A quality-driven systematic approach for architecting distributed software applications

ABSTRACT

Architecting distributed software applications is a complex design activity. It involves making decisions about a number of inter-dependent design choices that relate to a range of design concerns. Each decision requires selecting among a number of alternatives; each of which impacts differently on various quality attributes. Additionally, there are usually a number of stakeholders participating in the decision-making process with different, often conflicting, quality goals, and project constraints, such as cost and schedule. To facilitate the architectural design process, we propose a quantitative quality-driven approach that attempts to find the best possible fit between conflicting stakeholders' quality goals, competing architectural concerns, and project constraints. The approach uses optimization techniques to recommend the optimal candidate architecture. Applicability of the proposed approach is assessed using a real system.

REFERENCES

• 1: Chung, L., et al. Non-Functional Requirements in Software Engineering. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Ma.,1999.
• 2: Anderson, D., Sweeny, D., and T. Williams An Introduction to Management Science: Quantitative Approaches to Decision Making. South-Western Educational Publishing, 2002.
• 3: Svahnberg, M., Wholin, C., and Lundberg, L. A Quality-Driven Decision-Support Method for Identifying Software Architecture Candidates. Int. Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, 13(5), 2003, p. 547--573.
• 4: Rick Kazman , Jai Asundi , Mark Klein, Quantifying the costs and benefits of architectural decisions, Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering, p.297-306, May 12-19, 2001, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
• 5: IEEE Standard 1061-1992, Standard for Software Quality Metrics Methodology. New York: Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, 1992.
• 6: Mark H. Klein , Thomas Ralya , Bill Pollak , Ray Obenza , Michael González Harbour, A practitioner's handbook for real-time analysis, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA, 1993
• 7: Michael R. Lyu, Handbook of software reliability and system reliability, McGraw-Hill, Inc., Hightstown, NJ, 1996
• 8: C. U. Smith , L. G. Williams, Software Performance Engineering: A Case Study Including Performance Comparison with Design Alternatives, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.19 n.7, p.720-741, July 1993 [doi>10.1109/32.238572]
• 9: Lundberg, L. et al. Quality Attributes in Software Architecture Design. Proceedings of the IASTED 3rd International Conference on Software Engineering and Applications., Oct 1999.
• 10: Len Bass , Paul Clements , Rick Kazman, Software architecture in practice, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1998
• 11: Jan Bosch, Design and use of software architectures: adopting and evolving a product-line approach, ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., New York, NY, 2000
• 12: Christine Hofmeister , Robert Nord , Dilip Soni, Applied software architecture, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1999
• 13: Klein, M., and Kazman, R. Attribute-Based Architectural Styles, Tech. Report, CMU/SEI-99-TR-022, Soft Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University.
• 14: Philippe Kruchten, The 4+1 View Model of Architecture, IEEE Software, v.12 n.6, p.42-50, November 1995 [doi>10.1109/52.469759]
• 15: Dilip Soni , Robert L. Nord , Christine Hofmeister, Software architecture in industrial applications, Proceedings of the 17th international conference on Software engineering, p.196-207, April 24-28, 1995, Seattle, Washington, United States [doi>10.1145/225014.225033]
• 16: Evaluating software architectures: methods and case studies, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 2001
• 17: Al-Naeem, T., et al. Systematic Approaches for Designing B2B Applications. International Journal of Electronic Commerce (IJEC), Nov 2004.
• 18: Yoon, K.P., and Hwang, C. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: An Introduction. Sage Publications, 1995.
• 19: Saaty, T.L. The Analytical Hierarchical Process. McGraw-Hill, 1980.
• 20: Barry W. Boehm, Software Engineering Economics, Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1981
• 21: Ian Gorton , Jereme Haack, Architecting in the Face of Uncertainty: An Experience Report, Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering, p.543-551, May 23-28, 2004
• 22: Expertchoice, http://www.expertchoice.com Last accessed 20th Aug., 2004.
• 23: COABS, http://coabs.globalinfotek.com Last accessed 20th Aug., 2004.
• 24: Morisio, M., Stamelos, I., and Tsoukias, A. A New Method to Evaluate Software Artifacts against Predefined Profiles. Proc. of Workshop on Software Engineering Decision Support Methodologies, 2002.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
        D.2.11 Software Architectures

General Terms:
Design, Verification

Keywords:
optimization, software architecture design, software quality