Advertisement

Goal-Oriented Monitoring Adaptation: Methodology and Patterns

  • Antoine Toueir
  • Julien Broisin
  • Michelle Sibilla
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8508)

Abstract

This paper argues that autonomic systems need to make their distributed monitoring adaptive in order to improve their “comprehensive” resulting quality; that means both the Quality of Service (QoS), and the Quality of Information (QoI). Thus, we propose a methodology to design monitoring adaptation based on high level objectives (goals) related to the management of quality requirements. One of the advantages of adopting a methodological approach, is that monitoring reconfiguration will be conducted through a consistent adaptation logic. Starting from a model-guided monitoring framework, we introduce our methodology to assist human administrators in eliciting the appropriate quality goals piloting the monitoring. Moreover, some monitoring adaptation patterns falling into reconfiguration dimensions are suggested and exploited in a cloud provider case-study illustrating the adaptation of Quality-Oriented monitoring.

Keywords

Quality requirements adaptive monitoring autonomic systems goal-oriented adaptation 

References

  1. 1.
    Kephart, J.O., Chess, D.M.: The vision of autonomic computing. Computer 36(1), 41–50 (2003)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grefen, P., Aberer, K., Ludwig, H., Hoffner, Y.: Crossflow: Cross-organizational workflow management in dynamic virtual enterprises. International Journal of Computer Systems Science & Engineering 15, 277–290 (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Roxburgh, D., Spaven, D., Gallen, C.: Monitoring as an sla-oriented consumable service for saas assurance: A prototype. In: 2011 IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management (IM), pp. 925–939 (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thongtra, P., Aagesen, F.: An adaptable capability monitoring system. In: 2010 Sixth International Conference on Networking and Services (ICNS), pp. 73–80 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Munawar, M.A., Reidemeister, T., Jiang, M., George, A., Ward, P.A.S.: Adaptive monitoring with dynamic differential tracing-based diagnosis. In: De Turck, F., Kellerer, W., Kormentzas, G. (eds.) DSOM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5273, pp. 162–175. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nobre, J.C., Granville, L.Z., Clemm, A., Prieto, A.G.: Decentralized detection of sla violations using p2p technology. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Network and Service Management, pp. 100–107. International Federation for Information Processing (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    IBM Corp.: An architectural blueprint for autonomic computing. IBM White Paper (June 2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weyns, D., et al.: On patterns for decentralized control in self-adaptive systems. In: de Lemos, R., Giese, H., Müller, H.A., Shaw, M. (eds.) Self-Adaptive Systems. LNCS, vol. 7475, pp. 76–107. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ramirez, A.J., Cheng, B.H.C.: Design patterns for developing dynamically adaptive systems. In: Proceedings of the 2010 ICSE Workshop on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-Managing Systems, SEAMS 2010, pp. 49–58 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moui, A., Desprats, T., Lavinal, E., Sibilla, M.: A cim-based framework to manage monitoring adaptability. In: 2012 8th International Conference on Network and Service Management (CNSM) and 2012 Workshop on Systems Virtualiztion Management (SVM), pp. 261–265 (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moui, A., Desprats, T., Lavinal, E., Sibilla, M.: Information models for managing monitoring adaptation enforcement. In: International Conference on Adaptive and Self-adaptive Systems and Applications (ADAPTIVE), Nice, July 22-27, pp. 44–50 (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moui, A., Desprats, T., Lavinal, E., Sibilla, M.: Managing polling adaptability in a cim/wbem infrastructure. In: 2010 4th International DMTF Academic Alliance Workshop on Systems and Virtualization Management (SVM), pp. 1–6 (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Toueir, A., Broisin, J., Sibilla, M.: Toward configurable performance monitoring: Introduction to mathematical support for metric representation and instrumentation of the cim metric model. In: 2011 5th International DMTF Academic Alliance Workshop on Systems and Virtualization Management (SVM), pp. 1–6 (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Van Lamsweerde, A.: Requirements Engineering: From System Goals to UML Models to Software Specifications. Wiley (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Van Lamsweerde, A.: Requirements engineering in the year 00: a research perspective. In: Proceedings of the 2000 International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 5–19 (2000)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Toueir, A., Broisin, J., Sibilla, M.: A goal-oriented approach for adaptive sla monitoring: a cloud provider case study. In: LATINCLOUD 2013, Maceió, Brazil (December 2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Darimont, R., Van Lamsweerde, A.: Formal refinement patterns for goal-driven requirements elaboration. In: Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering - SIGSOFT 1996, pp. 179–190 (1996)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    DMTF Applications Working Group: Base metrics profile (December 2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Goranko, V.: Temporal logics for specification and verification. In: Proceedings of the European Summer School in Logic, Language and Information, ESSLI 2009 (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Information Processing 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antoine Toueir
    • 1
  • Julien Broisin
    • 1
  • Michelle Sibilla
    • 1
  1. 1.IRIT, University Toulouse III - Paul SabatierToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations