Advertisement

Software Quality Journal

, Volume 17, Issue 1, pp 51–63 | Cite as

Evaluating legacy assets in the context of migration to SOA

  • Vinay Kumar Reddy
  • Alpana Dubey
  • Sala Lakshmanan
  • Srihari Sukumaran
  • Rajendra Sisodia
Article

Abstract

A key activity in the introduction of service oriented architecture (SOA) for an organization is to evaluate the suitability of existing assets for service orientation. We identify the core principles of SOA as the guide lines in evaluating the suitability of the existing assets. The existing metrics and guidelines that could be helpful in evaluating these principles are surveyed. This would benefit an organization in understanding the effort needed for migration and also to build proper services from the existing assets.

Keywords

Measurement Migration SOA 

References

  1. Alonso, G., Casati, F., Kuno, H., & Machiraju, V. (2004). Web services: Concepts, architecture and applications. Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  2. Bieman, J. M., & Kang, B.-K. (1995). Cohesion and reuse in an object-oriented system. In SSR’95: Proceedings of the 1995 Symposium on Software reusability (pp. 259–262). New York, NY, USA: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  3. Boxall, M. A. S., & Araban, S. (2004). Interface metrics for reusability analysis of components. In ASWEC’04: Proceedings of the 2004 Australian Software Engineering Conference (ASWEC’04) (p. 40). Washington, DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  4. Buchhirano, A., & Gnesi, S. (2006). A survey on services composition languages and models. International workshop on web service modeling and testing (WS-MaTe) 2006.Google Scholar
  5. Canfora, G., Fasolino, A. R., Frattolillo, G., & Tramontana, P. (2006). Migrating interactive legacy systems to web services. CSMR, 0, 24–36.Google Scholar
  6. Chhabra, J. K., & Aggarwal, K. K. (2006). Measurement of intra-class & inter-class weakness for object-oriented software. In ITNG (pp. 155–160).Google Scholar
  7. Chidamber, S. R., & Kemerer, C. F. (1994). A metrics suite for object oriented design. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 20(6), 476–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cho, E. S., Kim, M. S., & Kim, S. D. (2001). Component metrics to measure component quality. In APSEC (pp. 419–426).Google Scholar
  9. Erl, T. (2005). Service-oriented architecture: Concepts, technology, and design. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall PTR.Google Scholar
  10. Henderson-Sellers, B. (1996). Object-oriented metrics: measures of complexity. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
  11. Kaminsky, A., & Bischof, H.-P. (2002). Many-to-many invocation: A new object oriented paradigm for ad hoc collaborative systems. In OOPSLA ’02: Companion of the 17th annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming, systems, languages, and applications (pp. 72–73). New York, NY, USA: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  12. Katki, F., McMonegal, L., Meyer, B., Lane, J., Wilson, P., Radatz, J., Yee, M., Porteous, H., & Springsteel, F. (Eds.). (1991). IEEE standard computer dictionary: Compilation of IEEE standard computer glossaries. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.Google Scholar
  13. Meier, J. D., Vasireddy, S., Babbar, A., & Mackman, A. (2004). Improving .NET application performance and scalability (patterns & practices). Microsoft Corporation.Google Scholar
  14. SUN microsystems. (1994). NFS: Network file system version 3 protocol specification. Technical report.Google Scholar
  15. Ott, L. M., & Thuss, J. J. (1993). Slice based metrics for estimating cohesion. In IEEE-CS International Metrics Symposium (pp. 71–81).Google Scholar
  16. Patel, S., Chu, W., & Baxter, R. (1992). A measure for composite module cohesion. In ICSE ’92: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Software engineering (pp. 38–48). New York, NY, USA: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  17. Poulin, J., & Caruso, J. (1993). A reuse metrics and return on investment model. In In Advances in Software Reuse: Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Software Reusability (pp. 152–166).Google Scholar
  18. Schmelzer, R. (2007). Should services be stateful? 10 Oct 2007. http://searchwebservices.techtarget.com.
  19. Schmelzer, R. (2007). What belongs in a service contract? 10 Oct 2007. http://www.zapthink.com/.
  20. Simon, F., Lffler, S., & Lewerentz, C. (1999). Distance based cohesion measuring.Google Scholar
  21. Stevens, W. P., Myers, G. J., & Constantine, L. L. (1999). Structured design. IBM Systems Journal, 38(2/3), 231–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. van der Hoek, A., Dincel, E., & Medvidovic, N. (2003). Using service utilization metrics to assess the structure of product line architectures. In IEEE METRICS (pp. 298–308).Google Scholar
  23. Washizaki, H., Yamamoto, H., & Fukazawa, Y. (2003). A metrics suite for measuring reusability of software components. In IEEE METRICS (p. 211).Google Scholar
  24. Xia, F. (1996). Module coupling: A design metric. APSEC, 00, 44.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vinay Kumar Reddy
    • 1
  • Alpana Dubey
    • 1
  • Sala Lakshmanan
    • 1
  • Srihari Sukumaran
    • 1
  • Rajendra Sisodia
    • 1
  1. 1.Philips Research AsiaBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations