JZUS - Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE

Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE C 2012 Vol.13 No.5 P.339-354

A taxonomic framework for autonomous service management in Service-Oriented Architecture

Author(s): Du Wan Cheun, Hyun Jung La, Soo Dong Kim
Affiliation(s): Department of Computer Science, Soongsil University, Seoul 156-743, Korea
Corresponding email(s): dwcheun@gmail.com, hjla80@gmail.com, sdkim777@gmail.com
Key Words: Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA), Autonomic computing (AC), Cause taxonomy, Services, Faults, Causes, Adaptation

Share this article to： More <<< Previous Article \|Next Article >>>

Abstract: Since service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) reveals the black box nature of services, heterogeneity, service dynamism, and service evolvability, managing services is known to be a challenging problem. autonomic computing (AC) is a way of designing systems that can manage themselves without direct human intervention. Hence, applying the key disciplines of AC to service management is appealing. A key task of service management is to identify probable causes for symptoms detected and to devise actuation methods that can remedy the causes. In SOA, there are a number of target elements for service remedies, and there can be a number of causes associated with each target element. However, there is not yet a comprehensive taxonomy of causes that is widely accepted. The lack of cause taxonomy results in the limited possibility of remedying the problems in an autonomic way. In this paper, we first present a meta-model, extract all target elements for service fault management, and present a computing model for autonomously managing service faults. Then we define fault taxonomy for each target element and inter-relationships among the elements. Finally, we show prototype implementation using cause taxonomy and conduct experiments with the prototype for validating its applicability and effectiveness.

Reference

[1]Arban, A., Moore, J., Bourque, P., Dupuis, R., 2005. Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge. IEEE Computer Society, California, USA.

[2]Avizienis, A., Laprie, J., Randell, B., Landwehr, C., 2004. Basic concepts and taxonomy of dependable and secure computing. IEEE Trans. Depend. Secure Comput., 1(1):11-33.

[3]Brogi, A., Canal, C., Pimentel, E., Vallecillo, A., 2004. Formalizing Web service choreographies. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci., 105(10):73-94.

[4]Brüning, S., Weißleder, S., Malek, M., 2007. A Fault Taxonomy for Service-Oriented Architecture. Proc. 10th IEEE High Assurance Systems Engineering Symp., p.367-368.

[5]Chappell, D., 2004. Enterprise Service Bus. O′Reilly, California, USA.

[6]Dan, A., Davis, D., Kearney, R., Keller, A., King, R., Kuebler, D., Ludwig, H., Polan, M., Spreitzer, M., Youssef, A., 2004. Web services on demand: WSLA-driven automated management. IBM Syst. J., 43(1):136-158.

[7]Erl, T., 2007. SOA Principles of Service Design. Prentice Hall, Boston.

[8]Hamadi, R., Benatallah, B., 2003. A Petri Net-Based Model for Web Service Composition. Proc. 14th Australasian Database Conf., p.191-200.

[9]Huang, X., Zou, S., Wang, W., Cheng, S., 2006. Layering Model and Fault Diagnosis Algorithm for Internet Services. Proc. Int. Multi-Conf. on Computing in the Global Information Technology, p.22.

[10]Hunter, E.J., 2002. Classification Made Simple. Ashgate Publishing, Surrey, England.

[11]IBM Research Center, 2006. Symptoms Reference Specification, Version 2.0. IBM Autonomic Computing Symptom Specification.

[12]Kephart, O., Chess, M., 2003. The vision of autonomic computing. Computer, 36(1):41-50.

[13]La, H., Kim, S., 2011. Static and dynamic adaptations for service-based systems. Inform. Software Technol., 53(12):1275-1296.

[14]Manes, A., 2005. The Elephant Has Left the Building. Intelligent Enterprise, NY.

[15]Martens, A., 2005. Analyzing Web service based business processes. LNCS, 3442:19-33.

[16]Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS), 2004. UDDI Version 3.0.2, UDDI Specification Technical Committee Draft.

[17]Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS), 2006. Web Services Distributed Management: Management of Web Services (WSDM-MOWS 1.1).

[18]Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS), 2007. Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0 (WS-BPEL 2.0).

[19]Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS), 2010. SOA-EERP Business Quality of Service Version 1.0.

[20]Pernici, B., Rosati, A.M., 2007. Automatic Learning of Repair Strategies for Web Services. Proc. 5th European Conf. on Web Services, p.119-128.

[21]Richardson, L., Ruby, S., 2007. RESTful Web Services. O′Reilly, California, USA.

[22]World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), 2005. Web Services Choreography Description Language Version 1.0 (WS-CDL 1.0).

[23]World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), 2007a. Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) 1.2.

[24]World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), 2007b. Web Services Description Language (WSDL), Version 2.0, Part 0: Primer.

[25]Zhang, J., Chang, Y., Lin, K., 2009. A Dependency Matric Based Framework for QoS Diagnosis in SOA. Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Service-Oriented Computing and Applications, p.1-8.

[26]Zheng, Z., Lyu, M.R., 2010. An adaptive QoS-aware fault tolerance strategy for Web services. Emp. Software Eng., 15(4):323-345.

Open peer comments: Debate/Discuss/Question/Opinion

<1>

Similar articles

- Go to

Darkslateblue:Affiliate; Royal Blue:Author; Turquoise:Article

Reference