2009
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-10383-4_3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intelligent Overload Control for Composite Web Services

Abstract: Abstract.In this paper, we analyze overload control for composite web services in service oriented architectures by an orchestrating broker, and propose two practical access control rules which effectively mitigate the effects of severe overloads at some web services in the composite service. These two rules aim to keep overall web service performance (in terms of end-to-end response time) and availability at agreed quality of service levels. We present the theoretical background and design of these access con… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, each invocation model may have a different fault likelihood value (even for the same service invoked). Phase I is divided into multiple steps ( Figure 1): calculating the service's weight in the composition relative to all services invoked (λ) (similar to the approach used in [13]). We use this value of λ as one of the basic constructs, calculating the time a service takes to execute in relation to the total execution time remaining in the composition (λ ), calculating the internal history value (Δ i ) using a Hidden Markov Model, and calculating the external history value (Δ i ) using clustering and reputation.…”
Section: A Phase I: Fault Occurrence Likelihood Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, each invocation model may have a different fault likelihood value (even for the same service invoked). Phase I is divided into multiple steps ( Figure 1): calculating the service's weight in the composition relative to all services invoked (λ) (similar to the approach used in [13]). We use this value of λ as one of the basic constructs, calculating the time a service takes to execute in relation to the total execution time remaining in the composition (λ ), calculating the internal history value (Δ i ) using a Hidden Markov Model, and calculating the external history value (Δ i ) using clustering and reputation.…”
Section: A Phase I: Fault Occurrence Likelihood Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, each invocation model may have a different fault likelihood value. Phase I is divided into multiple steps: calculating the service's weight in the composition relative to all services invoked (λ)(similar to the approach used in [14]). We use this value of λ as one of the basic constructs, calculating the time a service takes to execute in relation to the total execution time remaining in the composition (λ ′ ), calculating the internal history value (∆ i ) using a Hidden Markov Model, and calculating the external history value (∆ ′ i ) using clustering and reputation, the interested reader is referred to our prior work in [16], [11].…”
Section: A Phase I: Fault Occurrence Likelihood Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As mentioned earlier, λ is the ratio of the time that is needed to complete the service execution, divided by the total time of completing the execution of the whole system. Similar to the approach used in [10], we use this value of λ as one of the basic constructs Fig. 3.…”
Section: Phase 1: Fault Occurrence Likelihood Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%