Download to read offline
Towards Compensable SLAs
- 1.
- 2. Prof. Dr. AntonioRuiz-Cortés
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
- 10. What is myrisk? Should I change my provider? Am I using all the resources that I paid for? Can I be more competitive? Can I accept more customers? Should I break my guarantees? SLA
- 11.
- 12.
- 13.
- 14.
- 15.
- 16.
- 17.
- 18. Valid = Consistent+ Saturated v1 ≤ v1 (Increasing Utility Function) v1 ≥ v1 (Decreasing Utility Function) Interest Precedence
- 19. Valid = Consistent+ Saturated v1 ≤ v1 (Increasing Utility Function) v1 ≥ v1 (Decreasing Utility Function) Interest Precedence SLO
- 20. Compensable Guarantee Thresold isthe less interesting value Thresold should have no compensation
- 22.
- 23.
- 24. Modeling Scalability Engine Claiming Engine RiskDashboard Analysis Purchising What is my risk? Should I change my provider? Am I using all the resources that I paid for? Can I be more competitive? Can I accept more customers? Should I break my guarantees? Towards automation of Governance SLA
- 25.
Editor's Notes
- #5 LITTLE ROBOT THAT MAKE COMPUTERS TO FALL IN LOVE SYSTEM INTEGRATION AS LOVE: NON-FUNCTIONAL ISSUES ARE IMPORTANT
- #14 Semantics Priority Principle. while keeping close to the iAgree conceptual model (SLA ≈ CSP…) The target domain and style, (CSP in this case) must be chosen according to the source model. Thus, an iAgree document is, in esence a set of expressions that can be interpreted as constraints. In this sense the expressiveness of condition languages must match the expressiveness supported by the underlying CSP solver.