Abstract not found

Traditional mechanisms that allow a system to detect and recover from errors are typically wired into applications at the level of code where they are hard to change, reuse, or analyze. An alternative approach is to use externalized adaptation: one or more models of a system are maintained at run time and external to the application as a basis for identifying problems and resolving them. In this paper we provide an overview of recent research in which we use architectural models as the basis for such problem diagnosis and repair. These models can be specialized to the particular style of the system, the quality of interest, and the dimensions of run time adaptation that are permitted by the running system.

Abstract. Complex software systems require expressive notations for representing their software architectures. Two competing paths have emerged. One is to use a specialized notation for architecture – or architecture description language (ADL). The other is to adapt a general-purpose modeling notation, such as UML. The latter has a number of benefits, including familiarity to developers, close mapping to implementations, and commercial tool support. However, it remains an open question as to how best to use object-oriented notations for architectural description, and, indeed, whether they are sufficiently expressive, as currently defined. In this paper we take a systematic look at these questions, examining the space of possible mappings from ADLs into object notations. Specifically, we describe (a) the principle strategies for representing architectural structure in UML; (b) the benefits and limitations of each strategy; and (c) aspects of architectural description that are intrinsically difficult to model in UML using the strategies. 1

Component-based software engineering is a powerful paradigm for building large applications. However, our experience with building application of components is that the existing advanced component models (such as those offering component nesting, behavior specification and checking, dynamic reconfiguration to some extent, etc.) are subject to a lot of limitations and issues which prevent them from being accepted more widely (by industry in particular). We claim that these issues are specifically related to (a) the lack of support for dynamic reconfigurations of hierarchical architectures, (b) poor support for modeling and extendibility of the control part of a component, and (c) the lack of support for different communication styles applied in inter-component communication. In this paper, we show how these problems can be addressed and present an advanced component system SOFA 2.0 as a proof of the concept. This system is based on its predecessor SOFA, but it incorporates a number of enhancements and improvements. 1.

In an increasing number of domains software is now required to be self-adapting and self-healing. While in the past such abilities were incorporated into software on a per system basis, proliferation of such systems calls for more generalized mechanisms to manage dynamic adaptation. General mechanisms have the advantage that they can be reused in numerous systems, analyzed separately from the system being adapted, and easily changed to incorporate new adaptations. Moreover, they provide a natural home for encoding the expertise of system designers and implementers about adaptation strategies and policies. In this paper, we show how current software architecture tools can be extended to provide such generalized dynamic adaptation mechanisms.

Research over the past decade has revealed that modeling software architecture at the level of components and connectors is useful in a growing variety of contexts. This has led to the development of a plethora of notations for representing software architectures, each focusing on different aspects of the systems being modeled. In general, these notations have been developed without regard to reuse or extension. This makes the effort in adapting an existing notation to a new purpose commensurate with developing a new notation from scratch. To address this problem, we have developed an approach that allows for the rapid construction of new architecture description languages (ADLs). Our approach is unique because it encapsulates ADL features in modules that are composed to form ADLs. We achieve this by leveraging the extension mechanisms provided by XML and XML schemas. We have defined a set of generic, reusable ADL modules called xADL 2.0, useful as an ADL by itself, but also extensible to support new applications and domains. To support this extensibility, we have developed a set of reflective syntax-based tools that adapt to language changes automatically, as well as several semantically-aware tools that provide support for advanced features of xADL 2.0. We demonstrate the effectiveness, scalability, and flexibility of our approach through a diverse set of experiences. First, our approach has been applied in industrial contexts,

An important requirement for pervasive computing systems is the ability to adapt at runtime to handle varying resources, user mobility, changing user needs, and system faults. In this paper we describe an approach in which dynamic adaptation is supported by the use of software architectural models to monitor an application and guide dynamic changes to it. The use of externalized models permits one to make reconfiguration decisions based on a global perspective of the running system, apply analytic models to determine correct repair strategies, and gauge the effectiveness of repair through continuous system monitoring. We illustrate the application of this idea to pervasive computing systems, focusing on the need to adapt based on performance-related criteria and models.

One of the challenging problems for software developers is guaranteeing that a system as built is consistent with its architectural design. In this paper we describe a technique that uses run time observations about an executing system to construct an architectural view of the system. With this technique we develop mappings that exploit regularities in system implementation and architectural style. These mappings describe how low-level system events can be interpreted as more abstract architectural operations. We describe the current implementation of a tool that uses these mappings, and show that it can highlight inconsistencies between implementation and architecture.

Abstract. We propose a meta-framework called ‘Plastik ’ which i) supports the specification and creation of runtime component-framework-based software systems and ii) facilitates and manages the runtime reconfiguration of such systems while ensuring integrity across changes. The meta-framework is fundamentally an integration of an architecture description language (an extension of ACME/Armani) and a reflective component runtime (OpenCOM). Plastikgenerated component frameworks can be dynamically reconfigured either through programmed changes (which are foreseen at design time and specified at the ADL level); or through ad-hoc changes (which are unforeseen at design time but which are nevertheless constrained by invariants specified at the ADL level). We provide in the paper a case study that illustrates the operation and benefits of Plastik. 1

Existing approaches to differencing and merging architectural views are based on restrictive assumptions such as requiring view elements to have unique identifiers or exactly matching types.