skip to main content
10.1145/1595696.1595734acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesfseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Ensuring interoperable service-oriented systems through engineered self-healing

Published:24 August 2009Publication History

ABSTRACT

Many modern software systems dynamically discover and integrate third party libraries, components and services that comply with standard APIs. Compliance with standard APIs facilitates dynamic binding, but does not always guarantee full behavioral compatibility. For instance, problems that derive from behavior incompatibility are quite frequent in service-oriented applications that dynamically bind service implementations that match API specifications.

This paper proposes a technique to engineer applications with a self-healing layer that dynamically reveals and fixes interoperability problems. The core elements of the technique are catalogs and a runtime infrastructure. Catalogs support developers in configuring the self-healing layers. The runtime infrastructure enacts the configured self-healing strategies. This paper discusses both the effectiveness of our solution and the relevance of the problem in the context of service-oriented applications, referring to a case study of Web2.0 social applications that integrate the standard APIs del.icio.us and OpenSocial. As an outcome of this experience we present an inconsistency catalog that supports the configuration of self-healing layers for Web2.0 applications.

References

  1. L. Baresi and S. Guinea. Towards dynamic monitoring of WS-BPEL processes. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Service Oriented Computing (ICSOC), pages 269--282, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. D. Beyer, A. Chakrabarti, and T. A. Henzinger. An interface formalism for web services. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Foundations of Interface Technologies (FIT), ENTCS. Elsevier, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. W. Chan, S. Cheung, and K. Leung. A metamorphic testing approach for online testing of service-oriented software applications. International Journal of Web Services Research, 4(2):61--81, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. S. Cheng, A. Huang, D. Garlan, B. R. Schmerl, and P. Steenkiste. Rainbow: Architecture-based self-adaptation with reusable infrastructure. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Autonomic Computing (ICAC), pages 276--277, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. K. Chow and D. Notkin. Semi-automatic update of applications in response to library changes. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM). IEEE Computer Society, Nov. 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. M. Chu, C. Murphy, and G. E. Kaiser. Distributed in vivo testing of software applications. In Proceeding of the International Conference on Software Testing, Verification, Validation (ICST), pages 509--512, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. J. Cobleigh, L. Osterweil, A. Wise, and B. S. Lerner. Containment units: a hierarchically composable architecture for adaptive systems. In Proceedings of the tenth Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE), pages 159--165. ACM Press, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. C. Dabrowski and K. Mills. Understanding self-healing in service-discovery systems. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Self-healing Systems (WOSS), 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. H. Foster, S. Uchitel, J. Magee, and J. Kramer. Compatibility verification for web service choreography. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Web Services (ICWS), pages 738--741, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. S. George, D. Evans, and L. Davidson. A biologically inspired programming model for self-healing systems. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Self-Healing Systems (WOSS), pages 102--104, Nov. 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. A. Haller, E. Cimpian, A. Mocan, E. Oren, and C. Bussler. WSMX - a semantic service-oriented architecture. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Web Services (ICWS), pages 321--328, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. P. Kaminski, H. Müller, and M. Litoiu. A design for adaptive web service evolution. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Self-adaptation and self-managing systems (SEAMS), pages 86--92, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. J. O. Kephart and D. M. Chess. The vision of autonomic computing. IEEE Computer, 36(1):41--50, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. G. Klyne and J. J. Carroll. Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and abstract syntax, W3C recommendation 10 Feb. 2004. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. D. Martin, M. Burstein, O. Lassila, M. Paolucci, T. Payne, and S. McIlraith. Describing web services using OWL-S and WSDL. In DAML-S Coalition working document, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. H. R. Motahari Nezhad, B. Benatallah, A. Martens, F. Curbera, and F. Casati. Semi-automated adaptation of service interactions. In Proceedings of the International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW), pages 993--1002, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. P. Oreizy, M. M. Gorlick, R. N. Taylor, D. Heimhigner, G. Johnson, N. Medvidovic, A. Quilici, D. Rosenblum, and A. Wolf. An architecture-based approach to self-adaptive software. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 14(3):54--62, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. M. Paolucci and M. Wagner. Grounding OWL-S in WSDL-S. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Web Services (ICWS), Sept. 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. M. Pezzè and M. Young. Software testing and analysis. John Wiley&Sons, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. V. Poladian, J. P. Sousa, D. Garlan, and M. Shaw. Dynamic configuration of resource-aware services. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pages 604--613, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. S. Ponnekanti and A. Fox. Application-service interoperation without standardized service interfaces. In Proceedings of the Pervasive Computing and Communications Conference (PerCom), 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. S. Ponnekanti and A. Fox. Interoperability among independently evolving web services. In Proceedings of the International Middleware Conference, pages 331--351, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. D. Roman, U. Keller, H. Lausen, J. de Bruijn, R. Lara, M. Stollberg, A.Polleres, C. Feier, C. Bussler, and D. Fensel. Web service modeling ontology. Applied Ontologies, 1(1):77--106, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. M. K. Smith, D. L. McGuinness, and C. Welty. OWL Web Ontology Language guide, W3C recommendation 10 Feb. 2004. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. M. Solanki, A. Cau, and H. Zedan. Augmenting semantic web service descriptions with compositional specification. In Proceedings of the International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW), pages 544--552. ACM Press, May 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. D. Tosi, G. Denaro, and M. Pezzè. Experimental data on service interchangeability. Technical Report LTA:2008:01, University of Milano-Bicocca, Sep. 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. G. Valetto and G. Kaiser. Using process technology to control and coordinate software adaptation. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pages 262--272. IEEE Computer Society, May 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Q. Wang, L. Quan, and F. Ying. Online testing of web-based applications. In Proceeding of the International Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), pages 166--169, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Z. Xing and E. Stroulia. Api-evolution support with diff-catchup. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 33(12):818--836, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Ensuring interoperable service-oriented systems through engineered self-healing

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          ESEC/FSE '09: Proceedings of the 7th joint meeting of the European software engineering conference and the ACM SIGSOFT symposium on The foundations of software engineering
          August 2009
          408 pages
          ISBN:9781605580012
          DOI:10.1145/1595696

          Copyright © 2009 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 24 August 2009

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          ESEC/FSE '09 Paper Acceptance Rate32of217submissions,15%Overall Acceptance Rate112of543submissions,21%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader