Doradjen Pregled Kursa I Tipovi Arhitektura 100 Slajdova

Software Architecture
Dr Ljubomir Lazi , Docent

New wine in old bottles? (i.e., software architecture global design?, architect designer)
Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi
Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007
Overview
What is it, why bother? Architecture Design Viewpoints and view models Architectural styles Architecture asssessment Role of the software architect
The Role of the Architect
requirements client, users assess architect creates
solutions developers assess
visualises
prescribes
appearance, behaviour
architectural design
construction, co-operation
Pre-architecture life cycle
stakeholders (few)
requirements
quality
agreement
development
Characteristics
Iteration mainly on functional requirements Few stakeholders involved No balancing of functional and quality requirements
Adding architecture, the easy way
stakeholders (few)
requirements
quality
agreement architecture detailed design implementation development
Architecture in the life cycle

stakeholders (many)
requirements
quality
architecture agreement development
Characteristics
Iteration on both functional and quality requirements Many stakeholders involved Balancing of functional and quality requirements
Why Is Architecture Important?

Architecture is the vehicle for stakeholder communication Architecture manifests the earliest set of design decisions
Constraints on implementation Dictates organizational structure Inhibits or enable quality attributes
Architecture is a transferable abstraction of a system

Product lines share a common architecture Allows for template-based development Basis for training
Where did it start?

1992: Perry & Wolf 1987: J.A. Zachman; 1989: M. Shaw 1978/79: David parnas, program families 1972 (1969): Edsger Dijkstra, program families 1969: I.P. Sharp @ NATO Software Engineering conference: I think we have something in addition to software engineering [..] This is the subject of software architecture. Architecture is different from engineering.
10
Software architecture, definition (1)

The architecture of a software system defines that system in terms of computational components and interactions among those components. (from Shaw and Garlan, Software Architecture, Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline, PrenticeHall, 1996.)
11
statement procedure module (design) pattern architecture
12
Software Architecture, definition (2)

The software architecture of a system is the structure or structures of the system, which comprise software elements, the externally visible properties of those elements, and the relationships among them. (from Bass, Clements, and Kazman, Software Architecture in Practice, SEI Series in Software Engineering. Addison-Wesley, 2003.)
13
Important issues raised in this definition:
multiple system structures; externally visible (observable) properties of components.
The definition does not include:

the process; rules and guidelines; architectural styles.
14
Architectural Structures
module structure conceptual, or logical structure process, or coordination structure physical structure uses structure calls structure data flow control flow class structure
15
Software Architecture, definition (3)

Architecture is the fundamental organization of a system embodied in its components, their relationships to each other and to the environment and the principles guiding its design and evolution (from IEEE Standard on the Recommended Practice for Architectural Descriptions, 2000.)
16
Architecture is conceptual. Architecture is about fundamental things. Architecture exists in some context.
17
Other points of view

Architecture is high-level design Architecture is overall structure of the system Architecture is the structure, including the principles and guidelines governing their design and evolution over time Architecture is components and connectors
18
Software Architecture & Quality

The notion of quality is central in software architecting: a software architecture is devised to gain insight in the qualities of a system at the earliest possible stage. Some qualities are observable via execution: performance, security, availability, functionality, usability And some are not observable via execution: modifiability, portability, reusability, integrability, testability
Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007
19
Overview
20
Attribute-Driven Design (Bass et al, Ch 7)

Choose module to decompose Refine this module:
choose architectural drivers (quality is driving force) choose pattern that satisfies drivers apply pattern
Repeat steps
21
Example ADD iterations

Top-level: usability separate user interface Seeheim/three tier architecture Lower-level, within user interface: security authenticate users Lower-level, within data layer: availability active redundancy
22
Generalized model
Understand problem Solve it Evaluate solution
23
Global workflow in architecture design

context synthesis architecture evaluation evaluation results
backlog requirements
24
Generalized model (contd)

assets architecture ideas synthesis
backlog
constraints
evaluation
eval results sign.reqs
25
Design issues, options and decisions

A designer is faced with a series of design issues
These are sub-problems of the overall design problem. Each issue normally has several alternative solutions (or design options) The designer makes a design decision to resolve each issue. This process involves choosing the best option from among the alternatives.
26
Taking decisions
subproblem (or issue)
Design problem
subproblem (or issue)
Problem space
Decision = best option
Design Design option option
Design option
Design option
Decision = best option
Decision space
Alternative solutions
Alternative solutions
27
Decision space
The space of possible designs that can be achieved by choosing different sets of alternatives.
fat-client client style client-server thin-client client in a separate user interface layer Programmed in Java
Programmed in Visual Basic Programmed in C++
monolithic
no separate user interface layer
28
Tree or graph?
Issues and options are not independent ...
fat-client client style client-server thin-client
client in a separate user interface layer
flexibility
layered
MVC
monolithic
no separate user interface layer
29
More than just IT

Technical and non-techical issues and options are intertwined
Architects deciding on the type of database
versus
Management deciding on new strategic partnership
or
Management deciding on budget
30
Some (tacit) decisions are related to norms and values
31
Types of decisions
Implicit, undocumented
Unaware, tacit, of course knowledge
Explicit, undocumented
Vaporizes over time
Explicit, explicitly undocumented

Tactical, personal reasons
Explicit, documented
Preferred, exceptional situation
32
Why is documenting design decisions important?

Prevents repeating (expensive) past steps Explains why this is a good architecture Emphasizes qualities and criticality for requirements/goals Provides context and background
33
Uses of design decisions

Identify key decisions for a stakeholder
Make the key decisions quickly available. E.g., introducing new people and make them up2date. ..., Get a rationale, Validate decisions against reqs
Evaluate impact
If we want to change an element, what are the elements impacted (decisions, design, issues)? ..., Cleanup the architecture, identify important architectural drivers
34
Elements of a design decision

Issues: design issues being addressed Decision Status: e.g., pending, approved Assumptions: underlying assumptions Alternatives Rationale; the why of the decision taken Implications: e.g. need for further decisions
35
Pointers on design decisions

Hofmeister et al, Generalizing a Model of Software Architecture Design from Five Industrial Approaches, Journal of Systems and Software, 2007 Tyree and Ackerman, Architecture decisions: demystifying architecture, IEEE Software, vol. 22(2), 2005. Kruchten, Lago and van Vliet, Building up and exploiting architectural knowledge, WICSA, 2005. Lago and van Vliet, Explicit assumptions enrich architectural models, ICSE, 2005.
36
Overview
37
Software design in UML

Class diagrams, state diagrams, sequence diagram, etc Who can read those diagrams? Which type of questions do they answer? Do they provide enough information?
38
Who can read those diagrams?

Designer, programmer, tester, maintainer, etc. Client? User?
39
Which type of questions do they answer?

How much will it cost? How secure will the system be? Will it perform? How about maintenance cost? What if requirement A is replaced by requirement B?
40
Analogy with building architecture

Overall picture of building (client) Front view (client, beauty committee) Separate picture for water supply (plumber) Separate picture for electrical wiring (electrician) etc
41
Where We Started: Object-Oriented Programming

Object-oriented (OO) programming simplified software development through higher level abstractions & patterns, e.g., Associating related data & operations Decoupling interfaces & implementations
class X operation1() operation2() operation3() operationn() data
Well-written OO programs exhibit recurring structures that promote abstraction, flexibility, modularity, & elegance
Next Step: Distributed Object Computing (DOC)

Applies the Broker pattern to abstract away lower-level OS & protocol-specific details for network programming Creates distributed systems that are easier to model & build using OO techniques Result: robust distributed systems built with distributed object computing (DOC) middleware e.g., CORBA, Java RMI, etc. We now have more robust software & more powerful distributed systems
AbstractService service Client Proxy service Service service
: Client
operation()
Object : Interface X
Middleware
Component-based software engineering
Objectives
To explain that CBSE is concerned with developing standardised components and composing these into applications To describe components and component models To show the principal activities in the CBSE process To discuss approaches to component composition and problems that may arise
Topics covered
Components and component models The CBSE process Component composition
Component-based development
Component-based software engineering (CBSE) is an approach to software development that relies on software reuse. It emerged from the failure of object-oriented development to support effective reuse. Single object classes are too detailed and specific. Components are more abstract than object classes and can be considered to be stand-alone service providers.
CBSE essentials
Independent components specified by their interfaces. Component standards to facilitate component integration. Middleware that provides support for component inter-operability. A development process that is geared to reuse.
CBSE and design principles

Apart from the benefits of reuse, CBSE is based on sound software engineering design principles:
Components are independent so do not interfere with each other; Component implementations are hidden; Communication is through well-defined interfaces; Component platforms are shared and reduce development costs.
CBSE problems
Component trustworthiness - how can a component with no available source code be trusted? Component certification - who will certify the quality of components? Emergent property prediction - how can the emergent properties of component compositions be predicted? Requirements trade-offs - how do we do trade-off analysis between the features of one component and another?
Components
Components provide a service without regard to where the component is executing or its programming language
A component is an independent executable entity that can be made up of one or more executable objects; The component interface is published and all interactions are through the published interface;
Component definitions
Councill and Heinmann:
A software component is a software element that conforms to a component model and can be independently deployed and composed without modification according to a composition standard.
Szyperski:
A software component is a unit of composition with contractually specified interfaces and explicit context dependencies only. A software component can be deployed independently and is subject to composition by third-parties.
Component as a service provider

The component is an independent, executable entity. It does not have to be compiled before it is used with other components. The services offered by a component are made available through an interface and all component interactions take place through that interface.
Component characteristics 1
Standardised Component standardisation means that a component that is used in a CBSE process has to conform to some standardised component model. This model may define component interfaces, component meta-data, documentation, composition and deployment. A component should be independent it should be possible to compose and deploy it without having to use other specific components. In situations where the component needs externally provided services, these should be explicitly set out in a requires interface specification. For a component to be composable, all external interactions must take place through publicly defined interfaces. In addition, it must provide external access to information about itself such as its methods and attributes.
Independent
Composable
Component characteristics 2
Deployable
To be deployable, a component has to be self-contained and must be able to operate as a stand-alone entity on some component platform that implements the component model. This usually means that the component is a binary component that does not have to be compiled before it is deployed. Components have to be fully documented so that potential users of the component can decide whether or not they meet their needs. The syntax and, ideally, the semantics of all component interfaces have to be specified.
Documented
Component interfaces
Provides interface
Defines the services that are provided by the component to other components.
Requires interface
Defines the services that must be made available for the component to execute as specified.
Component interfaces
Requires int erface Defines the services from the com ponents environm ent that it uses Com ponent
Provides int erface Defines the services that are provided by the com ponent to other com ponents
Provides/requires interfaces
These interfaces are NOT the same as input/output interfaces. Both of these interfaces define both the inputs needed and the outputs produced by the provided and required services Requires
You can think of this as defining the methods that are called by a component or before a component executes
Provides
You can think of this as defining how the component is called.
A data collector component

Requires int erface Provides int erface addSensor rem oveSensor star tSensor stopSensor testSensor initialise report listAll
sensorManagem ent Data collector sensorData
Components and objects

Components are deployable entities. Components do not define types. Component implementations are opaque. Components are language-independent. Components are standardised.
Component models
A component model is a definition of standards for component implementation, documentation and deployment. Examples of component models
EJB model (Enterprise Java Beans) COM+ model (.NET model) Corba Component Model
The component model specifies how interfaces should be defined and the elements that should be included in an interface definition.
Elements of a component model

Custom isation Naming convention Com position Interace f definition Specific interaces f Meta-data access U sage inform ation Com ponent m odel Docum entation Packag ing Evolution support
Interaces f
Deploym ent and use
Middleware support
Component models are the basis for middleware that provides support for executing components. Component model implementations provide:
Platform services that allow components written according to the model to communicate; Horizontal services that are application-independent services used by different components.
To use services provided by a model, components are deployed in a container. This is a set of interfaces used to access the service implementations.
Component model services

Horizontal services Component m anagement Concurrency Transaction m anagement Persistence Resource management Security
Platform services Addressing Interface definition Exception Com ponent management com munications
Component development for reuse

Components are rarely created by simply using part of the code of another application system Rather, components for reuse have to be specifically developed so that they are reusable across a range of applications

Components developed for a specific application usually have to be generalised to make them reusable. A component is most likely to be reusable if it associated with a stable domain abstraction (business object). For example, in a hospital stable domain abstractions are associated with the fundamental purpose nurses, patients, treatments, etc.

Components for reuse may be specially constructed by generalising existing components. Component reusability Should reflect stable domain abstractions; Should hide state representation; Should be as independent as possible; Should publish exceptions through the component interface. There is a trade-off between reusability and usability The more general the interface, the greater the reusability but it is then more complex and hence less usable.
Changes for reusability

Remove application-specific methods. Change names to make them general. Add methods to broaden coverage. Make exception handling consistent. Add a configuration interface for component adaptation. Integrate required components to reduce dependencies.
Legacy system components

Existing legacy systems that fulfil a useful business function can be re-packaged as components for reuse. This involves writing a wrapper component that implements provides and requires interfaces then accesses the legacy system. Although costly, this can be much less expensive than rewriting the legacy system. We will return to issues of legacy system reuse in the discussion of service-oriented systems.
Reusable components
The development cost of reusable components may be higher than the cost of specific equivalents. This extra reusability enhancement cost should be an organization rather than a project cost. Generic components may be less space-efficient and may have longer execution times than their specific equivalents.
CBSE Processes
As discussed, conventional software engineering processes have to be adapted for reuse.
The CBSE process

When reusing components, it is essential to make trade-offs between ideal requirements and the services actually provided by available components. This involves:
Developing outline requirements; Searching for components then modifying requirements according to available functionality. Searching again to find if there are better components that meet the revised requirements.
The CBSE process

Modify requir m ents e accor ding to discovered com ponents
Outline system requir m ents e
Identify candidate com ponents
Architectur al design
Identify candidate com ponents
Com pose com ponents to create system
The component identification process
Component search
Component selection
Component validation
Component identification issues

Trust. You need to be able to trust the supplier of a component. At best, an untrusted component may not operate as advertised; at worst, it can breach your security. Requirements. Different groups of components will satisfy different requirements. Validation.
The component specification may not be detailed enough to allow comprehensive tests to be developed. Components may have unwanted functionality. How can you test this will not interfere with your application?
Component composition
Designing a system by integrating a number of components.
Component composition
The process of assembling components to create a system. Composition involves integrating components with each other and with the component infrastructure. Normally you have to write glue code to integrate components.
Types of composition
Sequential composition where the composed components are executed in sequence. This involves composing the provides interfaces of each component. Hierarchical composition where one component calls on the services of another. The provides interface of one component is composed with the requires interface of another. Additive composition where the interfaces of two components are put together to create a new component.
Types of composition
(a)
(b)
(c)
Sequential composition
In this case, the components are executed in sequence to provide some required effect The outputs from the provides interface from the first component executed become the inputs for the provides interface for the 2nd unit called (perhaps with some modification through an adapter component) Each component is executed independently and does not have to be aware of the other components in the sequence.
Hierarchical composition
In this case, one component (defined in the requires interface) is called directly from within the body of the other component. The calling component must know the name and the interface signature of the called component.
Additive composition
In this case, we put two components together so that the provides interface includes operations that come from both of the composed components. Essentially, this is normally implemented by defining a new small component that offers the combined interface and which than calls one of the composed components, depending on the call to the composed component.
Interface incompatibility
Parameter incompatibility where operations have the same name but are of different types. Operation incompatibility where the names of operations in the composed interfaces are different. Operation incompleteness where the provides interface of one component is a subset of the requires interface of another.
Incompatible components
string location(string pn) string owner (string pn) string proper ype (string pn) tyT
phoneDatabase (string com m and) addressFinder
m apDB (string com m and) m apper
displayMap (string postCode, scale) printMap (string postCode, scale)
Incompatibility
The component addressFinder through its location method produces a string which is the address of the property, including street number and name and town The component mapper through its displayMap method, expects a string which is a postcode only (not a complete address)
Adaptor components
Address the problem of component incompatibility by reconciling the interfaces of the components that are composed. Different types of adaptor are required depending on the type of composition. An addressFinder and a mapper component may be composed through an adaptor (called postCodeStripper) that strips the postal code from an address and passes this to the mapper component.
Composition through an adaptor

The component postCodeStripper is the adaptor that facilitates the sequential composition of addressFinder and mapper components.
Adaptor for data collector
star t sensor stop getdata
sensorManagem ent
addSensor rem oveSensor star tSensor Data collector stopSensor testSensor initialise report listAll
Adapter sensorData
Adaptor functionality
The data collector component requires a sensorManagement component that provides facilities to stop and start sensors and to query sensors for data The adapter component in this case turns a string of sensor management commands e.g. sensor.stop into the commands required for a specific sensor device.
Interface semantics
You have to rely on component documentation to decide if interfaces that are syntactically compatible are actually compatible. Consider an interface for a PhotoLibrary component:
public void addItem (Identifier pid ; Photograph p; CatalogEntry photodesc) ; public Photograph retrieve (Identifier pid) ; public CatalogEntry catEntry (Identifier pid) ;
Photo library composition
addItem Photo Library retrieve catEntry adaptor
getImage
Image Manager
getCatalogEntry U ser Interface
Photo Library documentation

This method adds a photograph to the library and associates the photograph identifier and catalogue descriptor with the photograph. what happens if the photograph identifier is already associated with a photograph in the library? is the photograph descriptor associated with the catalogue entry as well as the photograph i.e. if I delete the photograph, do I also delete the catalogue information?
The Object Constraint Language

The Object Constraint Language (OCL) has been designed to define constraints that are associated with UML models. It is based around the notion of pre and post condition specification - similar to the approach used in Z as described in Chapter 10.
Formal description of photo library
Photo library conditions

As specified, the OCL associated with the Photo Library component states that:
There must not be a photograph in the library with the same identifier as the photograph to be entered; The library must exist - assume that creating a library adds a single item to it; Each new entry increases the size of the library by 1; If you retrieve using the same identifier then you get back the photo that you added; If you look up the catalogue using that identifier, then you get back the catalogue entry that you made.
Composition trade-offs
When composing components, you may find conflicts between functional and non-functional requirements, and conflicts between the need for rapid delivery and system evolution. You need to make decisions such as:
What composition of components is effective for delivering the functional requirements? What composition of components allows for future change? What will be the emergent properties of the composed system?
Data collection and report generation

(a) Report generator
Data collection
Data m anagement
Report
(b)
Data collection
Data base
Report
Composition trade-offs
For composition (a), reporting and data management are separate so there is more flexibility if changes in one of these functions but not the other have to be made. For composition (b), there are fewer discrete components so faster communications within the component offering both data management and report generation.
Key points
CBSE is a reuse-based approach to defining and implementing loosely coupled components into systems. A component is a software unit whose functionality and dependencies are completely defined by its interfaces. A component model defines a set of standards that component providers and composers should follow. During the CBSE process, the processes of requirements engineering and system design are interleaved.
Key points
Component composition is the process of wiring components together to create a system. When composing reusable components, you normally have to write adaptors to reconcile different component interfaces. When choosing compositions, you have to consider required functionality, non-functional requirements and system evolution.
Creates a standard virtual boundary around application component implementations that interact only via welldefined interfaces
Solution: Component Middleware

Define standard container mechanisms needed to execute components in generic component servers
Specify the infrastructure needed to configure & deploy components throughout a distributed system
Container
<ComponentAssemblyDescription id="a_HUDDisplay"> ... <connection> <name>GPS-RateGen</name> <internalEndPoint><portName>Refresh</portName><instance>a_GPS</instance></internalEndPoint> <internalEndPoint><portName>Pulse</portName><instance>a_RateGen</instance></internalEndPoint> </connection> <connection> <name>NavDisplay-GPS</name> <internalEndPoint><portName>Refresh</portName><instance>a_NavDisplay</instance></internalEndPoint> <internalEndPoint><portName>Ready</portName><instance>a_GPS</instance></internalEndPoint> </connection> ... </ComponentAssemblyDescription>
Birdseye View of Component Middleware

Components encapsulate application business logic Components interact via ports Provided interfaces, e.g.,facets Required connection points, e.g., receptacles Event sinks & sources Attributes Containers provide execution environment for components with common operating requirements Components/containers can also Communicate via a middleware bus & Reuse common middleware services
Container Container
Middleware Bus
Replication A/V Streaming Security Persistence Notification
Scheduling
Load Balancing
Component middleware defines interfaces, policies, & some implementations
Component-based Software: Component

Component Modular Encapsulates its contents Replaceable black box, conformance defined by interface compatibility Component Interface Ports consist of provided interfaces (facets) & required (used) interfaces (receptacles) Attributes Component Implementation Monolithic (i.e., executable software) or Assembly-based (a set of interconnected subcomponents)
CCM Features Retained in LwCCM Subset

All types of ports, i.e., Facets Receptacles Event sources & sinks Attributes
Facets Component Reference Event Receptacles Sources Component Home
Generic port management operations in CCMObject Monolithic implementations Session/service component/ container types
Attributes
Container
Required Sends Ports To
Component homes
Receives Offered From Ports
Event Sinks
Component Integrated ACE ORB Lightweight CCM implementation atop TAO Supports component-oriented paradigm for DRE applications Provides Real-time CORBA policies & mechanisms required for DRE applications
Overview of CIAO
Key DRE aspects are supported as first-class metadata First official release (CIAO 0.4) was at end of December 2003 Latest release is downloadable from deuce.doc.wustl.edu/Download.html
Architecture presentations in practice

By and large two flavors:
Powerpoint slides for managers, users, consultants, etc UML diagrams, for technicians
A small sample
106
107
108
109
110
111
So,
Different representations For different people For different purposes These representations are both descriptive and prescriptive
112
IEEE model for architectural descriptions

Mission
Environment
System
Architecture
Stakeholder
Architecture Description
Rationale
Concern
Viewpoint
View
Library Viewpoint
Model
113
Some terms (from IEEE standard)

System stakeholder: an individual, team, or organization (or classes hereof) with interests in, or concerns relative to, a system. View: a representation of a whole system from the perspective of a related set of concerns. Viewpoint: A viewpoint establishes the purposes and audience for a view and the techniques or methods employed in constructing a view.
114
Stakeholders
Architect Requirements engineer Designer (also of other systems) Implementor Tester, integrator Maintainer Manager Quality assurance people
115
Viewpoint specification
Viewpoint name Stakeholders addressed Concerns addressed Language, modeling techniques
116
Kruchtens 4+1 view model

End-user Functionality Programmers Software management
Logical Viewpoint
Implementation Viewpoint Scenarios
Process Viewpoint
Integrators Performance Scalability
Deployment Viewpoint
System engineers Topology Communications
117
118
119
Checklist for Architecture Reviews
120
121
122
4 + 1: Logical Viewpoint
The logical viewpoint supports the functional requirements, i.e., the services the system should provide to its end users. Typically, it shows the key abstractions (e.g., classes and interactions amongst them).
123
4 + 1: Process Viewpoint
Addresses concurrent aspects at runtime (tasks, threads, processes and their interactions) It takes into account some nonfunctional requirements, such as performance, system availability, concurrency and distribution, system integrity, and fault-tolerance.
124
4 + 1: Deployment Viewpoint
The deployment viewpoint defines how the various elements identified in the logical, process, and implementation viewpoints-networks, processes, tasks, and objects-must be mapped onto the various nodes. It takes into account the system's nonfunctional requirements such as system availability, reliability (fault-tolerance), performance (throughput), and scalability.
125
4 + 1: Implementation Viewpoint
The imlementation viewpoint focuses on the organization of the actual software modules in the software-development environment. The software is packaged in small chunks-program libraries or subsystems-that can be developed by one or more developers.
126
4 + 1: Scenario Viewpoint
The scenario viewpoint consists of a small subset of important scenarios (e.g., use cases) to show that the elements of the four viewpoints work together seamlessly. This viewpoint is redundant with the other ones (hence the "+1"), but it plays two critical roles:
it acts as a driver to help designers discover architectural elements during the architecture design; it validates and illustrates the architecture design, both on paper and as the starting point for the tests of an architectural prototype.
127
Architectural views from Bass et al (view = representation of a structure)

Module views
Module is unit of implementation Decomposition, uses, layered, class
Component and connector (C & C) views

These are runtime elements Process (communication), concurrency, shared data (repository), client-server
Allocation views
Relationship between software elements and environment Work assignment, deployment, implementation
128
Module views
Decomposition: units are related by is a submodule of, larger modules are composed of smaller ones Uses: relation is uses (calls, passes information to, etc). Important for modifiability Layered is special case of uses, layer n can only use modules from layers <n Class: generalization, relation inherits from
129
Component and connector views

Process: units are processes, connected by communication or synchronization Concurrency: to determine opportunities for parallelism (connector = logical thread) Shared data: shows how data is produced and consumed Client-server: cooperating clients and servers
130
Allocation views
Deployment: how software is assigned to hardware elements Implementation: how software is mapped onto file structures Work assignment: who is doing what
131
How to decide on which viewpoints

What are the stakeholders and their concerns? Which viewpoints address these concerns? Prioritize and possibly combine viewpoints
132
Decision visualization
133
Business viewpoint
134
A caveat on quality
A view can be used to assess one or more quality attributes E.g., some type of module view can be used to assess modifiability It should then expose the design decisions that affect this quality attribute
135
Overview
136
Architectural styles
An architectural style is a description of component and connector types and a pattern of their runtime control and/or data transfer. Examples:
main program with subroutines data abstraction implicit invocation pipes and filters repository (blackboard) layers of abstraction
137
Alexanders patterns
There is abundance evidence to show that high buildings make people crazy. High buildings have no genuine advantage, except in speculative gains. They are not cheaper, they do not help to create open space, they make life difficult for children, they wreck the open spaces near them. But quite apart from this, empirical evidence shows that they can actually damage peoples minds and feelings. In any urban area, keep the majority of buildings four stories high or less. It is possible that certain buildings should exceed this limit, but they should never be buildings for human habitation.
138
General flavor of a pattern

IF you find yourself in <context>, for example <examples>, with <problem> THEN for some <reasons>, apply <pattern> to construct a solution leading to a <new context> and <other patterns>
139
Components and Connectors
Components are connected by connectors. They are the building blocks with which an architecture can be described. No standard notation has emerged yet.
140
Types of components
computational: does a computation of some sort. E.g. function, filter. memory: maintains a collection of persistent data. E.g. data base, file system, symbol table. manager: contains state + operations. State is retained between invocations of operations. E.g. adt, server. controller: governs time sequence of events. E.g. control module, scheduler.
141
Types of connectors
procedure call (including RPC) data flow (e.g. pipes) implicit invocation message passing shared data (e.g. blackboard or shared data base) instantiation
142
Framework for describing architectural styles

problem: type of problem that the style addresses. Characteristics of the reqss guide the designer in his choice for a particular style. context: characteristics of the environment that constrain the designer, reqs imposed by the style. solution: in terms of components and connectors (choice not independent), and control structure (order of execution of components) variants examples
143
Main-program-with-subroutines style
problem: hierarchy of functions; result of functional decomposition, single thread of control context: language with nested procedures solution:
system model: modules in a hierarchy, may be weak or strong, coupling/cohesion arguments components: modules with local data, as well as global data connectors: procedure call control structure: single thread, centralized control: main program pulls the strings
variants: OO versus non-OO
144
Abstract-data-type style
problem: identify and protect related bodies of information. Data representations likely to change. context: OO-methods which guide the design, OO-languages which provide the class-concept solution:
system model: component has its own local data (= secret it hides) components: managers (servers, objects, adts) connectors: procedure call (message) control structure: single thread, usually; control is decentralized
variants: caused by language facilities
145
Implicit-invocation style
problem: loosely coupled collection of components. Useful for applications which must be reconfigurable. context: requires event handler, through OS or language. solution:
system model: independent, reactive processes, invoked when an event is raised components: processes that signal events and react to events connectors: automatic invocation control structure: decentralized control. Components do not know who is going to react.
variants: Tool-integration frameworks, and languages with special features.

146
Pipes-and-filters style
problem: independent, sequential transformations on ordered data. Usually incremental, Ascii pipes. context: series of incremental transformations. OS-functions transfer data between processes. Error-handling difficult. solution:
system model: continuous data flow; components incrementally transform data components: filters for local processing connectors: data streams (usually plain ASCII) control structure: data flow between components; component has own flow
variants: From pure filters with little internal state to batch processes
147
Repository style
Client
Shared Data
Client
Client
problem: manage richly structured information, to be manipulated in many different ways. Data is long-lived. context: shared data to be acted upon by multiple clients solution:
system model: centralized body of information. Independent computational elements. components: one memory, many computational connectors: direct access or procedure call control structure: varies, may depend on input or state of computation
variants: traditional data base systems, compilers, blackboard
148
Layered style
Layern Layer2 Layer1
problem: distinct, hierarchical classes of services. Concentric circles of functionality context: a large system that requires decomposition (e.g., virtual machines, OSI model) solution:
system model: hierarchy of layers, often limited visibility components: collections of procedures (module) connectors: (limited) procedure calls control structure: single or multiple threads
variants: relaxed layering

149
Model-View-Controller (MVC) style

Controller n Model View n
problem: separation of UI from application is desirable due to expected UI adaptations context: interactive applications with a flexible UI solution:
system model: UI (View and Controller Component(s)) is decoupled from the application (Model component) components: collections of procedures (module) connectors: procedure calls control structure: single thread
variants: Document-View
150
Overview
What is it, why bother? Architecture Design Viewpoints and view models Architectural styles
Architecture asssessment Role of the software architect
151
Architecture evaluation/analysis
Assess whether architecture meets certain quality goals, such as those w.r.t. maintainability, modifiability, reliability, performance Mind: the architecture is assessed, while we hope the results will hold for a system yet to be built
152
Software Architecture Analysis

Software architecture
implementation
System
Properties
properties
Qualities
153
Analysis techniques
Questioning techniques: how does the system react to various situations; often make use of scenarios Measuring techniques: rely on quantitative measures; architecture metrics, simulation, etc
154
Scenarios in Architecture Analysis

Different types of scenarios, e.g. use-cases, likely changes, stress situations, risks, far-into-the-future scenarios Which stakeholders to ask for scenarios? When do you have enough scenarios?
155
Preconditions for successful assessment

Clear goals and requirements for the architecture Controlled scope Cost-effectiveness Key personnel availability Competent evaluation team Managed expectations
156
Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM)

Reveals how well architecture satisfies quality goals, how well quality attributes interact, i.e. how they trade off Elicits business goals for system and its architecture Uses those goals and stakeholder participation to focus attention to key portions of the architecture
157
Benefits
Financial gains Forced preparation Captured rationale Early detection of problems Validation of requirements Improved architecture
158
Participants in ATAM
Evaluation team Decision makers Architecture stakeholders
159
Phases in ATAM
0: partnership, preparation (informally) 1: evaluation (evaluation team + decision makers, one day) 2: evaluation (evaluation team + decision makers + stakeholders, two days) 3: follow up (evaluation team + client)
160
Steps in ATAM (phase 1 and 2)

Present method Present business drivers (by project manager of system) Present architecture (by lead architect) Identify architectural approaches/styles Generate quality attribute utility tree (+ priority, and how difficult) Analyze architectural approaches Brainstorm and prioritize scenarios Analyze architectural approaches Present results
161
Example Utility tree

Performance
Transaction response time (H, M) Throughput 150 transactions/sec
Training
Utility
Usability
Normal operations
Maintainability
Database vendor releases new version
162
Outputs of ATAM
Concise presentation of the architecture Articulation of business goals Quality requirements expressed as set of scenarios Mapping of architectural decisions to quality requirements Set of sensitivity points and tradeoff points Set of risks, nonrisks, risk themes
163
Important concepts in ATAM

Sensitivity point: decision/property critical for certain quality attribute Tradeoff point: decision/property that affects more than one quality attribute Risk: decision/property that is a potential problem These concepts are overlapping
164
Software Architecture Analysis Method (SAAM)

Develop scenarios for
kinds of activities the system must support kinds of changes anticipated
Describe architecture(s) Classify scenarios

direct -- use requires no change indirect -- use requires change
Evaluate indirect scenarios: changes and cost Reveal scenario interaction Overall evaluation
165
Scenario interaction in SAAM

Two (indirect) scenarios interact if they require changes to the same component Scenario interaction is important for two reasons:
Exposes allocation of functionality to the design Architecture might not be at right level of detail
166
Overview
What is it, why bother? Architecture Design Viewpoints and view models Architectural styles Architecture asssessment
Role of the software architect
167
Role of the software architect

Key technical consultant Make decisions Coach of development team Coordinate design Implement key parts Advocate software architecture
168
Summary
new and immature field proliferation of terms: architecture - design pattern framework - idiom architectural styles and design pattern describe (how are things done) as well as prescribe (how should things be done) stakeholder communication early evaluation of a design transferable abstraction
169
Further reading
Mary Shaw and David Garlan, Software Architecture; Perspectives of an Emerging Discipline, 1995. Philippe B. Kruchten, The 4+1 view model of architecture, IEEE Software, 12(6):42-50, November 1995. Frank Buschmann et al., Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture: A System of Patterns, 1996. Part II: 2001. Erich Gamma et al., Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software, 1995. Len Bass et al, Sofware Architecture in Practice, 2003 (2nd edition). C. Hofmeister et al., Applied Software Architecture, 1999. Jan Bosch, Design & Use of Software Architectures, 2000.
170

Doradjen Pregled Kursa I Tipovi Arhitektura 100 Slajdova

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Doradjen Pregled Kursa I Tipovi Arhitektura 100 Slajdova

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Software Architecture

Dr Ljubomir Lazi , Docent

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

The Role of the Architect

requirements client, users assess architect creates

solutions developers assess

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Pre-architecture life cycle

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Adding architecture, the easy way

agreement architecture detailed design implementation development

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Architecture in the life cycle

architecture agreement development

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Why Is Architecture Important?

Architecture is a transferable abstraction of a system

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Where did it start?

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Software architecture, definition (1)

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Software Architecture, definition (2)

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

The definition does not include:

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Software Architecture, definition (3)

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Other points of view

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Software Architecture & Quality

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Attribute-Driven Design (Bass et al, Ch 7)

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007

Example ADD iterations

Doc. Dr Ljubomir Lazi

Kljent Server Sistemi (Softverske Arhitekture) @ 2007