Advertisement

Scenario-Driven Dynamic Analysis of Distributed Architectures

  • George Edwards
  • Sam Malek
  • Nenad Medvidovic
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4422)

Abstract

Software architecture constitutes a promising approach to the development of large-scale distributed systems, but architecture description languages (ADLs) and their associated architectural analysis techniques suffer from several important shortcomings. This paper presents a novel approach that reconceptualizes ADLs within the model-driven engineering (MDE) paradigm to address their shortcomings. Our approach combines extensible modeling languages based on architectural constructs with a model interpreter framework that enables rapid implementation of customized dynamic analyses at the architectural level. Our approach is demonstrated in XTEAM, a suite of ADL extensions and model transformation engines targeted specifically for highly distributed, resource-constrained, and mobile computing environments. XTEAM model transformations generate system simulations that provide a dynamic, scenario- and risk-driven view of the executing system. This information allows an architect to compare architectural alternatives and weigh trade-offs between multiple design goals, such as system performance, reliability, and resource consumption. XTEAM provides the extensibility to easily accommodate both new modeling language features and new architectural analyses.

Keywords

Software Architecture Mobile Host Model Interpreter Architecture Description Language Software Architecture Community 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Perry, D.E., Wolf, A.L.: Foundations for the Study of Software Architectures. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 40–52 (Oct. 1992)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Medvidovic, N., et al.: A Classification and Comparison Framework for Software Architecture Description Languages. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering 26(1) (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Medvidovic, N., Dashofy, E., Taylor, R.N.: Moving Architectural Description from Under the Technology Lamppost. Journal of Systems and Software (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schmidt, D.C.: Model-Driven Engineering. IEEE Computer 39(2), 41–47 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Karsai, G., Sztipanovits, J., Ledeczi, A., Bapty, T.: Model-integrated development of embedded software. Proceedings of the IEEE 91(1), 145–164 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ledeczi, A., et al.: Modeling methodology for integrated simulation of embedded systems. ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation 13(1), 82–103 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dashofy, E., van der Hoek, A., Taylor, R.N.: An Infrastructure for the Rapid Development of XML-based Architecture Description Languages. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 266–276 (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    GME: The Generic Modeling Environment, http://www.isis.vanderbilt.edu/projects/gme/
  9. 9.
    Paunov, S., et al.: Domain-Specific Modeling Languages for Configuring and Evaluating Enterprise DRE System Quality-of-Service. In: Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference on Embedded and Real-Time Computing Systems and Applications (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ledeczi, A., et al.: On metamodel composition. In: Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE International Conference on Control Applications, pp. 756–760 (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jackson, D., Rinard, M.: Software Analysis: A Roadmap. In: Finkelstein, A. (ed.) The Future of Software Engineering, pp. 215–224. ACM Press, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Roshandel, R., et al.: Estimating Software Component Reliability by Leveraging Architectural Models. In: 28th International Conference on Software Engineering (May 2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Seo, C., Malek, S., Medvidovic, N.: An Energy Consumption Framework for Distributed Java-Based Software Systems. Tech. Report USC-CSE-2006-604 (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Malek, S.: A User-Centric Framework for Improving a Distributed Software System’s Deployment Architecture. Proceedings of the doctoral symposium at the 14th Symposium on Foundation of Software Engineering, Portland, Oregon, Nov. 2006 (To appear)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Malek, S., et al.: Prism-MW: A Style-Aware Architectural Middleware for Resource Constrained, Distributed Systems. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering. 31(3) (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Magee, J., et al.: Behaviour Analysis of Software Architectures. In: Proceedings of the TC2 First Working IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA1), pp. 35–50 (1999)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Adevs: A Discrete EVent System simulator. http://www.ece.arizona.edu/~nutaro/
  18. 18.
    Schriber, T.J., Brunner, D.T.: Inside Discrete-Event Simulation Software: How it Works and Why it Matters. In: Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • George Edwards
    • 1
  • Sam Malek
    • 1
  • Nenad Medvidovic
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science Department, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0781 

Personalised recommendations