Mapping ADL Specifications to an Efficient and Reconfigurable Runtime Component Platform

Joolia, Ackbar; Batista, Thaís; Coulson, Geoff; Gomes, Antônio Tadeu A.

doi:10.1109/wicsa.2005.42

Cited by 27 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…its connection with other elements) only if a pre-defined constraint or condition is satisfied. Darwin [17], Plastik [14] and Dynamic Wright [4] are examples that use this technique.…”

Section: Executable Code Generationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among existing ADLs in the literature, only few of them support dynamic reconfiguration such as C2 SAD(E)L [18], Darwin [17], π-ADL [20], Rapide [16], ACME/Plastik [14] and Dynamic Wright [4].…”

Section: Executable Code Generationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conventional ADLs support only static architecture description [18], [9]. Some ADLs, however, support dynamic architecture description, such as [17], [4], [18], [14], [13], [21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such a late reconfiguration hinders the traceability of configuration and consistency between different levels of the software development life cycle. However, there are some approaches that discuss reconfiguration issues at early stages of development process, for example at architecture or design levels, such as [4], [14], [18]. In these approaches, reconfiguration is expressed in an ad-hoc manner; reconfiguration is described without any explicit identification and separation of concerns.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Reconfigurable service-based architecture based on variability description

Adjoyan

Seriai

2017

Proceedings of the Symposium on Applied Computing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-adaptive systems evolve during system's execution against changes in operating environment. Such evolution and reconfiguration can be specified at architecture level using a syntactical expressive language such as Architecture Description Languages (ADLs). Variability modeling is an excellent instrument to model variations of software artifacts and their behavior within a self-adaptive system. However, existing ADLs that support dynamic reconfiguration do not explicitly model variation points on which the reconfiguration is based. This constitutes a barrier for a flexible management of reconfiguration at architecture level as well as traceability issues between a dynamic description given at architectural level and its counterpart at other abstraction levels. In this paper, we propose a variant-rich service-oriented ADL that enables system to reconfigure itself at runtime in response to a context change. To this end, our modular ADL, called Dynamic Service-Oriented Product Lines Architecture Description Language (DSOPL-ADL), specifies dynamic reconfigurations at architecture level besides specifying structural, variability and context information. Among several specified variable configurations at architecture level, one concrete configuration is generated at runtime triggered by a context value. Furthermore, an implementation code can be automatically generated from the architectural description.

show abstract

“…its connection with other elements) only if a pre-defined constraint or condition is satisfied. Darwin [17], Plastik [14] and Dynamic Wright [4] are examples that use this technique.…”

Section: Executable Code Generationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Executable Code Generationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conventional ADLs support only static architecture description [18], [9]. Some ADLs, however, support dynamic architecture description, such as [17], [4], [18], [14], [13], [21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Reconfigurable service-based architecture based on variability description

Adjoyan

Seriai

2017

Proceedings of the Symposium on Applied Computing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent research efforts on Model-Driven Engineering (MDE) such as Rainbow [2], ABCTool [3], Plastik [4] or DiVA [5] tackle the design evolution issue by building a causal connection between abstract design models and the running system. Thus, the designer can refine and update the conceptual models and then automatically synchronize them with the running system, thus preventing developers to write by hand ad-hoc and platformdependent scripts [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unifying Runtime Adaptation and Design Evolution

Morin

Ledoux

Hassine

et al. 2009

2009 Ninth IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-The increasing need for continuously available software systems has raised two key-issues: self-adaptation and design evolution. The former one requires software systems to monitor their execution platform and automatically adapt their configuration and/or architecture to adjust their quality of service (optimization, fault-handling). The later one requires new design decisions to be reflected on the fly on the running system to ensure the needed high availability (new requirements, corrective and preventive maintenance). However, design evolution and selfadaptation are not independent and reflecting a design evolution on a running self-adaptative system is not always safe. We propose to unify run-time adaptation and run-time evolution by monitoring both the run-time platform and the design models. Thus, it becomes possible to correlate those heterogeneous events and to use pattern matching on events to elaborate a pertinent decision for run-time adaptation. A flood prediction system deployed along the Ribble river (Yorkshire, England) is used to illustrate how to unify design evolution and run-time adaptation and to safely perform runtime evolution on adaptive systems.

show abstract

Programming distributed and adaptable autonomous components-the GCM/ProActive framework

Baude

Henrio

Ruz

2014

Softw. Pract. Exper.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYComponent oriented software has become a useful tool to build larger and more complex systems by describing the application in terms of encapsulated, loosely-coupled entities called components. At the same time, asynchronous programming patterns allow for the development of efficient distributed applications. While several component models and frameworks have been proposed, most of them tightly integrate the component model with the middleware they run upon. This intertwining is generally implicit and not discussed, leading to entangled, hard to maintain code. This article describes our efforts in the development of the GCM/ProActive framework for providing distributed and adaptable autonomous components. GCM/ProActive integrates a component model designed for execution on large scale environments, with a programming model based on active objects allowing a high degree of distribution and concurrency. This new integrated model provides a more powerful development, composition, and execution environment than other distributed component frameworks. We illustrate that GCM/ProActive is particularly adapted to the programming of autonomic component systems, and to the integration into a service oriented environment.

show abstract

Mapping ADL Specifications to an Efficient and Reconfigurable Runtime Component Platform

Cited by 27 publications

References 20 publications

Reconfigurable service-based architecture based on variability description

Reconfigurable service-based architecture based on variability description

Unifying Runtime Adaptation and Design Evolution

Programming distributed and adaptable autonomous components-the GCM/ProActive framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About