, Volume 99, Issue 2, pp 147–162 | Cite as

On-demand provisioning of workflow middleware and services into the cloud: an overview

  • Karolina Vukojevic-HauptEmail author
  • Florian Haupt
  • Frank Leymann


One of the core principles in service oriented computing is that services are always on and available. There are however domains where running services all the time is not suitable, for example when applying simulation workflows in the eScience domain. The simulation services orchestrated by these workflows are typically used only rarely and irregularly, keeping them running all the time would result in a significant waste of resources. As a consequence, we developed the approach of on-demand provisioning of workflow middleware and services. In this paper we will give an overview about our work. We will present the motivation and main idea of our solution approach and will also provide details about some of the results of our work. The overview about our previous and current work is then complemented by a detailed discussion and comparison of the roles involved in both concepts, traditional service oriented computing as well as our newly developed on-demand provisioning approach.


Cloud EScience On-demand provisioning Service oriented computing Dynamic provisioning Dynamic deployment 

Mathematics Subject Classification

68M01 68M11 68M14 68U20 



The authors would like to thank the German Research Foundation (DFG) for financial support of the project within the Cluster of Excellence in Simulation Technology (EXC310/2) at the University of Stuttgart.


  1. 1.
    Weerawarana S, Curbera F, Leymann F, Storey T, Ferguson DF (2005) Web services platform architecture: SOAP, WSDL, WS-policy, WS-addressing, WS-BPEL, WS-reliable messaging and more. Prentice Hall PTR, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Papazoglou MP (2003) Service-oriented computing: Concepts, characteristics and directions. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering (WISE 2003). doi: 10.1109/WISE.2003.1254461
  3. 3.
    Leymann F, Roller D (2000) Production workflow: concepts and techniques. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle RiverzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Taylor IJ, Deelman E, Gannon DB, Shields M (2014) Workflows for e-Science: scientific workflows for grids. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chard R, Chard K, Bubendorfer K, Lacinski L, Madduri R, Foster I (2015) Cost-aware cloud provisioning. Proceedings of the IEEE 11th International Conference on e-Science, pp 136–144Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Oinn T, Greenwood M, Addis M, Nedim Alpdemir M, Ferris J, Glover K, Goble C, Goderis A, Hull D, Marvin D, Li P, Lord P, Pocock MR, Senger M, Stevens R, Wipat A, Wroe C (2006) Taverna: lessons in creating a workflow environment for the life sciences. Concurr Comput Pract Exp 18(10):1067–1100. doi: 10.1002/cpe.993 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Altintas I, Berkley C, Jaeger E, Jones M, Ludascher B, Mock S (2004) Kepler: an extensible system for design and execution of scientific workflows. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Scientific and Statistical Database Management (SSDM). doi: 10.1109/SSDM.2004.1311241
  8. 8.
    Churches D, Gombas G, Harrison A, Maassen J, Robinson C, Shields M, Taylor I, Wang I (2006) Programming scientific and distributed workflow with triana services. Concurr Comput Pract Exp 18(10):1021–1037. doi: 10.1002/cpe.992
  9. 9.
    Vukojevic-Haupt K, Haupt F, Leymann F, Reinfurt L (2015) Bootstrapping complex workflow middleware systems into the cloud. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on e-Science. doi: 10.1109/eScience.2015.69
  10. 10.
    Vukojevic-Haupt K, Karastoyanova D, Leymann F (2013) On-demand provisioning of infrastructure, middleware and services for simulation workflows. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing and Applications. doi: 10.1109/SOCA.2013.21
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
    Sonntag M, Karastoyanova D (2012) Ad hoc iteration and re-execution of activities in workflows. Int J Adv Softw 5:91–109Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mell P, Grance T (2009) The NIST definition of cloud computing. NIST Special Publication 800–145Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Binz T, Breitenbücher U, Haupt F, Kopp O, Leymann F, Nowak A, Wagner S (2013) OpenTOSCA—a runtime for TOSCA-based cloud applications. International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-45005-1_62
  15. 15.
    Chappell D (2004) Enterprise Service Bus: Theory in Practice. O’Reilly MediaGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pautasso C, Alonso G (2005) Flexible binding for reusable composition of web services. Software Composition. doi: 10.1007/11550679_12
  17. 17.
    Byun E et al (2005) A dynamic grid services deployment mechanism for on demand resource provisioning. International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGrid). doi: 10.1109/CCGRID.2005.1558652
  18. 18.
    Vukojevic-Haupt K, Haupt F, Karastoyanova D, Leymann F (2014) Service Selection for On-demand Provisioned Services. Proceedings of the 18th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC). doi: 10.1109/EDOC.2014.25
  19. 19.
    Leymann F (2012) Linked Compute units and linked experiments: using topology and orchestration technology for flexible support of scientific applications. Software Service and Application Engineering. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-30835-2_6
  20. 20.
    Giles J (2006) The trouble with replication. Nature 442(7101):344–347Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Vukojevic-Haupt K, Haupt F, Karastoyanova D, Leymann F (2014) Replicability of Dynamically Provisioned Scientific Experiments. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing and Applications. doi: 10.1109/SOCA.2014.54
  22. 22.
    Vukojevic-Haupt K, Haupt F, Karastoyanova D, Leymann F (2015) A Middleware-centric optimization approach for the automated provisioning of services in the cloud. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science (CloudCom). doi: 10.1109/CloudCom.2015.86

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Architecture of Application SystemsUniversity of StuttgartStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations