Multi-Dimensional Customization Modelling Based on Metagraph for SAAS Multi-Tenant Applications

Shahin, Ashraf A.

doi:10.5121/csit.2014.4205

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 16 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Con Pre-defined parameters and options Xin & Levina (2008), Salih & Zang (2016), Kabbedijk & Jansen (2011) Con Tenant configuration Interface Xin & Levina (2008), Zhang et al (2007), Con Provider plugins Zhao et al (2014), Mohamed et al (2014) Con Customization templates Tsai, Shao & Li (2010), Tsai, Huang & Shao (2011), Saleh, Fouad & Abu-Elkheir (2014), Ralph (2008), Chen, Li & Kong (2013), Ruehl & Andelfinger (2011), Tsai & Sun (2013) Con Template repository Tsai, Huang & Shao (2011), Saleh, Fouad & Abu-Elkheir (2014), Tsai & Sun (2013) Con Customization point Shahin (2014), Con Feature selection Mohamed et al (2014), Ying et al (2010) Con Runtime Configuration Xin & Levina (2008), Gey, Landuyt & Joosen (2015), Moens & De Turck (2014), Shi et al (2009) Con Features deactivation Nguyen, Colman & Han (2016), Moens et al (2012) & Abu-Elkheir, 2014;Ralph, 2008;Chen, Li & Kong, 2013;Ruehl & Andelfinger, 2011;Tsai & Sun, 2013).…”

Section: Customization Practice Referencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A set of components, which accommodate a variety of tenant needs, is provided in the application template. By selecting a relevant component set, tenants can personalize each customization point (Shahin, 2014;. When a tenant wishes to subscribe to the SaaS application, the capabilities of each feature within the system are analyzed to determine whether they ought to be incorporated into the application (Mohamed et al, 2014;Ying et al, 2010).…”

Section: Customization Practice Referencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Com 1 Components consolidation and sharing Saleh, Fouad & Abu-Elkheir (2014), Moens et al (2012), Moens, Dhoedt & De Turck (2015), Liu et al (2010), Rico et al (2016), Ruehl, Wache & Verclas (2013), Makki et al (2016) Com 2 Runtime composition Moens et al (2012), Moens, Dhoedt & De Turck (2015), Kumara et al (2013), Mietzner, Leymann & Papazoglou (2008), Lee & Choi (2012) Com 3 Subcomponents composition Kumara et al (2013), Schroeter et al (2012), Kumara et al (2015) Com 4 Decomposition Shahin (2014), Moens et al (2012), Gey et al (2014) Com 5 Components relationships , Shahin (2014), Moens, Dhoedt & De Turck (2015) Composition approach…”

Section: Customization Practice Referencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The final composition must take into consideration the subcomponents of the core application (Kumara et al, 2013;Schroeter et al, 2012;Kumara et al, 2015). The composition approach enables simplification of the consolidated SaaS components (Shahin, 2014;Moens et al, 2012;Gey et al, 2014) as the relationships and dependencies between them are considered Shahin, 2014;Moens, Dhoedt & De Turck, 2015). Table 5 summarizes the common customization practices of the composition approach in the context of multi-tenant SaaS applications.…”

Section: Customization Practice Referencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Development of a valid and reliable software customization model for SaaS quality through iterative method: perspectives from academia

Ali

Sultan

Ghani

et al. 2020

PeerJ Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the benefits of standardization, the customization of Software as a Service (SaaS) application is also essential because of the many unique requirements of customers. This study, therefore, focuses on the development of a valid and reliable software customization model for SaaS quality that consists of (1) generic software customization types and a list of common practices for each customization type in the SaaS multi-tenant context, and (2) key quality attributes of SaaS applications associated with customization. The study was divided into three phases: the conceptualization of the model, analysis of its validity using SaaS academic-derived expertise, and evaluation of its reliability by submitting it to an internal consistency reliability test conducted by software-engineer researchers. The model was initially devised based on six customization approaches, 46 customization practices, and 13 quality attributes in the SaaS multi-tenant context. Subsequently, its content was validated over two rounds of testing after which one approach and 14 practices were removed and 20 practices were reformulated. The internal consistency reliability study was thereafter conducted by 34 software engineer researchers. All constructs of the content-validated model were found to be reliable in this study. The final version of the model consists of 6 constructs and 44 items. These six constructs and their associated items are as follows: (1) Configuration (eight items), (2) Composition (four items), (3) Extension (six items), 4) Integration (eight items), (5) Modification (five items), and (6) SaaS quality (13 items). The results of the study may contribute to enhancing the capability of empirically analyzing the impact of software customization on SaaS quality by benefiting from all resultant constructs and items.

show abstract

Section: Customization Practice Referencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Customization Practice Referencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Customization Practice Referencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Customization Practice Referencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Development of a valid and reliable software customization model for SaaS quality through iterative method: perspectives from academia

Ali

Sultan

Ghani

et al. 2020

PeerJ Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…SaaS is a software delivery model in which software is delivered to customers as a service [1]. Instead of delivering individual application instance for each tenant, one application instance serves thousands of tenants [2]. Nowadays, several SaaS companies, such as Salesfore.com, NetSuite, and Success Factors, utilize elasticity feature of cloud computing to ensure lowest cost of service delivery.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhancing Elasticity of SaaS Applications using Queuing Theory

Shahin¹

2017

ijacsa

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Elasticity is one of key features of cloud computing. Elasticity allows Software as a Service (SaaS) applications' provider to reduce cost of running applications. In large SaaS applications that are developed using service-oriented architecture model, each service is deployed in a separated virtual machine and may use one or more services to complete its task. Although, scaling service independently from its required services propagates scaling problem to other services, most of current elasticity approaches do not consider functional dependencies between services, which increases the probability of violating service level agreement. In this paper, architecture of SaaS application is modeled as multi-class M/M/m processor sharing queuing model with deadline to take into account functional dependencies between services during estimating required scaling resources. Experimental results show effectiveness of the proposed model in estimating required resources during scaling virtual resources.

show abstract

A Systematic Mapping Study on the Customization Solutions of Software as a Service Applications

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software as a Service (SaaS) is widely used and depended on by a wide range of applications. Considering this, the SaaS should capacitate itself to offer service to a large number of customers having their own specific requirements, without encountering software quality problems. Therefore, several researchers delved into the SaaS customization, and many customization solutions have been proposed. However, heretofore, no analysis or study explicitly classifies these proposals using different criteria, e.g., the kind of change required, the component of the software requiring changes, and the quality attributes of the SaaS considered in each proposed solution. This paper adopts the systematic mapping approach to methodically investigate the solutions recommended for the SaaS customization problems. These solutions are classified into various categories to create a classification scheme based on the customization types (personalization, configuration, composition, modification, integration, and extension), customization layer (user interfaces, workflows, services, and data), and quality attributes. Our study identified 81 primary studies reporting SaaS customization solutions. The results show that the configuration, composition, and extension received the highest consideration in the proposed solutions. In addition, the majority of the proposed solutions for the SaaS customization are connected with the workflow and service layers. Furthermore, the attributes, such as multi-tenancy, security, functionality, scalability, availability, and efficiency, are considered much more often than other attributes. The classification of the proposed solutions for the SaaS customization and results of this paper can play an important role in creating a framework for the SaaS customization assessment.

show abstract

Multi-Dimensional Customization Modelling Based on Metagraph for SAAS Multi-Tenant Applications

Abstract: Software as a Service (SaaS) is a new software delivery model in which pre

Cited by 4 publications

References 16 publications

Development of a valid and reliable software customization model for SaaS quality through iterative method: perspectives from academia

Development of a valid and reliable software customization model for SaaS quality through iterative method: perspectives from academia

Enhancing Elasticity of SaaS Applications using Queuing Theory

A Systematic Mapping Study on the Customization Solutions of Software as a Service Applications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About