Advertisement

Dependability Evaluation of Web Service-Based Processes

  • László Gönczy
  • Silvano Chiaradonna
  • Felicita Di Giandomenico
  • András Pataricza
  • Andrea Bondavalli
  • Tamás Bartha
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4054)

Abstract

As Web service-based system integration recently became the mainstream approach to create composite services, the dependability of such systems becomes more and more crucial. Therefore, extensions of the common service composition techniques are urgently needed in order to cover dependability aspects and a core concept for the dependability estimation of the target composite service. Since Web services-based workflows fit into the class of systems composed of multiple phases, this paper attempts to apply methodologies and tools for dependability analysis of Multiple Phased Systems (MPS) to this emerging category of dependability critical systems. The paper shows how this dependability analysis constitutes a very useful support to the service provider in choosing the most appropriate service alternatives to build up its own composite service.

Keywords

Business Process Service Level Agreement Composite Service Business Process Model Client Request 
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.
    Martinello, M.: Availability modeling and evaluation of web-based services –A pragmatic approach. PhD Thesis. LAAS-CNRS (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mura, I., Bondavalli, A., Zang, X., Trivedi, K.S.: Dependability modelling and evaluation of phased mission systems: a DSPN approach. In: IEEE DCCA-7 - 7th IFIP Int. Conference on Dependable Computing for Critical Applications, San Jose, CA, USA, pp. 299–318 (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mura, I., Bondavalli, A.: Markov regenerative stochastic Petri nets to model and evaluate phased mission systems dependability. IEEE Transactions on Computers 50(12), 1337–1351 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bondavalli, A., Chiaradonna, S., Di Giandomenico, F., Mura, I.: Dependability modeling and evaluation of ultiple-phased systems, using DEEM. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 53(4), 509–522 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    The VIATRA2 Model Transformation Framework, Generative Model Transformer Project, The Eclipse Foundation, http://eclipse.org/gmt/
  6. 6.
    Smotherman, M., Zemoudeh, K.: A non-homogeneous Markov model for phased-mission reliability analysis. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 38(5), 585–590 (1989)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alam, M., Al-Saggaf, U.M.: Quantitative reliability evaluation of repairable phased- mission systems using Markov approach. IEEE Transactions on Reliability R-35(5), 498–503 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Specification: Business Process Execution Language for Web Services Version 1.1 (May 2003), http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/ws-bpel/
  9. 9.
    Menasce, D., Almeida, V.A.F.: Capacity Planning for Web Services: Metrics, Models, and Methods. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Majzik, I., Pataricza, A., Bondavalli, A.: Stochastic dependability analysis of system architecture based on UML models. In: de Lemos, R., Gacek, C., Romanovsky, A. (eds.) Architecting Dependable Systems. LNCS, vol. 2677, pp. 219–244. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Web Service Level Agreements Project, http://www.research.ibm.com/wsla/
  12. 12.
    Web Services Flow Language (WSFL 1.0) - Appendix C: Endpoint Property Extensibility Elements. IBM Software Group (2001) Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tosic, V., Paguerk, B., Patel, K.: WSOL – A Language for the Formal Specification of Various Constraints and Classes of Service for Web Services. Research Report, Carleton University (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Avizienis, A., Laprie, J.C., Randell, B., Landwehr, C.: Basic Concepts and Taxonomy of Dependable and Secure Computing. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing 1(1), 11–33 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pataricza, A.: From the General Resource Model to a General Fault Modeling Paradigm? In: Workshop on Crititcal Systems Development with UML at UML 2002, Dresden, Germany (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    Graziano, A., Russo, S., Vecchio, V., Foster, P.: Metadata models for QoS-aware information management systems. In: Proc. of SEKE 2002, Ischia, Italy (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
    Web Service Description Language 1.1. W3C.org., http://www.w3.org/TR/wsdl
  20. 20.
    OMG Group, General Resource Model (GRM), http://www.omg.com
  21. 21.
    Zeng, L., Benatallah, B., Dumas, M.: Quality Driven Web Services Composition. In: Proceedings of WWW 2003, Budapest, Hungary, May 20-24 (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ran, S.: A model for web services discovery with QoS. ACM SIGecom Exchanges 4(1), 1–10 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Varró, D., Varró, G., Pataricza, A.: Designing the Automatic Transformation of Visual Languages. Science of Computer Programming 44, 205–227 (2002)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ehrig, H., Engels, G., Kreowski, H.-J., Rozenberg, G. (eds.): Handbook on Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation. Applications, Languages and Tools, vol. 2. World Scientific, Singapore (1999)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Börger, E., Stark, R.: Abstract State Machines. A method for High-Level System Design and Analysis. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    IBM Corporation. WebSphere Business Integrator 5.1, http://www-06.ibm.com/software/integration/
  27. 27.
  28. 28.
    Bradley, J.T., Dingle, N.J., Gilmore, S.T., Knottenbelt, W.J.: Derivation of Passage-time Densities in PEPA Models using ipc: the Imperial PEPA Compiler. In: Proc. of MASCOTS 2003, pp. 344–351 (2003)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ouyang, C., Verbeek, E., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Breutel, S., Dumas, M., ter Hoftstede, A.H.M.: WofBPEL: A Tool for Automated Analysis of BPEL Processes. In: Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Traverso, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3826, pp. 484–489. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kazhamiakin, R., Pandya, P., Pistore, M.: Modelling and Analysis of Time-related Properties in Web Service Compositions. In: Proc. of WESC 2005, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (2005)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Russell, N., Wohed, P., Verbeek, H.M.W.: Life After BPEL? In: Proc. of WS-FM, Versailles, France, pp. 35–50 (2005)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Koehler, J., Tirenni, G., Kumaran, S.: From Business Process Model to Consistent Implementation: A Case for Formal Verification Methods. In: EDOC, Lausanne, Switzerland, pp. 96–106 (2002)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Milner, R.: Communicating and Mobile Systems: The Pi-Calculus. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999)MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • László Gönczy
    • 1
  • Silvano Chiaradonna
    • 2
  • Felicita Di Giandomenico
    • 2
  • András Pataricza
    • 1
  • Andrea Bondavalli
    • 3
  • Tamás Bartha
    • 1
  1. 1.DMIS, Budapest University of Technology and EconomicsBudapestHungary
  2. 2.ISTI-CNRPisaItaly
  3. 3.DSI – Universita’ di FirenzeFirenzeItaly

Personalised recommendations