Fostering the Reuse of TOSCA-based Applications by Merging BPEL Management Plans

  • Sebastian WagnerEmail author
  • Uwe Breitenbücher
  • Oliver Kopp
  • Andreas Weiß
  • Frank Leymann
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 740)


Complex Cloud applications consist of a variety of individual components that need to be provisioned and managed in a holistic manner to setup the overall application. The Cloud standard TOSCA can be used to describe these components, their dependencies, and their management functions. To provision or manage the Cloud application, the execution of these individual management functions can be orchestrated by executable management plans, which are workflows being able to deal with heterogeneity of the functions. Unfortunately, creating TOSCA application descriptions and management plans from scratch is time-consuming, error-prone, and needs a lot of expert knowledge. Hence, to save the amount of time and resources needed to setup the management capabilities of new Cloud applications, existing TOSCA description and plans should be reused. To enable the systematic reuse of these artifacts, we proposed in a previous paper a method for combining existing TOSCA descriptions and plans or buildings blocks thereof. One important aspect of this method is the creation of BPEL4Chor-based management choreographies for coordinating different plans and how these choreographies can be automatically consolidated back into executable plans. This paper extends the previous one by providing a much more formal description about the choreography consolidation. Therefore, a set of new algorithms is introduced describing the different steps required to consolidate the management choreography into an executable management plan. The method and the algorithms are validated by a set of tools from the Cloud application management ecosystem OpenTOSCA.



This work was partially funded by the BMWi projects SmartOrchestra (01MD16001F), NEMAR (03ET40188), and by the DFG project SitOPT (610872).


  1. 1.
    Brown, A.B., Patterson, D.A.: To Err is Human. In: EASY, p. 5 (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Oppenheimer, D., Ganapathi, A., Patterson, D.A.: Why do internet services fail, and what can be done about it? In: USITS (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Opscode, Inc.: Chef official site (2015).
  4. 4.
    Puppet Labs Inc.: Puppet official site (2015).
  5. 5.
    Coutermarsh, M.: Heroku Cookbook. Packt Publishing Ltd., Birmingham (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Leymann, F., Roller, D.: Production Workflow: Concepts and Techniques. Prentice Hall PTR, New Jersey (2000)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Keller, A., Badonnel, R.: Automating the provisioning of application services with the BPEL4WS workflow language. In: DSOM (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kopp, O., Binz, T., Breitenbücher, U., Leymann, F.: BPMN4TOSCA: a domain-specific language to model management plans for composite applications. In: BPMN (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Herry, H., Anderson, P., Wickler, G.: Automated planning for configuration changes. In: The Past, Present, and Future of System Administration, Proceedings of the 25th Large Installation System Administration Conference, LISA, USENIX Association (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Breitenbücher, U., Binz, T., Kopp, O., Leymann, F., Wettinger, J.: Integrated cloud application provisioning: interconnecting service-centric and script-centric management technologies. In: CoopIS (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Binz, T., Breitenbücher, U., Kopp, O., Leymann, F., Weiß, A.: Improve resource-sharing through functionality-preserving merge of cloud application topologies. In: CLOSER. SciTePress (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wagner, S., Kopp, O., Leymann, F.: Consolidation of interacting bpel process models with fault handlers. In: Proceedings of the 5th Central-European Workshop on Services and their Composition (ZEUS), CEUR (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Decker, G., Kopp, O., Leymann, F., Weske, M.: BPEL4Chor: Extending BPEL for modeling choreographies. In: ICWS. IEEE (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
    Binz, T., Breitenbücher, U., Haupt, F., Kopp, O., Leymann, F., Nowak, A., Wagner, S.: OpenTOSCA – a runtime for TOSCA-based cloud applications. In: Basu, S., Pautasso, C., Zhang, L., Fu, X. (eds.) ICSOC 2013. LNCS, vol. 8274, pp. 692–695. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-45005-1_62 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kopp, O., Binz, T., Breitenbücher, U., Leymann, F.: Winery – a modeling tool for TOSCA-based cloud applications. In: Basu, S., Pautasso, C., Zhang, L., Fu, X. (eds.) ICSOC 2013. LNCS, vol. 8274, pp. 700–704. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-45005-1_64 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Breitenbücher, U., et al.: Vinothek - a self-service portal for TOSCA. In: Proceedings of the 6nd Central-European Workshop on Services and their Composition (ZEUS), CEUR (2014)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Breitenbücher, U., et al.: Combining declarative and imperative cloud application provisioning based on TOSCA. In: IC2E (2014)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Breitenbücher, U., et al.: Vino4TOSCA: a visual notation for application topologies based on TOSCA. In: CoopIS (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    OASIS: Web Services Business Process Execution Language (WS-BPEL) Version 2.0. OASIS (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    OMG: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN), Version 2.0 (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hofreiter, B., Huemer, C.: A model-driven top-down approach to inter-organizational systems: from global choreography models to executable BPEL. In: CEC (2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mendling, J., Hafner, M.: From WS-CDL choreography to BPEL process orchestration. J. Enterp. Inf. Manage. 21, 525–542 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kavantzas, N., Burdett, D., Ritzinger, G., Fletcher, T., Lafon, Y., Barreto, C.: Web Services Choreography Description Language Version 1.0 (2005)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Küster, J., Gerth, C., Förster, A., Engels, G.: A tool for process merging in business-driven development. In: Proceedings of the Forum at the CAiSE (2008)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mendling, J., Simon, C.: Business process design by view integration. In: Eder, J., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4103, pp. 55–64. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi: 10.1007/11837862_7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Herry, H., Anderson, P., Rovatsos, M.: Choreographing configuration changes. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Network and Service Management, CNSM (2013)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Soldani, J., Binz, T., Breitenbücher, U., Leymann, F., Brogi, A.: TOSCA-MART: a method for adapting and reusing cloud applications. Technical report, University of Pisa (2015)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wagner, S., Roller, D., Kopp, O., Unger, T., Leymann, F.: Performance optimizations for interacting business processes. In: IC2E. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wagner, S., Kopp, O., Leymann, F.: Towards verification of process merge patterns with Allen’s Interval Algebra. In: Proceedings of the 4th Central-European Workshop on Services and their Composition (ZEUS). CEUR (2012)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wagner, S., Kopp, O., Leymann, F.: Choreography-based consolidation of multi-instance BPEL processes. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Cloud Computing and Service Science (CLOSER). SciTePress (2014)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kopp, O., Martin, D., Wutke, D., Leymann, F.: The difference between graph-based and block-structured business process modelling languages. Enterp. Model. Inf. Syst. 4, 3–13 (2009)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Leymann, F.: BPEL vs. BPMN 2.0: should you care? In: BPMN (2010)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kopp, O., Mietzner, R., Leymann, F.: Abstract syntax of WS-BPEL 2.0. Technical report computer science 2008/06, University of Stuttgart, Faculty of Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, and Information Technology, Germany (2008)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    OASIS: Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0 - OASIS Standard (2007)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Barros, A., Dumas, M., Hofstede, A.H.M.: Service interaction patterns. In: Aalst, W.M.P., Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Curbera, F. (eds.) BPM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3649, pp. 302–318. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). doi: 10.1007/11538394_20 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wagner, S., Kopp, O., Leymann, F.: Choreography-based consolidation of interacting processes having activity-based loops. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Cloud Computing and Service Science (CLOSER). SciTePress (2015)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Weiß, A., Karastoyanova, D.: Enabling coupled multi-scale, multi-field experiments through choreographies of data-driven scientific simulations. Computing 98, 439–467 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kopp, O., Leymann, F., Wagner, S.: Modeling choreographies: BPMN 2.0 versus BPEL-based approaches. In: EMISA (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sebastian Wagner
    • 1
    Email author
  • Uwe Breitenbücher
    • 1
  • Oliver Kopp
    • 2
  • Andreas Weiß
    • 1
  • Frank Leymann
    • 1
  1. 1.IAASUniversity of StuttgartStuttgartGermany
  2. 2.IPVSUniversity of StuttgartStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations