![]() Ce patron permet d'implanter de façon minimale et générique des capacités additionnelles d’adaptation dynamique à granularité objet. Cette solution est présentée sous la forme d’un patron applicable aux langages objets à typage dynamique. Dans cette thèse, nous proposons une solution d’adaptation dynamique de comportement permettant de déverminer individuellement les objets d'un programme en cours d'exécution. De plus, dans le contexte des systèmes à objets, il peut être nécessaire d’observer et d’instrumenter individuellement le comportement de certains objets particuliers. Pour de telles applications, le défi est d’identifier les problèmes et de les corriger pendant l'exécution du programme. C'est par exemple le cas de drones en mission, de satellites et de certains objets connectés. The semantics is illustrated with PRISMA architecture specifications and is formalized by using typed graph transformations.Ĭertains programmes doivent fonctionner en continu et ne peuvent pas être interrompus en cas de dysfonctionnement. SOFTWARE SOLIS RESTO SOFTWAREtypes that define a software architecture). This paper describes the semantics for supporting the asynchronous evolution of architectural types (ie. ![]() This paper proposes the use of asynchronous dynamic evolution, where both types and instances evolve dynamically at different rates, while preserving: (i) type-conformance of instances, and (ii) the order of type evolutions. However, its support in distributed contexts, like self-organizing systems, is challenging: these systems have a degree of autonomy which requires asynchronous management. This issue is tackled by dynamic evolution. Although self-adaptive systems allow the adaptation or reorganization of the system structure, they generally do not allow introducing unforeseen changes at runtime. However this feature is not enough to deal with the longevity usually these systems exhibit. Self-adaptability is a feature that has been proposed to deal with the increasing management and maintenance efforts required by large software systems. ![]() On the one hand, the Reconfiguration Analysis aspect is domain-specific: it is Each aspect has a different role in the MDD process. maintenance operations) on technology- specific reconfiguration mechanisms may have an impact on the technology-independent reconfiguration specifications, and vice versa. Another reason for using aspects is to avoid that changes (i.e. The analysis of this impact is outside the scope of this work however other authors have conveniently addressed this problem, such as Pérez-Toledano et al. In both cases, the modification of an aspect does not necessarily impact to the other aspects. For instance, if a parameter is removed, the weaving definition can be modified to provide a default value to the other service (or the result of applying a function). This weaving will be invalidated if any of these services has its signature changed. create- ImageProcSoftware) to a generic reconfiguration service (i.e. In other words, this weaving binds the execution of a domain-specific reconfiguration service (i.e. The first weaving intercepts the execution of the service create-ImageProcSoftware (provided by the Reconfiguration Analysis aspect), and replaces it with the execution of the service createArchElement (provided by the Reconfiguration Coordination aspect). Povzetek: Predstavljen je pristop s samo-preoblikovanjem programske arhitekture.Īspects for autonomic reconfiguration For instance, Figure 6 shows some of the weavings that have been defined in the VisionSystem architectural type. ![]() In order to address these issues, this paper presents an aspect-oriented autonomic reconfiguration approach where: (1) each subsystem is provided with self-management properties so it can evolve itself and the components that it is composed of (2) self-management concerns are isolated and encapsulated into aspects, thus improving its reuse and maintenance. On the contrary, decentralized approaches, like self-organising architectures, offer good scalability but are not maintainable: reconfiguration specifications are spread and often tangled with functional specifications. Centralized approaches, like self-adaptive architectures, offer good maintenance properties but do not scale well for large systems. Several approaches have covered different aspects of their development, but some issues remain open, such as the maintainability or the scalability of self-management subsystems. systems capable of reconfiguring their structure at runtime to fulfil a set of goals. The increasing complexity of current software systems is encouraging the development of self-managed software architectures, i.e. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |