Advertisement

Component-Based Architecting for Distributed Real-Time Systems

How to achieve composability?
  • Dieter K. Hammer
Chapter
Part of the The Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science book series (SECS, volume 648)

Abstract

In systems- and software architecting, architecture can be viewed as a high-level design that supports the construction of ICT-systems. Starting from a list of general requirements, the first part of this chapter gives an overview of the dimensions of such a design. In addition, the various, often contradicting, architectural views that are relevant for the various stakeholders are discussed. Special emphasis is given to the modeling of the system behavior and the dependability constraints. The second part of this chapter summarizes the requirements that binary components must fulfill in order to be composable in the context of dependable distributed real-time systems. Thereby, the emphasis is on timeliness and reliability. It is argued that in order to achieve composability, resource requirements and non-functional properties are of equal importance as functionality. In addition, the architectural styles that govern the interaction of components with their environment must be specified. A method for constructing the collective behavior of a set of components and achieving composability is sketched and demonstrated by means of an example.

Keywords

Architecture architectural views components composability dependability design space design method distributed real-time systems embedded systems emergent properties interfaces non-functional constraints stakeholders system behavior 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Len Bass, Paul Clements, and Rick Kazman, Software Architecture in Practice, Addison-Wesley, 1998.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    L. Bergmans and M. Akşit, Composing Synchronization and Real-Time Constraints, to be published in Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, September 1996.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barry Boehm and Chris Abts, COTS Integration: Plug and Pray?, IEEE Computer, January 1999.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Grady Booch, James Rumbaugh, Ivar Jacobson, The Unified Modeling Language User Guide, Addison Wesley, 1999.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R.J.A. Buhr and R.S. Casselman, Use Case Maps for Object-Oriented Systems, Prentice-Hall, 1996.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bruce Powell Douglass, Doing Hard-Time: Designing and Implementing Embedded Systems with UML, Addison-Wesley, 1999.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    K.H. Ecker and D.K. Hammer, A Polynomial Time Scheduling Algorithm based on Refinement of Schedules, Int. Conference of the Institute for Management Sciences (TIMS XXXII), Anchorage, Alaska, USA, June 1994.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    F. Ehrens, The Synthesis of Variety, PhD Thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, 1996.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. Garlan, R. Allen and J. Ockerbloom, Architectural Mismatch: Why Reuse is So Hard, IEEE Software, November 1995.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dieter K. Hammer, Andrew A. Hanish and Tharam S. Dillon “Modeling Behavior and Dependability of Object-Oriented Real-Time Systems”, Special Issue on Real Time Object-Oriented Systems of the Int. Journal of Computer Systems Science and Engineering (IJCSSE), Jan. 1998.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    H. Hegge, Intelligent Product Family Descriptions for Business Applications, PhD Thesis (in dutch), Eindhoven University of Technology, 1994.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Recommendation Z.120, Message Sequence Charts, International Telecommunication Union, Geneva 1996.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Recommendation Z.120, Message Sequence Charts, Proposal, International Telecommunication Union, Geneva 2000.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    I. Jacobson et al., Object-Oriented Software Engineering: A Case driven Approach, Addison-Wesley, 1992.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Krishna Kavi, James C. Brouwne and Anand Tripathi, Computer Systems Research: The Pressure Is On, IEEE Computer, January 1999.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. Klein e.a., A Practitioner’s Handbook for Real-Time Analysis, Guide to Rate Monotonic Analysis for Real-Time Systems, Kluwer, 1993.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Herman Kopetz, Real-Time Systems: Design Principles for Distributed Embedded Applications, Kluwer, 1997.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Herman Kopetz, The Time-Triggered Architecture, Proc. First IEEE Int. Symposium on Object-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing (ISORC), Kyoto, April 1998.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Philip Kruchten, The 4+1 View Model of Architecture, IEEE Software, Vol. 12, No. 6, November 1995.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Philip Kruchten, The Rational Unified Process: An Introduction, Addison-Wesley, 1998.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    J.C. Laprie, Dependability: Basic Concepts and Terminology, Springer, 1992.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bertrand Meyer, Object-Oriented Software Construction, Prentice-Hall, 1997.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    David. L. Parnas “On the Criteria To Be Used in Decomposing Systems into Modules, Comm. ACM, vol. 15, no. 12, pp. 1053–1058, December 1972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    David. L. Parnas, On the Design and Development of Program Families, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. SE-2, no. 1, pp. 1–9, March 1976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dewayne E. Perry and Alexander L. Wolf, Foundations for the study of Software Architecture, ACM Sigsoft Notes, Vol. 17, No. 4, October 1992.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Eberhardt Rechtin and Mark Maier, The Art of Systems Architecting, CRC Press (London), 1997.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    S. Ren, G.A. Agha and M. Saito, A Modular Approach for Programming Distributed Real-Time Systems, to be published in Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, September 1996.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Herbert A. Simon, The Science of the Artificial, MIT Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Alexei Sintotski, Dieter Hammer, Jozef Hooman, Onno van Roosmalen, DEAL: an Object-Oriented Real-Time Language, to be submitted.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mary Shaw, Larger Scale Systems require Higher Level Abstractions, ACM Sigsoft Notes, Vol. 14, No.3, May 1989.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Clemens Szyperski, Component Software: Beyond Object-Oriented Software, Addison-Wesley, 1998.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    J.P. Verhoosel, D.K. Hammer, E.J. Luit, L.R. Welch and A.D. Stoyenko, A Model for Scheduling of Object-Based Distributed Real-Time Systems, Journal of Real-Time Systems, Vol. 8, Nr. 1, Jan. 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dieter K. Hammer
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computing ScienceEindhoven University of TechnologyEindhoventhe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations