Advertisement

A Framework for Rule-Based Dynamic Adaptation

  • Ivan Lanese
  • Antonio Bucchiarone
  • Fabrizio Montesi
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6084)

Abstract

We propose a new approach to dynamic adaptation, based on the combination of adaptation hooks provided by the adaptable application specifying where adaptation can happen, and adaptation rules external to the application, specifying when and how adaptation can be performed. We discuss different design choices that have to be considered when using such an approach, and then we propose a possible solution. We describe the solution in details, we apply it to a sample scenario and we implement it on top of the language Jolie.

Keywords

Dynamic Adaptation Train Station Adaptation Manager Adaptation Rule Applicability Condition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ardagna, D., Comuzzi, M., Mussi, E., Pernici, B., Plebani, P.: PAWS: A framework for executing adaptive web-service processes. IEEE Software 24(6), 39–46 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baresi, L., Guinea, S., Pasquale, L.: Self-healing BPEL processes with Dynamo and the JBoss rule engine. In: Proc. of ESSPE 2007, pp. 11–20. ACM Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brun, Y., et al.: Engineering self-adaptive systems through feedback loops. In: Cheng, B.H.C., de Lemos, R., Giese, H., Inverardi, P., Magee, J. (eds.) SESAS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5525, pp. 48–70. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bucchiarone, A., et al.: Design for adaptation of service-based applications: Main issues and requirements. In: Proc. of WESOA 2009 (2009) (to appear)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bucchiarone, A., Lluch Lafuente, A., Marconi, A., Pistore, M.: A formalisation of Adaptable Pervasive Flows. In: Proc. of WS-FM 2009 (2009) (to appear)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bultan, T., Fu, X.: Specification of realizable service conversations using collaboration diagrams. Service Oriented Computing and Applications 2(1), 27–39 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Colombo, M., Di Nitto, E., Mauri, M.: SCENE: A service composition execution environment supporting dynamic changes disciplined through rules. In: Dan, A., Lamersdorf, W. (eds.) ICSOC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4294, pp. 191–202. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Floch, J., Hallsteinsen, S., Stav, E., Eliassen, F., Lund, K., Gjorven, E.: Using architecture models for runtime adaptability. IEEE Software 23(2), 62–70 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Garlan, D., Schmerl, B.: Model-based adaptation for self-healing systems. In: Proc. of WOSS 2002, pp. 27–32. ACM Press, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Managing process variants in the process life cycle. In: Proc. of ICEIS, vol. (3-2), pp. 154–161 (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jolie team. Jolie website, http://www.jolie-lang.org/
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Karastoyanova, D., Houspanossian, A., Cilia, M., Leymann, F., Buchmann, A.P.: Extending BPEL for run time adaptability. In: Proc. of EDOC 2005, pp. 15–26. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kongdenfha, W., Saint-Paul, R., Benatallah, B., Casati, F.: An aspect-oriented framework for service adaptation. In: Dan, A., Lamersdorf, W. (eds.) ICSOC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4294, pp. 15–26. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kramer, J., Magee, J.: Self-managed systems: an architectural challenge. In: Proc. of FOSE 2007, pp. 259–268 (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Montesi, F., Guidi, C., Zavattaro, G.: Composing services with JOLIE. In: Proc. of ECOWS 2007, pp. 13–22. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Narendra, N.C., Ponnalagu, K., Krishnamurthy, J., Ramkumar, R.: Run-time adaptation of non-functional properties of composite web services using aspect-oriented programming. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 546–557. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    OASIS. Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0., http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/wsbpel-v2.0.html
  19. 19.
    Perry, D.E., Wolf, A.L.: Foundations for the study of software architecture. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 17(4), 40–52 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Spanoudakis, G., Zisman, A., Kozlenkov, A.: A service discovery framework for service centric systems. In: Proc. of SCC 2005, pp. 251–259. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Taylor, R.N., van der Hoek, A.: Software design and architecture: The once and future focus of software engineering. In: Proc. of FOSE 2007, pp. 226–243 (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    van Lamsweerde, A.: Requirements Engineering: From System Goals to UML Models to Software Specifications. Wiley, Chichester (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Verma, K., Gomadam, K., Sheth, A.P., Miller, J.A., Wu, Z.: The meteor-s approach for configuring and executing dynamic web processes. Technical report, University of Georgia, Athens (2005)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    World Wide Web Consortium. Web Services Description Language (WSDL) 1.1., http://www.w3.org/TR/wsdl

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ivan Lanese
    • 1
  • Antonio Bucchiarone
    • 2
  • Fabrizio Montesi
    • 1
  1. 1.Lab. FocusUniversità di Bologna/INRIABolognaItaly
  2. 2.Fondazione Bruno Kessler - IRSTTrentoItaly

Personalised recommendations