This presentation shows how the ADORE framework is used to tame the complexity of orchestration design, based on a case study defined by Kienzle et al. This case study (Car Crash Crisis Management System) is defined as a common requirement set used to compare Aspect Oriented Modeling techniques.

1. TAMING ORCHESTRATION
DESIGN COMPLEXITY
USING `
Sébastien Mosser* Mireille Blay-Fornarino*& Robert France
, **
(*) University of Nice - Sophia Antipolis
CNRS / I3S / Modalis Team, France
(**) Colorado State University, CS Department
Software Assurance Lab, Fort Collins, CO, USA
AOM Workshop, Bellairs (Barbados)
April, 12th 2010

2. ONCE UPON A TIME ...
a Commercial
an Architect

3. ONCE UPON A TIME ...
« Service Oriented Architecture
( S OA ) i s a b u s i n e s s - c e n t ri c I T
architectural approach that supports
integrating your business as linked,
repeatable business tasks, or
services.» (IBM)
a Commercial
an Architect

4. ONCE UPON A TIME ...
« Service Oriented Architecture
( S OA ) i s a b u s i n e s s - c e n t ri c I T
architectural approach that supports
integrating your business as linked,
repeatable business tasks, or
services.» (IBM)
a Commercial
« Ok, so we will build atomic services and
then implement business processes to
orchestrate them all. It sounds exciting!
Let’s go! »
an Architect

5. AND THEY ALL LIVED
HAPPILY EVER AFTER ... SURE?
the (same)
Architect
the
(same)Comm

6. WHY???
4

7. FROM DREAMS ...
Receive a Message
Invoke
Invoke
partners
Reply a Message
business process
5

8. ... TO REALITY !
6

9. ... TO REALITY !
6

10. AGENDA
• Context: Realizing a CCCMS by designing a SOA
• ADORE, in a Nutshell
• Algorithms: Weave & Merge
• Conflicts: Detection Rules
• Quantitative Analysis
• Conclusions & Perspectives

11. CONTEXT:
REALIZING A CCCMS
BY DESIGNING A SOA

12. CASE STUDY: «CAR CRASH
CRISIS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM»
• TAOSD Special Issue on Aspect Oriented Modeling
• Rationale: A common case study to compare AOM approaches
• Context: Crisis Management System (CMS)
• How to handle a «car crash» crisis?
representation
of
9

13. OUR APPROACH
Given requirements (pdf)
Textual Use Cases System Actors
as as
Business Processes Atomic Services
10

14. EX: «CAPTURE WITNESS REP.»
Actors
Main
Success
Scenario
Business
Extensions
11

15. => REALIZING THE CCCMS ...
•8 Main Success Scenario:
• e.g., «Capture Witness Report»
• 27 Business Extensions:
• e.g., «Fake Witness Information»
•3 Non-Functional Properties:
• i.e., «security», «persistence», «statistical logging»
http://www.adore-design.org/doku/examples/cccms
12

16. n ts
8 27 e
m
Scenarios Business Extensions i re
q u
Re
Car Crash Crisis
Management System
3
NF Properties
e ss
c
P ro
e ss
s in
B u

17. n ts
8 27 e
m
Scenarios Business Extensions i re
q u
Re
Car Crash Crisis
Management System
12
«designing» δ Processes
3
NF Properties
e ss 12
c Partners
P ro
e ss
s in
B u

18. n ts
8 27 e
m
Scenarios Business Extensions i re
q u
Re
Car Crash Crisis ~ 13 000
Management System Actions
12
«designing» δ Processes
3 «realizing» ρ
NF Properties
1216
e ss 12 Activities 895
c Partners Relations
P ro
e ss ρ
in 76
us Operations
B

19. n ts
8 27 e
m
Scenarios Business Extensions i re
q u
Re
Car Crash Crisis ~ 13 000
Management System Actions
12
«designing» δ Processes
3 «realizing» ρ
NF Properties
1216
e ss 12 Activities 895
c Partners Relations
P ro
e ss ρ
in 76 Intrinsic
us Operations
B Parallelism

20. CHALLENGE: «HOW TO
TAME THIS COMPLEXITY?»
14

21. IN A NUTSHELL

22. RATIONALE
TAMING ORCHESTRATION
DESIGN COMPLEXITY
• Modeler designs incomplete processes (fragments)
• Use case (base process) & extensions, NF properties
• Algorithms build the final (complete) process
• Automatic integration & properties preservation (e.g., orders)
16

23. OUR (META)MODEL
Activities
Processes
Relations
Variables
17

24. A FRAMEWORK
18

25. A FRAMEWORK
E -P
R -
DSL
18

26. A FRAMEWORK
-P EL
R -E BP G
P N
L
DSL M
X
18
Mondrian

27. LET’S DEMONSTRATE!
19

28. ALGORITHMS:
WEAVE & MERGE

29. WEAVE ALGORITHM
composition cms::captureWitnessReport {
apply callDisconnected => a10;
apply callDisconnected => a2;
apply requestVideo(user: 'coord') => {a3,a4};
}
• Intention:
• Integrate fragments into processes
• Properties:
• Order Independence, Relation Preservation, Block Handling
21

30. WEAVE, BY EXAMPLE
ω
ω
ω
Order-Independent
Blocks
22

31. WEAVE TECHNIQUE:
«THINK, THEN DO»
callDisconnected requestVideo
cms::captureWitnessReport 23

32. WEAVE TECHNIQUE:
«THINK, THEN DO»
callDisconnected requestVideo
χ
actions’ χ
actions’’ χ
actions’’’
f f’ f’’
cms::captureWitnessReport 23

33. WEAVE TECHNIQUE:
«THINK, THEN DO»
callDisconnected requestVideo
χ
actions’ χ
actions’’ χ
actions’’’
f f’ f’’
ω
actions
cms::captureWitnessReport 23

34. WEAVE TECHNIQUE:
«THINK, THEN DO»
callDisconnected requestVideo
χ
actions’ χ
actions’’ χ
actions’’’
f f’ f’’
actions
cms::captureWitnessReport 23

35. WEAVE TECHNIQUE:
«THINK, THEN DO»
callDisconnected requestVideo
actions’ actions’’ actions’’’
f f’ f’’
cms::captureWitnessReport 23

36. MERGE ALGORITHM
composition cms::captureWitnessReport {
apply ignoreDisconnection => a4;
apply fakeCrisisDetected => a4;
}
• Intention:
• Handle the «Shared Join Point» problem
• Properties:
• Order Independence, Relation Preservation
24

37. MERGE ALGORITHM
μ
Shared Join Points
Order-Independent
25

38. MERGE TECHNIQUE:
«THINK, THEN DO» !
ignoreDisconnection fakeCrisisDetected
χ χ
f μ f’
actions f’’’
26

39. THE ALL TOGETHER!!
composition cms::captureWitnessReport {
apply callDisconnected => a10;
apply callDisconnected => a2;
apply requestVideo(user: 'coord') => {a3,a4};
apply fakeWitnessInfo => a2a3
apply ignoreDisconnection => a4;
apply fakeCrisisDetected => a4;
apply fakeCrisisDetected => requestVideo::a3;
}
27

40. THE ALL TOGETHER!!
Endogenous Parameters Weave
composition cms::captureWitnessReport {
apply callDisconnected => a10;
apply callDisconnected => a2;
apply requestVideo(user: 'coord') => {a3,a4};
apply fakeWitnessInfo => a2a3
apply ignoreDisconnection => a4;
apply fakeCrisisDetected => a4; Merge
apply fakeCrisisDetected => requestVideo::a3;
}
Multiple Use Fragment on
of Fragments Fragment
27

41. OPENING THE BOX
callDisconnected
fakeWitnessInfo
requestVideo
fakeCrisisDetected
ignoreDisconnection
28

42. OPENING THE BOX
χ
callDisconnected
χ
fakeWitnessInfo χ
requestVideo χ
χ
fakeCrisisDetected
χ
ignoreDisconnection χ
28

43. OPENING THE BOX
χ
callDisconnected
χ
fakeWitnessInfo χ
requestVideo χ β
χ
fakeCrisisDetected
χ
ignoreDisconnection χ
28

44. OPENING THE BOX
χ
callDisconnected
χ
fakeWitnessInfo χ
requestVideo χ β
ω
χ
fakeCrisisDetected
χ
μ
ignoreDisconnection χ
28

45. OPENING THE BOX
χ Endogenous
callDisconnected
χ
fakeWitnessInfo χ
requestVideo χ β
ω ω
χ
fakeCrisisDetected
χ
μ
ignoreDisconnection χ
captureWitnessReport
28

46. CCCMS SUMMARY
Main Success Scenario + Business Extensions
Weave Merge Actions
23 5 2422
Previous System + Non Functional Properties
Weave Merge Actions
+ 63 + 33 + 8416
29

47. CONFLICTS:
DETECTION RULES
«Power is nothing without control»
(Günter Kniesel, TR, 2006)

48. FINAL
RESULT ...
31 (medium use case)

49. FINAL
RESULT ... Equivalent
Activities!
Incomplete Model!
31 (medium use case)

50. FINAL
RESULT ...
31 (medium use case)

51. APPROACH: LOGICAL RULES
• Business Process properties defined as logical rules:
• e.g., «No Concurrent Ending», «No Equivalent Calls»
• Rule set is evaluated at different modeling «phase»:
• Fragments (P1), Compositions (P2), Merged (P3), Result (P4)
• Reaction to a violation can be different
• Can be «just» a Bad-Smell (~) or a definitive Error (X)
32

52. EXISTING RULES
Rule P1 & P3 P2 P4
Concurrent Ending X
Separation of ~
Equivalent Calls ~ Concerns ~
Lack of Response ~ Model X
Design Weaknesses Incompleteness
~ ~
Reflexive Composition X
Pointcuts
Recursive Composition X
Interactions
Missing Weave ~
Uninitialized Variable ~
Fragments X
Interactions
Invocation Cycle ~ ~
33

53. EXISTING RULES
Rule P1 & P3 P2 P4
Concurrent Ending X ~
Equivalent Calls ~ ~
Lack of Response ~ X
Design Weaknesses ~ ~
Reflexive Composition X
Recursive Composition X
Missing Weave ~
Uninitialized Variable ~ X
Invocation Cycle ~ ~
33

54. EXAMPLE:
DESIGN WEAKNESSES No incomplete
condition
isConflicting(Process,Act,Cond,Contrary) :-
process(Process),
activity:belongsTo(Act,Process),
isGuardedBy(_,Act,Cond,Value),
invert(Value,Contrary),
+ isGuardedBy(_,Act,Cond,Contrary).
34

55. QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS

56. Business Extensions
Main Success Scenario 36
Non Functional Properties

57. PROCESS COGNITIVE LOAD
Parallelism Max. Length
Width x Height | Paths |
| Activities |
• Hypothesis:
37

58. OBTAINED RESULTS
38

59. OBTAINED RESULTS
38

60. OBTAINED RESULTS
38

61. CONCLUSIONS
& PERSPECTIVES

62. TODAY,
I SHOWED YOU ...
• The ADORE framework in action
• e.g., DSL, Algorithms, Model Transformations
• How it tames orchestration design complexity
• Using the CCCMS, a common case study
• How to ensure quality in composed models
• Using a set of logical rules, inference & backtracking
40

63. AND I COULD
HAVE SHOWN *...
• How to build the complete CCCMS
• Running the associated set of composition
• How to generate composition directives
• Using logical meta-predicates
• How to use MONDRIAN to visualize compositions**
• Providing (*) demo on
a holistic point of view on a given system demand
41 (**) SC‘2010

64. PERSPECTIVES
• Structural impact of behav. compositions
• Linking ADORE to model composition tools
• Conflict rule expressiveness
• Defining a DSL to express rules
• Write my PhD thesis!
• Defend it, and find a postdoc ^_^
42

65. ANY QUESTIONS? REMARKS?
http://www.adore-design.org
43
Illustrations by C.line & sxc.hu