Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
research-article

Context-aware composite SaaS using feature model

Published: 01 October 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Software as a Service (SaaS) in cloud computing is delivered in a composite form to effectively address complex levels of user’s requirements. Composite SaaS runs in a dynamic distributed cloud environment where the quality of service (QoS) properties of the constituents may get violated at runtime. To face such dynamism and volatility, it is vital to support an online adaptation of composite SaaS. Recent research focused on centralized adaptation approaches based on the closed world assumption that the boundary between SaaS and the cloud environment is known. This is impractical for dynamic composition that requires distributed settings in the open world. To address these challenges, this paper proposes a distributed approach for composite SaaS adaptation applying the master/slave pattern. Slaves locally monitor and adapt the distributed SaaS constituents and send performance information to the master, which adapts the composite service to provide the global expected QoS and monitors the overall performance. To support dynamic adaptation by the master, we propose a solution based on the feature model that captures the variability of the composite SaaS. The activation and deactivation of nodes in the feature model reconfigure the workflow of the composition. Since the reconfiguration task is complex, we apply a meta-heuristic search technique to solve this problem while minimizing the adaptation cost (i.e., resource consumption and violation penalties). Furthermore, we propose an adaption approach for SaaS constituents that substitutes the failed ones promptly to avoid costly global SLA violations. Finally, we present a Kalman-based on-line QoS prediction approach for making decisions regarding the adaptation actions to be taken. Experimental results show that our approach is efficient in distributed and large-scale cloud environments compared to the centralized and off-line approaches.

Highlights

Introduce a distributed adaptation process to manage the composite SaaS adaptation.
Solve global adaptation using feature model and multi-objective optimization.
Introduce local adaptation process for prompt substitution of failed constituents.
Improve QoS prediction accuracy by using influence factors from Cloud environments.

References

[1]
Foster I., Zhao Y., Raicu I., Lu S., Cloud computing and grid computing 360-degree compared, in: 2008 Grid Computing Environments Workshop, 2008, pp. 1–10.
[2]
González L.M.V., Rodero-Merino L., Caceres J., Lindner M.A., A break in the clouds: towards a cloud definition, Comput. Commun. Rev. 39 (1) (2009) 50–55.
[3]
Zeng L., Benatallah B., Ngu A.H. H., Dumas M., Kalagnanam J., Chang H., QoS-Aware middleware for web services composition, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 30 (5) (2004) 311–327.
[4]
Müller C., Oriol M., Franch X., Marco J., Resinas M., Cortés A.R., Rodríguez M., Comprehensive explanation of SLA violations at runtime, IEEE Trans. Serv. Comput. 7 (2) (2014) 168–183.
[5]
Jatoth C., Gangadharan G.R., Buyya R., Computational intelligence based qos-aware web service composition: A systematic literature review, IEEE Trans. Serv. Comput. 10 (3) (2017) 475–492.
[6]
Cremenea M., Suciu M., Pallez D., Dumitrescub D., Comparative analysis of multi-objective evolutionary algorithms for qos-aware web service composition, Appl. Soft Comput. 39 (2016) 124–139.
[7]
Cho J.H., Ko H.G., Ko I.Y., Adaptive service selection according to the service density in multiple qos aspects, IEEE Trans. Serv. Comput. 9 (6) (2016) 883–894.
[8]
Mousa A., Bentahar J., An efficient QoS-aware web services selection using social spider algorithm, in: The 11th International Conference on Future Networks and Communications (FNC 2016) / the 13th International Conference on Mobile Systems and Pervasive Computing (MobiSPC 2016) / Affiliated Workshops, August 15-18, 2016, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2016, pp. 176–182.
[9]
Taghavi M., Bentahar J., Otrok H., Wahab O.A., Mourad A., On the effects of user ratings on the profitability of cloud services, in: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Web Services, ICWS 2017, Honolulu, HI, USA, June 25-30, 2017, 2017, pp. 1–8.
[10]
Chen B., Peng X., Yu Y., Zhao W., Requirements driven self-optimization of composite services using feedback control, IEEE Trans. Serv. Comput. 8 (1) (2015) 107–120.
[11]
Cardellini V., Casalicchio E., Grassi V., Iannucci S., Presti F.L., Mirandola R., MOSES: A framework for QoS driven runtime adaptation of service-oriented systems, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 38 (5) (2012) 1138–1159.
[12]
Hallsteinsen S., Hinchey M., Park S., Schmid K., Dynamic software product lines, in: Capilla Rafael, Bosch Jan, Kang Kyo-Chul (Eds.), Systems and Software Variability Management: Concepts, Tools and Experiences, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2013, pp. 253–260.
[13]
Kyo C. Kang, Sholom G. Cohen, James A. Hess, William E. Novak, A. Spencer Peterson, Feature-oriented domain analysis (FODA) feasibility study, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Tech. Rep. Technical Report CMU/SEI-90-TR-021, 1990.
[14]
Kephart J.O., Chess D.M., The vision of autonomic computing, Computer 36 (1) (2003) 41–50.
[15]
Simon D., Optimal State Estimation: Kalman, H Infinity, and Nonlinear Approaches, Wiley, 2006.
[16]
Mousa A., Bentahar J., Alam O., Multi-objective self-adaptive composite saas using feature model, in: 2018 IEEE 6th International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud (FiCloud), 2018, pp. 77–84.
[17]
Alfrez G.H., Pelechano V., Mazo R., Salinesi C., Diaz D., Dynamic adaptation of service compositions with variability models, J. Syst. Softw. 91 (2014) 24–47.
[18]
Alfrez G.H., Pelechano V., Achieving autonomic web service compositions with models at runtime, Comput. Electr. Eng. 63 (2017) 332–352.
[19]
Barakat L., Miles S., Luck M., Adaptive composition in dynamic service environments, Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 80 (2018) 215–228.
[20]
Pernici B., Siadat S.H., Adaptation of web services based on QoS satisfaction, in: Maximilien E. Michael, Rossi Gustavo, Yuan Soe-Tsyr, Ludwig Heiko, Fantinato Marcelo (Eds.), Service-Oriented Computing: ICSOC 2010 International Workshops, PAASC, WESOA, SEE, and SOC-LOG, San Francisco, CA, USA, December 7-10, 2010, Revised Selected Papers, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 65–75.
[21]
He Q., Yan J., Jin H., Yang Y., Adaptation of web service composition based on workflow patterns, in: Bouguettaya Athman, Krueger Ingolf, Margaria Tiziana (Eds.), Service-Oriented Computing – ICSOC 2008: 6th International Conference, Sydney, Australia, December 1-5, 2008. Proceedings, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008, pp. 22–37.
[22]
Zhu J., He P., Zheng Z., Lyu M.R., Online qos prediction for runtime service adaptation via adaptive matrix factorization, IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 28 (10) (2017) 2911–2924.
[23]
Zheng Z., Ma H., Lyu M.R., King I., Collaborative web service qos prediction via neighborhood integrated matrix factorization, IEEE Trans. Serv. Comput. (ISSN ) 6 (3) (2013) 289–299,.
[24]
Wang C., Pazat J.L., A two-phase online prediction approach for accurate and timely adaptation decision, in: 2012 IEEE Ninth International Conference on Services Computing, 2012, pp. 218–225.
[25]
Li G.S., Wang N., Web service qos prediction with adaptive Calibration, in: 2015 International Conference on Computer Science and Applications (CSA), 2015, pp. 351–356.
[26]
Czarnecki K., Helsen S., Eisenecker U., Formalizing cardinality-based feature models and their specialization, Softw. Process.: Improv. Pract. 10 (1) (2005) 7–29.
[27]
Bosch J., Design and use of software architectures: adopting and evolving a product-line approach, Addison-Wesley, 2000.
[28]
Benavides D., Trinidad P., Ruiz-Cortés A., Automated reasoning on feature models, in: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, in: CAiSE’05, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2005, pp. 491–503,. Online.
[29]
Cubo J., Pimentel E., DAMASCO: A framework for the automatic composition of component-based and service-oriented architectures, in: Crnkovic Ivica, Gruhn Volker, Book Matthias (Eds.), Software Architecture, in: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6903, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 388–404.
[30]
White J., Strowd H.D., Schmidt D.C., Creating self-healing service compositions with feature models and microrebooting, Int. J. Bus. Process. Integr. Manage. 4 (1) (2009) 35–46.
[31]
Benavides D., Martín-Arroyo P. Trinidad, Cortés A.R., Automated reasoning on feature models, in: Seminal Contributions To Information Systems Engineering, 2013.
[32]
Bentahar J., Maamar Z., Benslimane D., Thiran P., Using argumentative agents to manage communities of web services, in: 21st International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications (AINA 2007), Workshops Proceedings, Volume 2, May 21-23, 2007, Niagara Falls, Canada, 2007, pp. 588–593.
[33]
Khosravifar B., Bentahar J., Moazin A., Thiran P., Analyzing communities of web services using incentives, Int. J. Web Serv. Res. 7 (3) (2010) 30–51.
[34]
Jaeger M.C., Rojec-Goldmann G., Muhl G., Qos aggregation for web service composition using workflow patterns, in: Proceedings. Eighth IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, 2004. EDOC 2004., 2004, pp. 149–159.
[35]
Jang J., Shin D., Lee K., Fast quality driven selection of composite web services, in: 2006 European Conference on Web Services (ECOWS’06), 2006, pp. 87–98.
[36]
He Q., Han J., Yang Y., Jin H., Schneider J.G., Versteeg S., Formulating cost-effective monitoring strategies for service-based systems, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 40 (5) (2014) 461–482.
[37]
Wang Y., He Q., Ye D., Yang Y., Formulating criticality-based cost-effective monitoring strategies for multi-tenant service-based systems, in: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS), 2017, pp. 325–332.
[38]
Puttige V.R., Anavatti S.G., Comparison of real-time online and offline neural network models for a UAV, in: 2007 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, 2007, pp. 412–417.
[39]
Ju-Long D., Control problems of grey systems, Systems Control Lett. 1 (5) (1982) 288–294. Online. Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016769118280025X.
[40]
Wei G., Ling Y., Guo B., Xiao B., Vasilakos A.V., Prediction-based data aggregation in wireless sensor networks: combining grey model and kalman filter, Comput. Commun. 34 (6) (2011) 793–802. Online. Available http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140366410004330.
[42]
Lust T., Teghem J., The multiobjective multidimensional knapsack problem: a survey and a new approach, CoRR abs/1007.4063 (2010) Online. AvailablearXiv:1007.4063.
[43]
Tout H., Talhi C., Kara N., Mourad A., Selective mobile cloud offloading to augment multi-persona performance and viability, IEEE Trans. Cloud Comput. (2016) 1–1.
[44]
Deb K., Pratap A., Agarwal S., Meyarivan T., A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 6 (2) (2002) 182–197.
[45]
Li L., Yang P., Ou L., Zhang Z., Cheng P., Genetic algorithm-based multi-objective optimisation for qos-aware web services composition, in: Bi Yaxin, Williams Mary-Anne (Eds.), Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010, pp. 549–554.
[46]
cloudharmony. cloudharmony. [Online]. Available: http://cloudharmony.com/.
[47]
Salakhutdinov R., Mnih A., Probabilistic matrix factorization, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 20, Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2007, pp. 1257–1264.
[48]
M. Senn, WS-DREAM: Towards open datasets and source code for web service research. [Online]. Available: http://wsdream.github.io.

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)A Catalog of Performance Measures for Self-Adaptive SystemsProceedings of the XX Brazilian Symposium on Software Quality10.1145/3493244.3493259(1-10)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2021
  • (2019)Runtime Monitoring of Behavioral Properties in Dynamically Adaptive SystemsProceedings of the XXXIII Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering10.1145/3350768.3351798(377-386)Online publication date: 23-Sep-2019

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Future Generation Computer Systems
Future Generation Computer Systems  Volume 99, Issue C
Oct 2019
651 pages

Publisher

Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.

Netherlands

Publication History

Published: 01 October 2019

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 09 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)A Catalog of Performance Measures for Self-Adaptive SystemsProceedings of the XX Brazilian Symposium on Software Quality10.1145/3493244.3493259(1-10)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2021
  • (2019)Runtime Monitoring of Behavioral Properties in Dynamically Adaptive SystemsProceedings of the XXXIII Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering10.1145/3350768.3351798(377-386)Online publication date: 23-Sep-2019

View Options

View options

Get Access

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media