Esteemed software patterns for banking system

  • Sudha Rajesh
  • A. Chandrasekar


Software architecture plays an important role in the field of Software engineering. The main challenge of software design is to improve the quality attributes. Design phase plays an important part during this process. The designers have to take care of the complex situations. Quality of the design must also be considered during the development. The existing software architecture design methods are having the demerits with the lower quality service reliability and others. So a latest and highly developed software design patterns are necessary to work out the above drawback. This article suggests a new methodology to carry out the software design with newest set of design patterns. We proposed an esteemed software patterns for banking enterprises. The proposed work is done by extending the choice of these design patterns with bank managers and analyzed, that design patterns are highly usefulness for the designers in designing the software with esteemed patterns and preeminent quality attributes.


ESP Design patterns Quality attributes Software architecture 


  1. 1.
    Patidar, A., Suman, U.: A Survey on Software Architecture Evaluation Methods. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    IEEE std: IEEE Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology. (2006). Retrieved 19 Jan 2006
  3. 3.
    Meiappane, A., Venkataesan, V.P.: Substitute and Communication Pattern for an Internet Banking System, I.J. Information Technology and Computer Science. MECS, April 2014, pp. 58–64Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Meiappane, A., Venkataesan, V.P.: Request and notification pattern for an internet banking system. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Inf. Technol. Res. 1(1), 1–8 (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Folmer, E., Bosch, J.: Usability Patterns in Software Architecture. Department of Mathematics and Computing Science, University of Groningen, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tokuda, L., Batory, D.: Evolving object-oriented designs with refactoring. J. Autom. Softw. Eng. 8, 89–120 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Birukou, A., Blanzieri, E., Giorgini, P.: Choosing the Right Design Pattern: An Implicit Culture Approach. Technical Report (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eden, A.H., Gil, J., Yehudai, A.: Automating the application of design patterns. J. Object Oriented Program. 10, 44–46 (1997)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moynihan, G.P., Suki, A., Fonseca, D.J.: An expert system for the selection of software design patterns. Expert Syst. J. 23(1), 39–52 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gomathy, C.K., Rajalakshmi, S.: A software design pattern for bank service-oriented architecture. Int. J. Adv. Res. Comput. Eng. Technol. 3(4), 1302–1306 (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gomathy, C.K., Rajalakshmi, S.: Software pattern quality comportment in service-oriented architectures. Eur. Sci. J. 10(9). ISSN:1857-7881, (Print) e-ISSN 1857- 7431.(2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lankhorst, M.M., Luttighuis, P.O.: Enterprise Architecture Patterns for Multichannel Management. Telematica Instituut, Netherlands (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fanjiang, Y.-Y., Hsueh, N.-L., Lee, J.: Towards a pattern based model transformation approach for design quality enhancement. J. Softw. Eng. Stud. 2(3), 120–133 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Elish, K.O., Alshayeb, M.: Using software quality attributes to classify refactoring to patterns. J. Softw. 7(2), 408–419 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pandey, S., Ahmad, S.F., Hussain, M.: A critical survey on quality models in software engineering. In: IJCSIT-S282, ACEIT Conference Proceeding (2016)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ram, N.S., Rodrigues, P.: Enhanced intelligent risk divination using added quality attributes injected ATAM and design patterns. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Secur. 2(2), 27–34 (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ram, N.S., Rodrigues, P.: Intelligent risk prophecy using more quality attributes injected ATAM and design patterns. In: 7th WSEAS International Conference on Software Engineering, Parallel and Distributed Systems (SEPADS ’08), University of Cambridge, UK, 20–22 Feb 2008Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rohila, B.B., Dinker, A.G.: An approach for enhance the software quality based on quality model. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Adv. Eng. 4(1) (2014). ISSN:2250-2459Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Khan, M.F., Yousaf, K., Mustaqeem, A., Maqsood, M.: Improvement in quality of software architecture via enhanced-pattern driven architecture. Int. J. Inf. Technolo. Comput. Sci. 4, 31–39 (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jegarkandy, S.S., Ramsin, R.: Assessing the suitability of architectural patterns for use in agile software development. In: PATTERNS 2016: The Eighth International Conferences on Pervasive Patterns and Applications, IARIA (2016)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Subburaj, R., Jekese, G., Hwata, C.: Impact of object oriented design patterns on software development. Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res. 6(2) (2015). ISSN:2229-5518Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ram, N.S., Rodrigues, P.: Innovative patterns for finding enhanced solutions to your architecture. IJCSNS Int. J. Comput. Sci. Netw. Secur. 8(7), 1–29 (2008)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dubey, S.K., Rana, A.: A comprehensive assessment of object-oriented software systems using metrics approach. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Eng. 2(08), 2726–2730 (2010)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lung, C.-H., Bot, S., Kalaichelvan, K., Kazman, R.: An approach to software architecture analysis for evolution and reusability. In: Proceedings of the CASCON (Centre for Advanced Studies Conference), Canada, pp. 144–154 (1997)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pettersson, N., Lowe, W., Nivre, J.: Evaluation of accuracy in design pattern occurrence detection. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 36(4), 575–590 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yan, X., Liu, H., Zhu, Z., Wu, Q.: Hybrid genetic algorithm for engineering design problems. Clust. Comput. 20(1), 263–275 (2017)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wang, H., Zhang, T.: Software model checking for resources race. Clust. Comput. 20(1), 179–193 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Colquitt, D., Leaney, J.: Expanding the view on complexity within architecture trade-off analysis method. In: Proceedings of the 14th Annual IEEE International Conference and Workshops on the Engineering of Computer-Based SystemsGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shaw, M., Clements, P.: The golden age of software architecture. In: IEEE Software, March/April 2006Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Moura, H., Teixeira, J.C.: Managing Stakeholders Conflicts, pp. 286–316 (2010)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rashid, E., Patnayak, S., Bhattacherjee, V.: Estimation and evaluation of change in software quality at a particular stage of software development. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 6(10), 1–10 (2013)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., Vlissides, J.: Design patterns elements of reusable object-oriented software. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Boston (1995)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Data and Object Factory: Software design patterns. Data and Object Factory (2002)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pena, C., Bastarrica, M.C., Perovich, D.: ATAM-HW: extending ATAM for explicitly incorporating hardware-related trade-off decisions. In: XXIX International Conference on Chilean Computer Science Society (SCCC). IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Babar, M.A., Gorton, I.: Comparison of scenario based software architecture evaluation methods. National ICT Australia Ltd. University of South Wales, AustraliaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sathyabama UniversityChennaiIndia
  2. 2.CSE DepartmentSt. Joseph’s College of EngineeringChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations