Using components for architecture-based management

Sicard, Sylvain; Boyer, Fabienne; Palma, Noël De

doi:10.1145/1368088.1368103

Cited by 77 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The FRACTAL model has been used as a basis for the development of several kinds of configurable middleware platforms, and has been successfully used for building automated, architecture-based, distributed systems management capabilities, including deployment and (re)configuration management capabilities [1,14,18,25], self-repair capabilities [8,59], overload management capabilities [9], and self-protection capabilities [16]. The FRACTAL model is currently defined by a formal specification [40] based on the Alloy language [32].…”

Section: Kernel Level: Defining a Reflective Component Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

A component‐based middleware platform for reconfigurable service‐oriented architectures

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY ThetextitService Component Architecture (SCA) is a technology‐independent standard for developing distributed Service‐oriented Architectures (SOA). The SCA standard promotes the use of components and architecture descriptors, and mostly covers the lifecycle steps of implementation and deployment. Unfortunately, SCA does not address the governance of SCA applications and provides no support for the maintenance of deployed components. This article covers this issue and introduces the FRASCATI platform, a run‐time support for SCA with dynamic reconfiguration capabilities and run‐time management features. This article presents the internal component‐based architecture of the FRASCATI platform, and highlights its key features. The component‐based design of the FRASCATI platform introduces many degrees of flexibility and configurability in the platform itself and it can host the SOA applications. This article reports on micro‐benchmarks highlighting that run‐time manageability in the FRASCATI platform does not decrease its performance when compared with the de facto reference SCA implementation: Apache TUSCANY. Finally, a smart home scenario illustrates the extension capabilities and the various reconfigurations of the FRASCATI platform. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Kernel Level: Defining a Reflective Component Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

A component‐based middleware platform for reconfigurable service‐oriented architectures

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rainbow [3] models the system data based on the input architecture style. Jade [5] represents system data as a Fractal model, guided by the provided Fractal ADL. The MoDisco project [6] provides reusable components for "model discovers" that represent system data as MOF compliant models, according to the MOF meta-models.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To our knowledge, the current generic runtime model supporting tools [3][4][5][6] all require users to define such meta-models by hand.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inferring Meta-models for Runtime System Data from the Clients of Management APIs

Song¹,

Huang²,

Xiong³

et al. 2010

Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.A new trend in runtime system monitoring is to utilize MOFbased techniques in analyzing the runtime system data. Approaches and tools have been proposed to automatically reflect the system data as MOF compliant models, but they all require users to manually build the meta-models that define the types and relations of the system data. To do this, users have to understand the different management APIs provided by different systems, and find out what kinds of data can be obtained from them. In this paper, we present an automated approach to inferring such meta-models by analyzing client code that accesses management APIs. A set of experiments show that the approach is useful for realizing runtime models and applicable to a wide range of systems, and the inferred meta-models are close to the reference ones.

show abstract

“…Example systems built with Fractal include: the Think framework for the construction of reconfigurable operating system kernels [15,26]; the PEtALS enterprise service bus [3]; the Perseus framework for the construction of persistency services and Speedo, an implementation of the JDO (Java Data Object) standard, which embeds Perseus [5]; the GOTM framework for the construction of transaction management services [28]; the Dream framework for the construction of communication subsystems and messageoriented middleware [22]; the CLIF framework for distributed load testing presented in this special issue. Systems management capabilities developed with Fractal include in particular: deployment and configuration management capabilities [4,11,14,16,17], self-repair capabilities [31], and overload management capabilities [8]. Again, most of these systems and software frameworks are available as open source software hosted by the OW2 consortium [2].…”

Section: Yearsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Component-based architecture: the Fractal initiative

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Fractal initiativeComponent-based software engineering (CBSE) [32] and software architecture [30] have become mature and very active fields of study.1 Both can be traced back to an early vision of systematically produced software [24] and are primarily concerned with the construction of software systems by composition or assembly of software components, with well-defined interfaces and explicit dependencies. Nowadays, it is generally recognized that component-based software engineering and software architecture approaches are crucial to the development, deployment, management, and maintenance of large, dependable software systems [6].Several component models and associated architecture description languages (i.e., notations for defining components and component assemblages) have been defined in the past 15 years.2 In large part, this diversity stems from differences in application domains targeted by the different models, as well as differences in choices for component interconnection and composition capabilities (much as there exists today a wealth of models and languages for concurrency).In the face of this diversity, the Fractal component model [10]-a programming language-independent component model for the construction of highly configurable software systems introduced by France Telecom and INRIA in 2001-was designed from the outset to allow arbitrary forms of component interconnection and component composition and to allow other component models to be derived as Fractal personalities. To achieve this, the Fractal model combines ideas from three main sources: (1) CBSE and software architecture, (2) reflective systems [18], and (3) configurable and adaptable distributed systems, (notably, the OpenORB [7] system and its associated OpenCOM component model [12]).From CBSE and software architecture, Fractal inherits basic concepts for the modular construction of software systems: software components, interfaces, and explicit connections (called bindings) between them. Notably, these concepts allow for the (recursive) construction and management of hierarchical component architectures possibly with sharing (a subcomponent can be part of several parent components) this last feature being an originality of Fractal. From reflective systems, Fractal inherits the idea that components can exhibit meta-level behavior reifying, through appropriate interfaces (called controller interfaces), their internal structure, and behavior. From configurable Ann. Telecommun. (2009) 64:1-4 DOI 10.1007/s12243-009-0086-

show abstract

Using components for architecture-based management

Cited by 77 publications

References 21 publications

A component‐based middleware platform for reconfigurable service‐oriented architectures

A component‐based middleware platform for reconfigurable service‐oriented architectures

Inferring Meta-models for Runtime System Data from the Clients of Management APIs

Component-based architecture: the Fractal initiative

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About