, and components before implementation. This allows assessment and improvement of quality.
- Important design concepts span abstraction, architecture, patterns, separation of concerns, modularity, information hiding, and functional independence. Architecture defines overall structure and interactions. Patterns help solve common problems.
- Separation of concerns and related concepts like modularity and information hiding help decompose problems into independently designed and optimized pieces to improve manageability. Functional independence means each module has a single, well-defined purpose with minimal interaction.
The document discusses software architecture, including its definition, types of architectures, views, and documentation. It defines software architecture as the fundamental organization of a system, including its components, relationships, and design principles. The document outlines different types of architectures like business, technical, and enterprise architectures. It also discusses common architecture views used in frameworks like RUP, RM-ODP, and DODAF. Finally, it covers architecture documentation and modeling techniques.
The document provides an overview of software analysis and design. It defines the key purposes of analysis and design as transforming requirements into a system design and evolving an architecture. It explains the difference between analysis, which focuses on understanding problems, and design, which focuses on solutions. The document also introduces common analysis and design concepts like the four views of architecture, use cases, packages, layers, and patterns.
The document introduces software architecture and architectural design. It discusses that architectural design is important for understanding how a software system should be organized. The objectives are to understand the importance of architecture, decisions made in the design process, and architectural patterns. It also covers topics like architectural views, patterns, and application architectures.
Is The Architectures Of The Convnets ) For Action...Sheila Guy
The document discusses enterprise architecture (EA), which is defined as a conceptual blueprint that defines the structure and operation of an organization. The purpose of EA is to understand how an organization can most effectively achieve its current and future objectives. Some key benefits of EA include taking a holistic approach, ensuring consistency when delivering solutions to business problems, and aligning business and IT strategies to effectively use IT assets and support the organization's goals. EA is similar to city planning in providing an overall framework and context.
The document provides an overview of software patterns including their objectives, types, UML modeling elements and diagrams, and examples of design patterns like Template Method and Strategy. It discusses architectural patterns like layers, MVC, and SOA. It also covers design patterns like Template Method, Strategy, and Iterator in terms of their intent, participants, consequences, and implementations.
The document discusses key concepts in software design including abstraction, architecture, patterns, modularity, coupling and cohesion, and information hiding. It defines software design as transforming user requirements into an implementable form using programming languages. The software design process exists between requirements and programming and yields architectural, high-level, and detailed designs. It also outlines characteristics of good design like correctness, efficiency, and understandability.
Oracle Application Integration Architecture (AIA) is a framework from Oracle for integrating disparate Oracle applications. It provides standardized components and methodologies to make integration more reusable and scalable. Key components of AIA include Process Integration Packs (pre-built integrations), Enterprise Business Objects (a common data model), an error handling framework, and the Composite Application Validation System for testing. AIA is based on service-oriented architecture principles and aims to reduce maintenance by promoting loose coupling between applications through its development methodology. However, surveys of experienced Oracle architects found that while AIA can help with integration, fully delivering on its promises can still be challenging for large, complex implementations.
The document discusses analyzing software architectures and making design decisions. It describes several benefits of architecture evaluation such as cost savings, early problem detection, and improved quality. It also outlines techniques for architecture evaluation including ATAM and CBAM. The document discusses moving from single systems to product lines, using off-the-shelf components which requires managing architectural mismatches, and searching for compatible components. Finally, it examines how software architecture may evolve in the future as programming languages and tools continue to develop.
The document is a term paper on efficient performance models in component-based software engineering. It discusses component-based software engineering as a development model that allows developers to rapidly assemble systems from pre-existing commercial off-the-shelf components. It describes what components are, component models, advantages and disadvantages of the approach, and concludes that component-based engineering provides an easy way to develop software but relies on well-defined component standards.
The document discusses object-oriented design and its role in software development. It describes how design builds upon analysis to provide implementation details. Key aspects of object-oriented design include defining a multilayered architecture, specifying subsystems and components, describing classes and objects, and defining communication mechanisms. The input to design comes from artifacts created in analysis like use cases and class models. The output of design serves as a blueprint to guide construction.
Presenting an Excusable Model of Enterprise Architecture for Evaluation of R...Editor IJCATR
The document presents a method for creating an executable model of enterprise architecture diagrams to evaluate reliability. It transforms UML collaboration diagrams into colored Petri nets using an algorithm. This allows simulation of the diagrams to identify potential reliability issues early in the planning process. It aims to avoid high costs of implementation by improving architectural artifacts. The key steps are:
1) Using C4ISR framework and UML diagrams to describe enterprise architecture.
2) Transforming collaboration diagrams to colored Petri nets using a algorithm that represents messages as transitions and senders/receivers as places.
3) Annotating the Petri net model with reliability data to enable simulation and evaluation of reliability.
Similar to Lectura 2.1 architectural integrationstylesfor largescale-editable_pdf (20)
Sudheer Mechineni, Head of Application Frameworks, Standard Chartered Bank
Discover how Standard Chartered Bank harnessed the power of Neo4j to transform complex data access challenges into a dynamic, scalable graph database solution. This keynote will cover their journey from initial adoption to deploying a fully automated, enterprise-grade causal cluster, highlighting key strategies for modelling organisational changes and ensuring robust disaster recovery. Learn how these innovations have not only enhanced Standard Chartered Bank’s data infrastructure but also positioned them as pioneers in the banking sector’s adoption of graph technology.
Essentials of Automations: The Art of Triggers and Actions in FMESafe Software
In this second installment of our Essentials of Automations webinar series, we’ll explore the landscape of triggers and actions, guiding you through the nuances of authoring and adapting workspaces for seamless automations. Gain an understanding of the full spectrum of triggers and actions available in FME, empowering you to enhance your workspaces for efficient automation.
We’ll kick things off by showcasing the most commonly used event-based triggers, introducing you to various automation workflows like manual triggers, schedules, directory watchers, and more. Plus, see how these elements play out in real scenarios.
Whether you’re tweaking your current setup or building from the ground up, this session will arm you with the tools and insights needed to transform your FME usage into a powerhouse of productivity. Join us to discover effective strategies that simplify complex processes, enhancing your productivity and transforming your data management practices with FME. Let’s turn complexity into clarity and make your workspaces work wonders!
Removing Uninteresting Bytes in Software FuzzingAftab Hussain
Imagine a world where software fuzzing, the process of mutating bytes in test seeds to uncover hidden and erroneous program behaviors, becomes faster and more effective. A lot depends on the initial seeds, which can significantly dictate the trajectory of a fuzzing campaign, particularly in terms of how long it takes to uncover interesting behaviour in your code. We introduce DIAR, a technique designed to speedup fuzzing campaigns by pinpointing and eliminating those uninteresting bytes in the seeds. Picture this: instead of wasting valuable resources on meaningless mutations in large, bloated seeds, DIAR removes the unnecessary bytes, streamlining the entire process.
In this work, we equipped AFL, a popular fuzzer, with DIAR and examined two critical Linux libraries -- Libxml's xmllint, a tool for parsing xml documents, and Binutil's readelf, an essential debugging and security analysis command-line tool used to display detailed information about ELF (Executable and Linkable Format). Our preliminary results show that AFL+DIAR does not only discover new paths more quickly but also achieves higher coverage overall. This work thus showcases how starting with lean and optimized seeds can lead to faster, more comprehensive fuzzing campaigns -- and DIAR helps you find such seeds.
- These are slides of the talk given at IEEE International Conference on Software Testing Verification and Validation Workshop, ICSTW 2022.
Securing your Kubernetes cluster_ a step-by-step guide to success !KatiaHIMEUR1
Today, after several years of existence, an extremely active community and an ultra-dynamic ecosystem, Kubernetes has established itself as the de facto standard in container orchestration. Thanks to a wide range of managed services, it has never been so easy to set up a ready-to-use Kubernetes cluster.
However, this ease of use means that the subject of security in Kubernetes is often left for later, or even neglected. This exposes companies to significant risks.
In this talk, I'll show you step-by-step how to secure your Kubernetes cluster for greater peace of mind and reliability.
Generative AI Deep Dive: Advancing from Proof of Concept to ProductionAggregage
Join Maher Hanafi, VP of Engineering at Betterworks, in this new session where he'll share a practical framework to transform Gen AI prototypes into impactful products! He'll delve into the complexities of data collection and management, model selection and optimization, and ensuring security, scalability, and responsible use.
Alt. GDG Cloud Southlake #33: Boule & Rebala: Effective AppSec in SDLC using ...James Anderson
Effective Application Security in Software Delivery lifecycle using Deployment Firewall and DBOM
The modern software delivery process (or the CI/CD process) includes many tools, distributed teams, open-source code, and cloud platforms. Constant focus on speed to release software to market, along with the traditional slow and manual security checks has caused gaps in continuous security as an important piece in the software supply chain. Today organizations feel more susceptible to external and internal cyber threats due to the vast attack surface in their applications supply chain and the lack of end-to-end governance and risk management.
The software team must secure its software delivery process to avoid vulnerability and security breaches. This needs to be achieved with existing tool chains and without extensive rework of the delivery processes. This talk will present strategies and techniques for providing visibility into the true risk of the existing vulnerabilities, preventing the introduction of security issues in the software, resolving vulnerabilities in production environments quickly, and capturing the deployment bill of materials (DBOM).
Speakers:
Bob Boule
Robert Boule is a technology enthusiast with PASSION for technology and making things work along with a knack for helping others understand how things work. He comes with around 20 years of solution engineering experience in application security, software continuous delivery, and SaaS platforms. He is known for his dynamic presentations in CI/CD and application security integrated in software delivery lifecycle.
Gopinath Rebala
Gopinath Rebala is the CTO of OpsMx, where he has overall responsibility for the machine learning and data processing architectures for Secure Software Delivery. Gopi also has a strong connection with our customers, leading design and architecture for strategic implementations. Gopi is a frequent speaker and well-known leader in continuous delivery and integrating security into software delivery.
In the rapidly evolving landscape of technologies, XML continues to play a vital role in structuring, storing, and transporting data across diverse systems. The recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) present new methodologies for enhancing XML development workflows, introducing efficiency, automation, and intelligent capabilities. This presentation will outline the scope and perspective of utilizing AI in XML development. The potential benefits and the possible pitfalls will be highlighted, providing a balanced view of the subject.
We will explore the capabilities of AI in understanding XML markup languages and autonomously creating structured XML content. Additionally, we will examine the capacity of AI to enrich plain text with appropriate XML markup. Practical examples and methodological guidelines will be provided to elucidate how AI can be effectively prompted to interpret and generate accurate XML markup.
Further emphasis will be placed on the role of AI in developing XSLT, or schemas such as XSD and Schematron. We will address the techniques and strategies adopted to create prompts for generating code, explaining code, or refactoring the code, and the results achieved.
The discussion will extend to how AI can be used to transform XML content. In particular, the focus will be on the use of AI XPath extension functions in XSLT, Schematron, Schematron Quick Fixes, or for XML content refactoring.
The presentation aims to deliver a comprehensive overview of AI usage in XML development, providing attendees with the necessary knowledge to make informed decisions. Whether you’re at the early stages of adopting AI or considering integrating it in advanced XML development, this presentation will cover all levels of expertise.
By highlighting the potential advantages and challenges of integrating AI with XML development tools and languages, the presentation seeks to inspire thoughtful conversation around the future of XML development. We’ll not only delve into the technical aspects of AI-powered XML development but also discuss practical implications and possible future directions.
Introducing Milvus Lite: Easy-to-Install, Easy-to-Use vector database for you...Zilliz
Join us to introduce Milvus Lite, a vector database that can run on notebooks and laptops, share the same API with Milvus, and integrate with every popular GenAI framework. This webinar is perfect for developers seeking easy-to-use, well-integrated vector databases for their GenAI apps.
Cosa hanno in comune un mattoncino Lego e la backdoor XZ?Speck&Tech
ABSTRACT: A prima vista, un mattoncino Lego e la backdoor XZ potrebbero avere in comune il fatto di essere entrambi blocchi di costruzione, o dipendenze di progetti creativi e software. La realtà è che un mattoncino Lego e il caso della backdoor XZ hanno molto di più di tutto ciò in comune.
Partecipate alla presentazione per immergervi in una storia di interoperabilità, standard e formati aperti, per poi discutere del ruolo importante che i contributori hanno in una comunità open source sostenibile.
BIO: Sostenitrice del software libero e dei formati standard e aperti. È stata un membro attivo dei progetti Fedora e openSUSE e ha co-fondato l'Associazione LibreItalia dove è stata coinvolta in diversi eventi, migrazioni e formazione relativi a LibreOffice. In precedenza ha lavorato a migrazioni e corsi di formazione su LibreOffice per diverse amministrazioni pubbliche e privati. Da gennaio 2020 lavora in SUSE come Software Release Engineer per Uyuni e SUSE Manager e quando non segue la sua passione per i computer e per Geeko coltiva la sua curiosità per l'astronomia (da cui deriva il suo nickname deneb_alpha).
Why You Should Replace Windows 11 with Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 for enhanced perfor...SOFTTECHHUB
The choice of an operating system plays a pivotal role in shaping our computing experience. For decades, Microsoft's Windows has dominated the market, offering a familiar and widely adopted platform for personal and professional use. However, as technological advancements continue to push the boundaries of innovation, alternative operating systems have emerged, challenging the status quo and offering users a fresh perspective on computing.
One such alternative that has garnered significant attention and acclaim is Nitrux Linux 3.5.0, a sleek, powerful, and user-friendly Linux distribution that promises to redefine the way we interact with our devices. With its focus on performance, security, and customization, Nitrux Linux presents a compelling case for those seeking to break free from the constraints of proprietary software and embrace the freedom and flexibility of open-source computing.
Maruthi Prithivirajan, Head of ASEAN & IN Solution Architecture, Neo4j
Get an inside look at the latest Neo4j innovations that enable relationship-driven intelligence at scale. Learn more about the newest cloud integrations and product enhancements that make Neo4j an essential choice for developers building apps with interconnected data and generative AI.
Threats to mobile devices are more prevalent and increasing in scope and complexity. Users of mobile devices desire to take full advantage of the features
available on those devices, but many of the features provide convenience and capability but sacrifice security. This best practices guide outlines steps the users can take to better protect personal devices and information.
Unlocking Productivity: Leveraging the Potential of Copilot in Microsoft 365, a presentation by Christoforos Vlachos, Senior Solutions Manager – Modern Workplace, Uni Systems
Climate Impact of Software Testing at Nordic Testing DaysKari Kakkonen
My slides at Nordic Testing Days 6.6.2024
Climate impact / sustainability of software testing discussed on the talk. ICT and testing must carry their part of global responsibility to help with the climat warming. We can minimize the carbon footprint but we can also have a carbon handprint, a positive impact on the climate. Quality characteristics can be added with sustainability, and then measured continuously. Test environments can be used less, and in smaller scale and on demand. Test techniques can be used in optimizing or minimizing number of tests. Test automation can be used to speed up testing.
GraphSummit Singapore | The Art of the Possible with Graph - Q2 2024Neo4j
Neha Bajwa, Vice President of Product Marketing, Neo4j
Join us as we explore breakthrough innovations enabled by interconnected data and AI. Discover firsthand how organizations use relationships in data to uncover contextual insights and solve our most pressing challenges – from optimizing supply chains, detecting fraud, and improving customer experiences to accelerating drug discoveries.
A tale of scale & speed: How the US Navy is enabling software delivery from l...sonjaschweigert1
Rapid and secure feature delivery is a goal across every application team and every branch of the DoD. The Navy’s DevSecOps platform, Party Barge, has achieved:
- Reduction in onboarding time from 5 weeks to 1 day
- Improved developer experience and productivity through actionable findings and reduction of false positives
- Maintenance of superior security standards and inherent policy enforcement with Authorization to Operate (ATO)
Development teams can ship efficiently and ensure applications are cyber ready for Navy Authorizing Officials (AOs). In this webinar, Sigma Defense and Anchore will give attendees a look behind the scenes and demo secure pipeline automation and security artifacts that speed up application ATO and time to production.
We will cover:
- How to remove silos in DevSecOps
- How to build efficient development pipeline roles and component templates
- How to deliver security artifacts that matter for ATO’s (SBOMs, vulnerability reports, and policy evidence)
- How to streamline operations with automated policy checks on container images
Dr. Sean Tan, Head of Data Science, Changi Airport Group
Discover how Changi Airport Group (CAG) leverages graph technologies and generative AI to revolutionize their search capabilities. This session delves into the unique search needs of CAG’s diverse passengers and customers, showcasing how graph data structures enhance the accuracy and relevance of AI-generated search results, mitigating the risk of “hallucinations” and improving the overall customer journey.
1. Architectural Integration Styles for Large-scale Enterprise Software Systems
Jonas Anderson, Pontus Johnson
f
Dept. o Industrial Information and Control Systems,
KTH, Royal Institute of Technology
Osquldas vag 12, SE - 100 44 Stockholm, SWEDEN
Gonasa, pontusj} @ics.kth.se
Abstract
A predominant problem in the management of largescale enterprise software systems is application
integration. Despite the considerable efforts spent on the
development of new standards and technologies f o r
software interoperation, the integration of systems that
originally were not designed io interact with each other is
f
a major undertaking, requiring in-depth knowledge o
existing systems, incorporation of integration products,
and development and/or parameterization of various
kinds of adapters and gateways.
This article presents the concept of architectural
integration styles, i.e. architectural styles describing
software structures of integration solutions f o r enterprise
software systems. The article further proposes an
approach f o r selection of styles based on the
characteristics of the existing software applications and
the desired quality attributes of the integrated system.
A number of architectural integration styles f o r
enterprise systems are presented in the article, and a case
study o the style selection process applied to a mid-sized
f
Swedish electricity retailer is described.
1. Introduction
Integration of software systems has during the last
decades become one of the most important, as well as
resource consuming, activities in enterprise software
system management. Enterprise software systems are
typically composed of a mix of legacy, custom, and
commercial-of-the-shelf software, and characterized by
large-grained,
heterogeneous
and
unmodifiable
components, and heterogeneous connectors.
As a result of the increasing focus on system
integration, there is a growing market for software
integration products and standards. The once fairly clear
market division has recently been blurred by component
technologies and standards like CORBA [20], COM [9],
and Enterprise JavaBeans [171 incorporating more and
more services. Typical integration solutions are
exemplified by remote method invocation, message
0-7695-1345-X’01/$10.00 0 2001 IEEE
queuing systems, transaction management systems,
message brokers, adapters, and database connectivity
solutions [7] [16] [21] [22].
This article considers architectural styles [14] as a
means for design of integration solutions for enterprise
software systems. The article argues that architectural
styles on the level of enterprise software systems can be
used as generalizations of common integration solutions,
much in the same way that styles and pattems are used in
traditional software architecture and design. In other
words, architectural integrations styles may be seen as
generalizations of historically successful solutions to
common problems. The perhaps most interesting part
about architectural styles is that they are believed to
impact software quality attributes. Certain styles are more
appropriate than others for achieving certain quality
attributes in a system. It is consequently desirable to
classify “good” architectural styles and employ them when
certain goals are sought.
There are, however, a number of differences between
traditional software systems and enterprise software
systems that need to be taken into consideration. The
article assumes that the components of enterprise software
systems are unmodifiable. This is not always the case, but
whether it is or not, on the enterprise system level, it is
almost always desirable to construct non-intrusive
integration solutions, justifying the view of components as
unmodifiable. As a consequence, the article examines
enterprise software architecture from the aspect of systems
integration. This focus delimits the problem nicely,
permitting a structured analysis based on a manageable
number of variables.
1.1. Purpose of the article
The purpose of the article is to propose an approach for
selection of integration solutions, based on architectural
integration styles for enterprise software systems. To
promote this, a structure for describing architectural
integration styles is presented. To firther strengthen the
feasibility of the approach, a number of architectural
styles are presented. The approach and the presented
styles are subsequently considered in the context of a
224
2. systems integration project in an energy company on the
Swedish energy market.
1.2. Definitions
Below, some in the article recurring terms are defined.
Architectural style. Before describing architectural
integration styles for enterprise software systems, we need
to define architectural styles in general. According to
Alexander et al. [I], reiterated by Gamma et al. [12], a
pattern “describes a problem that occurs over and over
again in our environment, and then describes the core of
the solution to that problem, in such a way that you can
use this solution a million times over, without ever doing
it the same way twice”. According to Bass et al. [5], an
architectural style is the same thing as a system pattern (to
be differentiated from design and code patterns). Bass et
al. define architectural styles (or system patterns) as 1) a
set of component types, 2) a runtime topological layout of
these components, 3 ) a set of semantic constraints, and 4)
a set of connectors.
Enterprise software system. The total interconnected
system of systems and applications within an organization.
Thus, in an enterprise software system, software systems
that from a vendor view may be considered as large and
complex, are in an enterprise software system considered
as components.
Enterprise software architecture.
The
model
description of an enterprise software system, consisting of
more or less structured and/or explicit descriptions of the
source (present), intermediate, and target (intended)
architectures. In addition, technically outdated but
commonly business critical and/or inadequately
documented source architectures are commonly termed
legacy enterprise software architectures. This article
advocates architectural integration styles as a prominent
part in such architectural descriptions. Accordingly,
components in these different architectural descriptions
are termed legacy, source, intermediate, and target
components.
Architectural integration style. An architectural
integration style is in this article used to denote a
generalization of a historically successful integration
solution on the level of enterprise software systems.
Integration styles are further elaborated on in the
remainder of the article.
Base components. The term base component refers to
the original components introduced for hnctional rather
than integration purposes. Contributing to the selection of
base components are legacy components, available
packaged components, organizational needs, and business
vision. In this article, the base components are considered
as the main building blocks in the architectural integration
styles.
1.3. Outline of article
Section 2 discusses the main differences between
traditional single-vendor software systems and enterprise
software systems. Section 3 presents a structure for
describing architectural ‘integration styles for enterprise
software systems as well as the rationale for using such a
structure. In Section 4, a number of architectural
integration styles for enterprise software systems are
described. Analyzed styles include the gateway style, the
adapter style, the point-to-point style, the mediator style,
the message router style, the database federation style,
and the desktop integration style. Section 5 presents a
case study of the selection of architectural integration
style for an enterprise active on the Swedish energy
market. The styles in Section 4 are considered in the
context of an extensive application integration project.
Section 6 concludes the article with a discussion on the
findings of the research.
2. Large-scale enterprise systems
To support the article’s attempt to use the concept of
architectural styles on enterprise software systems, this
section presents the main differences between singlevendor software systems and large-scale enterprise
software systems. The main themes of the differences
stressed in this article are the latter system level’s
heterogeneity of interconnected architectural entities, and
the strive for maximizing the use of packaged software,
thus limiting cost and risk, but also the degree of freedom
regarding changes and replacement of components
compared to custom development. Hence, the
architectural design space for enterprise software systems
becomes rather discrete in terms of feasible design
alternatives, and the share of the total effort spent on the
parameterization and adaptation of components and
connectors is considerably larger.
The total enterprise software system in a medium-sized
enterprise may comprise of more than a hundred
interconnected components with different degree of
interaction [8]. Traditionally, systems have been
developed and customized from scratch in order to fulfill
the specific requirements for one organization. Some
notable characteristics of the elements in an enterprise
software architecture are briefly highlighted below [3].
Components are large-grained. Enterprise software
components reflect the chunks of software that the
organization wishes to makes explicit in order to maintain
a high level of freedom regarding the quality attributes
focused upon. Thus, enterprise software components are
often fairly large-grained, as they tend to reflect available
packaged software components, legacy software
components, and management goals. For instance,
225
3. complete systems such as customer information systems
and geographical information systems might be
considered as components in enterprise software
architectures [ 161.
The supply of packaged components is limited. The
number of on the market available large-grained
components is always limited. Often components with the
desired hnctionality do not exist, forcing enterprises to
either develop those components from scratch or combine
packaged software to fulfill the requirements of the
component.
The legacy architecture constitutes the starting
point of the system development effort. Enterprises
have to take their legacy software components under
consideration. These components often constitute a
significant asset that may not be easily replaceable without
severe disturbances to the business operations [6].
The enterprise software system may contain both
data and functional redundancy. The use of packaged
components increases complexity since those components
rarely correspond completely to the organization’s
requirements. In order to grasp the bulk of the
requirements, different packaged components are
combined with custom-developed components, such as
adapters, wrappers, and gateways [6] [ 161, often resulting
in both functional and data redundancy. Data and
hnctionality can also be virtually redundant, i.e. similar
but not identical, causing further inconsistencies in
enterprise databases [4].
Components are not modifiable. Since enterprise
software systems to a large extent consist of packaged
software, changes to the system cannot be performed
directly on the base components. Normally, the source
code is not available, and if it were, changes might violate
the components’ commercial status as packaged software.
Therefore, changes to the system are preferably handled
indirectly, either by influencing the software vendor to
adapt its packaged product in coming releases, or by
implementing non-intrusive modifications, e.g. by
wrapping the component in order to change its external
behavior.
Components are heterogeneous. In an enterprise
software system that to a large extent is composed of the
combination of packaged and legacy components from a
wide range of vendors, epochs, and intended purposes,
uniform system components normally proves hard, costly,
and often even inappropriate to realize.
Connectors are heterogeneous. Connectors in an
enterprise software system are by nature diverse since
their main purpose is to glue heterogeneous components
together. Moreover, connectors do not only interface with
other components within the same enterprise software
system, they also provide interfaces to other
organizations’ software systems bringing even more
heterogeneity into the enterprise’s total battery of
connectors.
3. Describing architectural integration styles
for enterprise software systems
Traditional development is a creative process where
the components are defined and the functionality is
determined and allocated along with the selection of
architectural style. Because of these parallel processes, the
degrees of freedom are innumerous, making controlled
decision processes hard to implement.
When developing integration solutions of the kind
discussed herein, the components are unmodifiable and
the functionality is determined and allocated beforehand.
These limitations make it far easier to structure the
process of style selection.
Assuming that the main style selection process starts
after the base components have been chosen, this article
proposes that selection of architectural styles for
enterprise systems can be based on the characteristics of
the individual base components and the desired quality
attributes of the resulting system.
In other words, applying an architectural style on a
certain set of components yields some specific quality
attributes. To relate this to Alexander et al. [I] and
Gamma et al. [12], the problem is described as a set of
components and a set of desired quality attributes while
the solution is the style definition. This is not a new
definition of styles but a reformulation adapted for
architectural integration styles for enterprise software
systems.
To make the style selection process straightforward,
styles need to be described in three parts. Firstly, the style
must be defined. Secondly, the constraints that the
components are subject to (these are part of or
consequences of the style definition) should be described.
Finally, the quality attributes that the resulting system
displays need to be examined.
Perhaps the most problematic issue with architectural
styles, whether they are limited to enterprise software
systems or not, is the identification of all the relevant
component constraints and resulting quality attributes. In
this article, a basic set will be considered without claiming
any kind of completeness. Below, we present the basic
parts of a style description.
3.1. Style definition
In the proposed style description, the definition is thus
expressed as one or several constraints on components,
connectors, semantics or topology. These defining
constraints may imply other constraints (e.g., a constraint
on connectors is often also a constraint on the component
226
4. interfaces). In the style definition, the primary constraints
are described.
3.2. Quality attributes
Architectural styles are principally believed to impact
quality attributes of the resulting system [IS]. The
resulting characteristics are therefore described in terms of
“ilities” [19]. As such, a number of quality attributes are
considered in Table 1 . The table is by no means a
complete account of quality attributes, and the hierarchical
division is not claimed to be the only possible division.
Perhaps the most obvious component constraint relates
to the component types allowed by the architectural style
(stand-alone components, database components, etc.).
There are also a number,of constraints related to the
things that one component needs to know or manage about
a collaborating component. This includes collaborator
location and availability, information such as transfer
protocol [IO], data format [18], schema, and content
(including method signatures and interfaces) as well as
architectural assumptions [ 1 I ] [ 131.
Furthermore, there may be constraints on the types of
access that the component must provide, e.g. interface
access to the database, to the application logic, or to
internal objects of the component. Interfaces can
furthermore be subdivided into full-service, limitedservice, and controlled interfaces [ 161.
3.4. Organizing styles
Styles are related to each other in several different
ways and a clear organization of proposed styles may help
both in the use of and in the proposition of new styles.
The two most important relations are the sub-style and
uses relations. A sub-style is constructed by adding
constraints to its parent style (or meta-style). A uses
relation indicates that one style typically uses another
style.
components
accessibility
User
functionality
accessibility
I
I
Adapter
How much of the functionality that is accessible to the
end-users.
Point-to-Point
Table 1. Quality attributes
Also note that most quality attributes are directional
(the more of the quality attribute the better); a style that
improves many quality attributes is better than a style that
only improves one. Also, the easier it is to combine a style
with other styles without affecting the quality attributes
(the more orthogonal the styles are), the better it is.
3.3. Component constraint dimensions
Component constraints are either part of, or results of,
the style definition. As argued before, however, it makes
sense to express these constraints separately and in more
detail in the case of integration of unmodifiable
components. Connectors are treated more en passant since
they are not decided on beforehand.
Figure 2. “Uses”and sub-style relations between
presented architectural integration styles.
Another way of relating styles is by the type of
architectural constraints that they impose. On the topmost
level, constraints maybe divided into component type,
connector, topological, and semantic constraints.
A third set of dimensions for relating styles are the
quality attributes that they supposedly support.
Particularly interesting to note is that the quality attributes
of the styles are most easily expressed using a
comparative approach, since it is difficult to e.g. express
the scalability of one style without referring to another
style.
227
5. L L
------
r-----
I
Source
I
I
J
L
-
%
-',
Target
Amiication
-----I
I
I
Application
I
I
+I
i-
Component
L-----
The Screen-Scraping, Application, and
Database Gateway Style
The Desktop IntegrationStyle
The Message Router Style
m
Component
Component
Component
The Database Federation Style
The Point-to-Point Style
The Adapter Style
Figure I Architectural integration styles. Note that the gateway, the desktop integration, the message router,
.
and the database federation architectural integration styles all are sub-styles to the general mediator style.
Therefore, the mediator style is not explicitly illustrated in the figure.
4. Examples of architectural integration
styles
In this section, a number of architectural integration
styles for enterprise software systems are presented. The
styles are diverse and are not selected based on any
specific principle. Each style is described according to the
structure discussed in the previous section, including a
style definition, supported quality attributes, and
component constraints. The considered styles are the
gateway style, the adapter style, the point-to-point style,
the mediator style, the message router style, the database
federation style, and the desktop integration style.
4.1. The gateway style
The gateway style summarizes many ideas behind the
system migration approach of gradually altering complex
software system, e.g. summarized in [6]. Consequently,
the purpose of the gateway style is to allow direct
integration between two systems on the data or application
logic level. These two systems are normally referred to as
the source and target enterprise system. The gateway style
assumes that at least the source system is composed of a
database component, an application logic component, and
a user interface component. However, these may or may
not be separable (and whether they are often determines
the gateway sub-style employed). As is shown below,
gateways come in many colors and forms.
Style definition. The gateway style is defined by the
introduction of a component for direct interface mapping
between a source and a target system. The style is
divisible into several sub-styles based on the type of
source systems and the means for communication. A
database gateway encapsulates a database from the
application logic in the source component by providing a
new database management interface suited for the target
component. Application gateways, or adapters,
encapsulate the application logic and the data by
providing the source component with an application
interface compatible with the target component. The
screen scraper gateway is an application gateway that
connects to a (legacy) source component by tapping into
the data stream originally intended for the terminal.
As the name implies, the static gateway binds the
interfaces at design-time, while the dynamic gateway
allows runtime binding. A thin gateway provides nothing
but interface binding, while a thick gateway also includes
transformation of data format and schema.
228
6. The gateways may offer forward translation of calls
and data from a source component to a target component
and/or reverse translation from a target component to a
source component.
Quality attributes. The gateway style is intended to
provide integration of methods and data in a non-intrusive
manner. Component accessibility is therefore the main
benefit of the style. Database gateways have no effect on
functionality accessibility while application gateways may
or may not improve data accessibility.
A static gateway makes the integrated system less
modijiable than a dynamic gateway because minor
changes in any base component may necessitate a change
in the gateway. Dynamic gateways are designed to
manage some of these changes run-time. Dynamic
gateways may further increase the modifiability by selfparameterization through probing of the base component
when first connected.
For database gateways, forward translation facilitates
the accessibility of source data and functionality for the
target system, whereas the reverse translation primarily
addresses the issue of data consistency.
Given that the gateway is well implemented, it will
have moderately negative effects on performance, and no
effects on reliability or security per se. However, e.g.
reliability and security of the integrated system may be
compromised by unmanaged architectural assumptions.
Components. The database gatewqy requires the
separation of the source database from the rest of the
source component as well as access to the database. On
the back-end, the gateway interfaces with the database and
on the front-end, it interfaces with the application logic of
the target component.
The application gateway requires the separation of the
user interface and the rest of the source component as well
as access to the application logic. The back-end interfaces
with the source component’s application logic while the
front-end interfaces with the target component’s user
interface and/or application logic.
The back-end of the screen-scraper gatewa-v interfaces
with the source component’s application logic. As with all
application gateways, the front-end interfaces with the
target component’s user interface andor application logic.
The whole point of the gateway style is to let both the
target and source components remain oblivious of its
counterparts’ interfaces, data formats, locations, etc., as
well as of the specificities of the gateway.
4.2. The adapter style
interfaces. It is closely related to the gateway style; it is
however presented as a style in its own right because of its
common usage.
Style definition. The style introduces a component
between a mediator, for instance a message router, and a
base component, for interface binding and transformation.
As for gateways, static adapters bind the base
component interfaces at design-time, while dynamic
adapters allow runtime binding. The thin adapter
provides nothing but interface binding, while the thick
adapter also includes transformation of data format and
schema.
Centralized adapters run on the same node as the
mediator (and possibly even in the same process space)
and are normally thin. Distributed adapters on the other
hand reside both on the source and the target node and are
normally thick.
Quality attributes. The characteristics of adapters are
the similar to those of application gateways. Their main
benefit is thus component accessibility of functionality
and data. A drawback is that adapters often need to be
modified when the source application is upgraded (this is
more true of thin and static adapters than of thick and
dynamic).
Distributed adapters have the advantage of closeness to
the source or target component, making it easier to
supervise and control the application, e.g. restarting it,
capturing events, etc. Also, coordination of the interaction
between the mediator and the source or target component
is easier dealt with when the adapter resides on both sides
of the communication.
Components. On the one end of the adapter, a base
component is located, and on the other sits a mediator
component (e.g. a message router).
The base component does not need to have any
information about the mediator, while the mediator needs
to mange information about the adapter’s location,
availability and possibly also the base components (and
adapters) architectural assumptions. If the adapter is thin,
the mediator may also need to know the data format and
schema of the base component’s data (although it might
just pass the problem of data interpretation on to the
collaborators).
The base component needs to expose its application
logic interfaces either (and preferably) as APls, or through
screen-scraping. If the base component does not expose
functionality in a (for integration purposes) reasonable
manner, this will likely become a major concern for the
whole integration process.
The purpose of the adapter style is to allow integration
between mediators (such as message routers) and base
components. The style provides a binding and
transformation between mediator and base component
229
7. 4.3. The point-to-point style
The point-to-point style is perhaps the simplest style to
implement for small systems, featuring as direct
communication between components as is possible.
Style definition. The main conceptual feature of this
style is that all inter-component communication is direct
or when necessary, via (thin) gateways, i.e. each
component is connected using static binding to those
collaborators with which it needs to communicate.
There are many sub-styles of the point-to-point style.
These include synchronous or asynchronous point-topoint, queued, or direct point-to-point.
Quality attributes. The style can be used for limited
both user and inter-component data access as well as for
limited user and inter-component function access. The
accessibility may be limited since a target component or
graphical user interface (GUI) may not be designed to
invoke functions offered by a source component. The
common functionality and data is thus reduced to the least
common denominator of the interconnected base
components.
The style is easily implemented for systems with a
small number of components but quickly becomes
unwieldy as the number of components increases, since
the number of connectors increases rapidly. Hence, the
point-to-point style does not scale well. In the worst case,
the number of connectors becomes n(n - I ) ,where n is the
2
number of components. Furthermore, the more
heterogeneous the component interfaces are, the more
gateways are needed.
The style may also result in a weak security system. If
the components have different security standards, these
may be highly problematic to integrate, in the worst case
these need to be negotiated as many times as there are
connectors. Further, the style is not very efficient for
managing data consistency, since this requires all affected
components to be notified when data changes in one
component. Since users may change data in all systems
(no single point of data entry), all components must be
able to notify all other affected components of the data
change and all must be able to accept and act on such
notifications.
Components. The components in the point-to-point
style need to be active stand-alone components. Since all
intelligence is located in the base components, they need
to be more or less compatible from the start. For instance,
one component must be designed to ask for certain data
and another to be able to provide it. Integrating a
component that is based on the assumption that the
communication is synchronous with a component with an
asynchronous assumption may further cause difficulties,
which indicates potential problems of transfer protocols.
As indicated above, the more similar the components are
(as to GUIs, security standards, etc.), the easier they will
be to integrate. This goes for most styles, but becomes
particularly pertinent in this case because of the rapid
growth of integration surfaces as the number of
components increases. The style does not include
directory services or other mediators, which means that
the components need to have (certain knowledge about
their collaborators. They need to know the location of the
collaborators, the interface signatures, data formats and
schemas, they need to be able to manage temporary
unavailability of collaborators, etc. Some of these issues
may however be managed using gateways.
Finally, the components need to provide access to the
relevant data and functionality through application
interfaces.
4.4. The mediator style
The mediator style features a central component
implementing services to simplify integration. All styles
presented below are sub-styles to the mediator style.
Style definition. The main feature of the mediator
style is the introduction of a new central component
providing services facilitating integration. These services
may include load-balancing services, transformation
services, routing services, etc.
In the middle-tier mediator sub-style, client
components are located on one end of the mediator and
server components on the other. In the peer-to-peer
mediator sub-style, all components may act as clients or
servers.
In the hub mediator sub-style, all traffic is directed
through the mediator, and no additional point-to-point
connections are allowed between components.
Quality attributes. The characteristics of the mediator
style vary markedly depending on the services provided
by the central component. However, the centralized
topology of the style, and in particular the strict rules of
the hub mediator sub-style, may have effects on the
reliability, providing a single point of failure; on
scalability, minimizing the number of connectors; on
security, permitting the deployment of a centralized
authorization and access control system; on accessibility,
providing a single point of information exchange; and on
performance, in particular for the middle-tier sub-style,
permitting distribution of loads among servers. Just as
with the point-to-point style, the accessibility may be
limited if target components or GUIs are not designed to
invoke functions offered by source components. The
common fhctionality and data is thus reduced to the least
common denominator, implying that the style is best
suited for similar components.
230
8. Components. Components can be of any kind in the
general mediator style. Sub-styles do however normally
limit the options. All components need to be designed for
interaction with the mediators. In many cases, however,
adapters can provide these capabilities.
4.5. The message router style
The message router style allows components to remain
unaware of the specific locations and availability of their
collaborators.
Style definition. The message router is a hub and
peer-to-peer mediator style with a central component that
directs information between the base components based
on the content or source of the information. All intercomponent communication is routed through the central
component. A message queuing service is typically
provided by the message router.
Quality attributes. The message router reduces the
complexity and thus scalability problems of the point-topoint style topology. The previous worst-case scenario of
n! connectors (where n is the number of interconnected
components) is reduced to a worst case of n connectors,
since all base components communicate via the mediator.
As with all mediator styles, a single-point-of-failure may
decrease reliability. The message queuing service may
however increase durability of information if persistent
storage is provided. Authentication and access control can
be provided as additional services on top of the message
router. Encryption must be provided at the component
level for message protection. Accessibility is similar to the
point-to-point style.
Components. The components in the message router
style are typically stand-alone components. The style
requires that the transmitting components know the
address, availability, transfer protocol, and interfaces of
the router. If the components are not designed to
communicate with the router, adapters may be employed.
The availability of the recipients normally becomes
unimportant for the sender because of the message
router’s queuing service. The sender needs to know only
the data representation format and content expected by the
recipient. Severe performance problems may occur if a
component is designed for direct synchronous
communication, since the message router is based on an
asynchronous communication model. The calling
component may, e.g. block its execution waiting for the
competition of a request sent to an unavailable server
component while the message router queues the message
without generating errors. These problems are, however,
not unique for the message router style.
Components need to be able to send and receive
messages. Adapters can often package API calls as
messages if the component does not provide this
capability.
4.6. The database federation style
The database federation style is employed in order to
integrate heterogeneous databases and to provide a unified
view of their contents to the database users.
Style definition. The style is a middle-tier mediator
style; the back-end of the central component is connected
to several databases while the client-end provides a
uniform interface to client applications, creating a virtual
database model containing the information of the source
databases. The virtual database may also be physically
replicated creating a data warehouse sub-style.
Quality attributes. The database federation style is
mainly aimed at improving data accessibility, isolation,
and consistency. The centralized control over the data
stores makes these objectives feasible. Modifiability is
improved in the sense that new client applications only
need to adhere to one database management system
interface, and new databases only need to interface to the
central component. Security is easier to implement than in
the point-to-point style because of the single-point-ofentry. The vulnerability is however also increased because
of the single-point-of-failure.
Components. The back-end components of the
database style are database management systems of
various kinds. These components need not know anything
of the collaborating components and they may in principle
feature any DBMS interface.
The
client-end
components
are stand-alone
components and need to know everything (address,
interface formats, etc.) about the mediator component, but
nothing about the back-end databases. They need to
access the central unit but need not necessarily provide
any interfaces of their own.
4.7. The desktop integration style
The desktop integration style offers a pragmatic
alternative to more ambitious approaches to integration by
employing the user interface as the main point of
integration. The main usage of this style and its obvious
advantages are for the rapid deployment of new user
interfaces without changing the bulk of the underlying
components, e.g. for giving a new look-and-feel to legacy
systems or to provide a unique user view for a specific
purpose. Further, the user interface component may be
supplemented with a gateway component to increase the
inter-component interaction.
Style definition. The desktop integration style is a
mediator style where a new user interface is employed as
integrator of disparate stand-alone components.
23 1
9. Depending on whether the interface component is thin or
thick, the style may also provide gateway functionality in
terms of function and data synchronization between
components.
The thin desktop integration sub-style introduces no
new functionality, simply visualizing the components
functionality and data in a new user interface. The thick
desktop integration sub-style adds an active component
providing some gateway fimctionality to the solution.
Also, new functionality may be introduced using the GUI
as the gateway mediator.
Quality attributes. The thin desktop integration substyle provides user accessibility to both functionality and
data. If the interface is well implemented, the user is able
to perform the same functions and access the same data
using the new interface as by using user interfaces of all
the base components. Components cannot however,
access functions and data of the other components; all
inter-component interaction must be mediated by the user.
Data consistency, atomicity, isolation, durability, and
security are not managed by the sub-style. Introducing a
new component or upgrading an existing one may
necessitate redevelopment of the user interface.
Furthermore, the usability of the system is probably poor
since the user faces several applications in one GUI.
Introducing a gateway component, the thick desktop
integration
sub-style
improves the
component
accessibility of both functionality and data. The gateway
may for instance be used to manage data consistency or
security between the base components. Dependencies
introduced in terms of static bindings to underlying
components may, however, require that changes in
components, either directly or by hard-detected side
effects, must be reflected in GUI. Hence, complexity and
upgradeability are inflicted.
Components. The components connected to the thin
interface are stand-alone components. Typically these
components are in themselves complete application
systems with a database, application logic and a user
interface. The user interfaces of all of the components are
replaced with the new CUI. The base components need
not manage any information about the other base
components, the user interface and the optional gateway
do however need to be aware of the locations, interfaces,
availability, etc. of the base components.
5. Application of architectural integration
styles
This section exemplifies the use of some of the
architectural integration styles previously described. The
example is based on a participatory case study of the
acquisition of a business system for a mid-sized electricity
retailer, active on the deregulated Scandinavian energy
market.
Architectural integration styles may be utilized in
several ways. To select a suitable style for a given
scenario, the base components need to be described and
the desired quality attributes of the resulting system need
to be specified. Having completed this description, the
characteristics of the base components can be compared to
the component constraints of the different architectural
integration styles and the desired quality attributes can be
compared to the attributes supported by the architectural
integration styles. These comparisons reveal the style that
best suits the base components and the desired quality
attributes. Because of the high cost associated with custom
development, the most preferred styles need to be
compared with the products available on the market to
determine which parts of the integration solution that can
be procured as third-party products and which parts that
need to be custom developed.
5.1. The initial scenario
The enterprise under study was recently formed by the
merger of the energy sales departments of five
municipality-owned electric utilities into one organization.
As a consequence, five completely disparate organizations
had to be integrated without a single day out of operation.
The functional areas for the target architecture were sales
and marketing, customer relations, electricity trading,
new interfaces towards customer and partners (e.g.,
Swedish national grid, large customers, and banks), and
basic administration (e.g., billing). In some of the
hnctional areas, one or several legacy systems were
already in operation, while other functional areas totally
lacked system support. In order to quickly reap some of
the benefits of the merger while maintaining business
operations, rudimentary scripts andor spreadsheet
applications were used as temporary solutions for the
exchange of information between the legacy components
and the compilation of this information. However, the
degree of automation was low, demanding considerable
manual intervention to provide a reasonable flow of
operations. This case has previously been discussed from
an enterprise architectural analysis process perspective
in [3], and from the perspective of strategic information
systems planning in [2].
Base system. The resulting enterprise software system
consisted of five different sets of geographically
distributed legacy enterprise software systems (to maintain
a consistent terminology, the legacy systems are hereafter
called components). The enterprise software system thus
contained a complex collection of legacy systems
(especially with regard to the large and complex
databases) and extensive use of large-grained packaged
232
10. components, such as customer information systems,
billing systems, energy settlement systems, and sales
support systems. Furthermore, the system revealed nonmodifiable, heterogeneous components, overlapping data
and functionality, and rudimentary and heterogeneous
connectors ranging from object brokers to the exchange of
flat files.
The legacy components were based on four
significantly different approaches; two installations were
minicomputer-based customer information systems, one
was based on an outsourced mainframe solution, one was
a small-scale client-server type of system, and one
installation was a large-scale bespoke developed clientserver system. All but the bespoke developed system were
packaged applications that were also used by several other
energy companies, and consequently maintained and
upgraded in regular releases.
None of the legacy components were designed to
interoperate with other applications. All provided limited
data interfaces, allowing reading of database data but not
writing, and only one component provided an application
programming .interface (API), the remaining components
application logic only accessible by means of screenscraping. Only the bespoke component was designed to
use external services for locating and managing
availability of collaborators. All components featured
proprietary data formats and schemas. The one component
that featured an API did not conform to any wellestablished standard.
Initial architectural style. Describing the initial
system in any specific architectural style is most
straightforwardly done in terms of the point-to-point style,
since most connectors provided simplistic one-to-one
connections (heavily relying on file transfer). Message
passing and data formats were constructed ad-hoc by the
use of proprietary formats, with the exception of
settlement measurement data that was expressed in an
Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) format derivate, and
that was based on a message routing product. As message
passing was asynchronous and batch-oriented, i.e. files
were transferred regularly for instance once every 24Ih
hour or weekly, transaction atomicity was poor.
Moreover, since enterprise data were distributed on
several databases (and in several cases redundant), dhta
consistency was inadequate.
Before the company merger, the components, their
interconnections, and the data managed in the architecture
were of limited number and size. Hence, given the limited
complexity the point-to-point style proved adequate. But,
the company merger called for a more coherent view of
the new organization’s total enterprise software
architecture. Since new connectors and adapters had to be
applied for every new inter-component interaction,
complexity accelerated with each additional component
introduced into the architecture.
In the remainder of this section, the process for
selecting feasible design alternatives in terms of
architectural styles is hrther elaborated.
Desired quality attributes. Starting with the
enterprise’s business requirements, high-level quality and
functional requirements of the new enterprise software
architecture were formulated. This effort led to a refined
set of requirements. In that stage of the process, the
functional requirements mainly served as the rationale for
determining which base components to include in the
target architecture. From an initially rather long list of
desirable quality attributes, a limited set to focus upon was
selected. The quality attributes hereby addressed were
modifiability, reliability, accessibility, and performance.
5.2. Architectural integration styles
This section exemplifies how architectural integration
styles may be employed by demonstrating some of the
main design alternatives from the selected case. Some of
the design alternatives omitted in this case description
circumvented the architectural problem by either
outsourcing the complete operation to a service provider
or by procuring a turn-key, packaged system that was not
intended to be decomposable into smaller components. It
is also stressed that some styles, such as the transaction
management style and the publishhbscribe style are
omitted since they were not reflected in any of the design
alternatives in the case study.
The investigated styles were Adapter, Desktop
integration, Message router, Gateway, and Database
Federation. All styles but the first two were used as the
basis (solitary or in combination with other styles) for
different design alternatives. The adapter and transformer
styles played an important role in the implementation of
the other styles, but were not considered as primary design
drivers; rather, they provided informative constraints on
whether the main design alternatives were feasible or not.
The presentation order of the styles differs somewhat from
Section 4 due to pedagogic reasons.
The adapter style. During the style selection process,
the styles discussed under the headings below provided
the basis for the main design alternatives. Because of the
diverse interfaces provided by the base components,
prohibiting direct inter-component access to data as well
as hnctionality, adapters were considered for all
integration styles based on mediators. Adapters do,
however, only increase accessibility by binding and
transforming interfaces. The limited-service base
component interfaces (e.g., allowing database reading but
not writing) remain limited even after the introduction of
an adapter. In most cases, available adapters were static,
i.e. bound to base component interfaces at design-time,
233
11. and thick in order to cope with significantly differing data
schemes and formats in source data components.
As a result, an important trade-off was between
spending resources on data conversion in order to limit the
number of concurrent (and redundant) data components,
or on implementation and/or parameterization of adapters
to pave the way for mediator integration styles.
The desktop integration style. From a component
view, the main benefit of the desktop integration style is
that it is applicable to almost any components. This was
also the case for the studied base components. As a first
integrating step to create uniform business operations,
although the enterprise was spatially distributed, the
desktop integration style was considered, since it is
designed to improve user accessibility to both data and
hnctionality.
Both the thin and the thick desktop integration substyles were studied. The thick desktop style, also
providing gateway functionality is discussed below
together with the gateway style.
Application of the thin desktop integration style was
considered in order to hastily tie systems together
adapting to the new business and organizational
requirements, e.g., GUIs that were adapted to a specific
user group or business process.
In its most simplistic form, the user was considered as
the intelligent mediator by allowing the user access to
more than one legacy component through the client CUI,
e.g. by accessing the underlying systems directly using
their native user interfaces (if required using for instance a
terminal emulator as adapter/connector), and the functions
included in the client GUI, such as “cut and paste” to
ensure the proper exchange of data between components.
The main advantage of the thin desktop integration
sub-style was that it did not require any programming and
none, or only sparse, parameterization since the
integration functionality was “implemented” through
trained users.
However, in order to implement the thin desktop
integration sub-style, extensive user training had to be
carried out due to source components’ heavily diverse
user interfaces. Also, it was early revealed that the substyle could not be fully implemented since the users then
would have to be fully trained to operate four totally
different user interfaces. However, implemented in a
limited scale and combined with some organizational
changes, the style offered some ease of the burden. But,
the design alternative had severe shortcomings as to
modifiability mainly in terms of scalability.
The message router style. The benefits of a message
router style include accessibility and modifiability (mainly
in terms of scalability). For two major parts of the source
architecture, the message router style was already applied,
which provided useful information in the architectural
planning process.
Firstly, the bespoke developed client-sever application
mentioned above employed a commercial message
oriented middleware product bolh for interaction between
components within the application, and with
interconnected legacy enterprise components. However,
the experiences from this effort were deterrent. Since the
base components were not selected from an integration
perspective, information exchange between components
could not be controlled and turned out to be both complex
and voluminous. Hence, both performance, and reliability
suffered. Moreover, the remaining legacy base
components were not compatible with the considered
message router e.g. as to data formats, data schemas, data
interface signatures, or location and availability
management. Since these incompatibilities required
powerful adapters that were not available on the market,
the necessary resources for developing these adapters
from scratch became significant.
Secondly, as mentioned above, all energy measurement
related information was, due to the regulatory framework
on the electricity market, exchanged in a common
message format (EDlel, an Electronic Data Interchange
format derivate) using a packaged message router product.
The message router was employed both for internal
interactions among components in the enterprise system,
and externally to connect to systems located at other
energy companies or at the Swedish National Grid
authority. For its intended purpose, the message router
functioned well, proving itself as a simple, stable and
flexible solution. However, its real-time performance was
poor and it had limitations in its transfer protocol (e.g.
making it unable to provide transaction atomicity). Thus,
making this design alternative inappropriate as a generalpurpose message router mediator.
The gateway style. Ensuring a high degree of
modifiability in terms of both scalability and
upgradeability was the prime reason for making use of the
gateway style in one of the design alternatives. Legacy
considerations, especially with regard to legacy data, were
a major consideration throughout the architectural
planning process. As a result, the database gateway style
was considered, to allow new components to be added or
phased out gradually. A contributing factor for this was
that several of the legacy components in operation served
their purpose well, and the wrapping of these components
was initially expected to allow the development effort to
be focused on the functionality that lacked or was
inadequate in the source architecture.
In addition, there were several business and political
reasons for management to maintain a freedom of action
regarding a gradual transition into a target architecture.
The company’s aggressive policy of company
acquisitions, mergers and partnerships demanded
flexibility in terms of information systems. Accordingly,
the style provided means for a gradual reduction in the
234
12. number of redundant components, but also for the
incorporation of new components. However, when
assessing the availability of third party products to support
the integration to the base components’ database
management systems, it became evident that these had to
be custom developed to a considerable cost and risk (cf.
the adapter and transformer styles).
An optional design alternative was to consider the
legacy/source components as non, or semi-decomposable,
and to deploy a combined application and screen-scraper
gateway. A distinct advantage with this choice was that it
could provide a uniform GUI for users throughout the
enterprise, thus providing a single-point-of-entry-data, and
(to a limited extent) both reverse and forward translation
of information. This would support data consistency,
atomicity, and isolation. Moreover, new G U S ,
specifically adapted to different user groups could be
developed, improving both usability and security (in terms
of authentication and access control). The style also
permitted a limited addition of new components, such as
contact center functionality. The main drawback with this
style was, however, that in order to provide a uniform
interface to several heterogeneous source/legacy
components, the gateway would only be able to provide
the least common denominator of the functionality and
data of the underlying components. Furthermore, the
gateway had to be fairly complex and hence both hard and
costly to implement and to maintain over time.
The database federation style. To provide a one-way
forward translation of a sub-set of the data from the
source architecture data components, either by providing a
virtual database, or by replicating the selected information
into a separate data store (data warehouse), a design
alternative that employed the database federation style
was considered. The benefits of this approach were mainly
that it provided reading accessibility to the selected data
in the entire organization, e.g. for generating economical
statistics. Because of the limited-service interfaces of the
base components, write access was not provided on the
data level. Moreover, the poor performance of this
alternative ruled it out as a method for real-time access of
enterprise data. Also from a usability and data consistency
perspective, the approach was cumbersome, as changes to
data in the source components had to be done through the
present legacy GUIs, causing a bothersome situation for
the users (cf. the desktop integration style above).
5.3. Results of the style selection process
In the planning process, the architectural styles
discussed in this section served several purposes. Firstly,
styles and patterns are proven solutions to recurring
problems; a main benefit is therefore the reuse of
historically successful designs.
Secondly, they served as a simple intuitive description
of different design alternatives that stakeholder found
comprehensible. Once overcoming this novel way of
describing an enterprise software architecture, the
structure provided by the style description and its
relatively pure coupling between the style problem, its
advantages and disadvantages, together with the style’s
relation to other styles were found helpful as a way to
promote awareness and communication among
stakeholders (e.g. top-management, IT-staff, users, and
vendors).
Thirdly, design alternatives expressed in terms of
architectural styles provided useful input the architectural
design by clarifying feasible design choices, thus
gradually delimiting the design space. It should here be
stressed that initially, the design space seemed rather
endless. But as design alternatives were abandoned, both
due to legacy architecture considerations, availability of
appropriate packaged software, and organizational
matters, only a very limited number of alternatives were
left to choose between.
In the exemplifying case, it was concluded that in the
given context, the point-to-point integration style was
initially ruled out mainly due to its poor scalability.
Despite several attractive properties, the gateway, and the
message router style proved too costly and too risky to
implement in full scale in the short run, and therefore only
constituted feasible solutions in the longer perspective. A
paramount reason for ruling out the general mediator
styles was the poor availability of COTS adapters.
Therefore, since this state of affairs was expected to
change as bigger electricity retail companies in
conjunction with vendors would contribute to the
development of these products, it was concluded that the
desktop integration and the database federation styles
were the only feasible design alternatives during the
foreseeable planning period. Although, tactical rather than
strategic to their nature, and with several major
weaknesses, the relatively low cost and risk involved in
the implementation gave them an decisive advantage over
the other considered styles, even if they arguably
postponed several strategic architectural design choices.
6. Summary
In the article, we propose an approach for selection of
integration solution based on architectural integration
styles for enterprise software systems. The approach is
supported by an adapted structure for integration style
description based on the characteristics of enterprise
software systems, e.g., non-modifiable components,
extensive use of packaged software and legacy
components. Integration styles and the proposed structure
235
13. for integration style description is exemplified by a
presentation of seven styles.
The application of integration styles in the enterprise
context is demonstrated in a case study, briefly outlining
the architectural planning process, describing the source
architecture and presenting a number of design
alternatives in terms of architectural integration styles.
Styles and patterns are proven solutions to recurring
problems; a main benefit is therefore the reuse of
historically successful designs. Moreover and due to the
limited supply of integration product on the market, the
selection of an architectural integration style constitutes a
considerable part of the enterprise software system design.
Architectural integration styles allow this design process
to be conducted on a generalized level, independent of
specificities of individual products. Further benefits are
due to improved communication between stakeholders
and increased awareness of risks, constraints, and
opportunities in enterprise architectures.
7 References
.
Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M.,
Fiksdahl-King,I., Angel, S., A Pattern Language, Oxford
University Press, 1977.
[2] Anderson, J., Cegrell, T., Cheong, K.H., Haglind, M.,
“Strategic Management of Information Technology in Small and
Medium Sized Electric Utilities: Bridging the Gap Between
Theory and Practice,” to appear in proceedings of Portland
International Conference on Management of Engineering and
Technology, 2001.
[3] Anderson, J., Johnson, P., “Extending Attribute-Based
Architectural Analysis to Enterprise Software Systems,
Proceedings of the Third Australasian Workshop on Software
and System Architectures, 2000.
[4] Anderson, J., Johnson, P., “IT Infrastructure Architectures
for Electric Utilities: A Comparative Analysis of Description
Techniques”, Proceedings of the 33“/ Hawaii International
Conference on Systems Sciences, 2000.
[I]
’
[5] Bass, L., Clements, P., Kazman, R., Software Architecture
in Practice. Addison-Wesley, 1998.
[6] Brodie, M. L., Stonebraker, M., Migrating Legacy Systems:
Gateways, Interfaces. and the Incremental Approach, Morgan
Kaufmann Publishers, 1995.
[7] Brown, A., Large-scale, Component-Based Development,
Prentice-Hall, 2000.
[8] Cegrell, T.. et.al., “IT Strategy for Electric Utilities: From a
Paper Tiger to an Effective Management Tool,” Proceedings of
DA/DSM DistribuTech Europe 97, 1998.
[ 9 ] Chappell, D., Understanding ActiveX and OLE: A Guide
for Developers and Managers, Microsoft Press, 1996.
[IO] DeLine, R., Resolving Packaging Mismatch (Ph.D. Thesis),
Camegie Mellon University, 1999.
[ 11 Gacek, C., Detecting Architectural Mismatch During
3
System Composition (Ph.D. The:j.is), University of Southern
California, 1998.
[ 121 Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., Vlissides, J., Design
Patterns: Elements o Reusabk Object-Oriented Software,
f
Addison-Wesley, 1998.
[I31 Garlan, D., Allen, R., Ockerbloom, J., “Architectural
Mismatch: Why Reuse is so Hard,” IEEE Software, 1994.
[ 141 Garlan, D., Shaw, M., Software Architecture: Perspectives
on an Emerging Discipline, Prentice Hall, 1996.
[ 151 Kazman, R., Bass, L., Toward Deriving Software
Architectures from Quality Attributes, Technical Report
CMU/SEI-94-TR-IO,SEI, 1994.
[ 161 Linthicum,D.,
Enterprise Application Integration,
Addison-Wesley, 2000.
[ 171 Monson-Haefel, R., Enterprise JavaBeans, 2“d Ed.,
O’Reilly & Associates, 2000.
[ 181 Ockerbloom, J., Mediating Among Diverse Data Formats
(Ph.D. Thesis), Camegie Mellon University, 1998.
[191 Pressman, R., Software Engineering: A Practitioner’s
Approach, 5‘hed., McGraw-Hill, 2000.
[20] Pritchard, J., COM and CORBA Side by Side:
Architectures, Strategies, and Implementations, AddisonWesley, 1999.
[21] Ruh, W., Maginnis, F., Brown, J., Enterprise Application
Integration: A Wiley Tech Brief; John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2001.
[22] Thomas, A., Selecting Enterprise JavaBeans Technology,
Patricia Seybold Group, 1998.
236