Sale!

Milestone 3 Deployment Blueprints

$30.00

Category:
Rate this product

1
Assignment 3: Couse Project Milestone 3
Derivation and Evaluation of Solution and
Deployment Blueprints
Software Architecture

In this assignment, you will work from the business blueprint you derived in Assignment
2 to build the rest of your blueprint family. Upon completion, your family will be
composed of a “business” blueprint (BB) and two “deployment” blueprints (DB) (Figure
1). (In this assignment, you do not need to create a separate “solution” blueprint (SB).
You can think of it as creating a specific SB for each DB, collapsing the SB into the DB.)
Stakeholder
Quality Needs
Business
Functionality
and Data
Blueprint “Family” for Student 1
Business
Blueprint 1
Deployment
Blueprint 1.1
Deployment
Blueprint 1.2
Solution
Blueprint 1.1
Solution
Blueprint 1.2
Prioritized Needs and
Related Qualities 1
Blueprint “Family” for Student n
Business
Blueprint n
Deployment
Blueprint n.1
Deployment
Blueprint n.2
Solution
Blueprint n.1
Solution
Blueprint n.2
Prioritized Needs and
Related Qualities n
Assignment 1
(submitted as a
group)
Assignment 2
(individual, with
one set of
prioritized needs
and one business
blueprint per
student)
Assignment 3
(individual, with
two solution and
two deployment
blueprints per
student)
Figure 1: Blueprint “families” derived from stakeholder needs and domain functionality
2
Background
• The BB is intended to be the architect’s implementation-independent “vision” for
how domain functionality should be assigned to system components (i.e., what is
the functional and data responsibilities of each component). BB connectors
represent the dependencies between components due to the I/O between functions
allocated to those components. BB allocation is driven by heuristics that suggest
how structural properties, such as coupling, cohesion, and complexity, may
promote or inhibit system qualities of interest (i.e., non-functional requirements
expressed by stakeholders). Depending on the heuristics applied, the choice of
components can be influenced by business areas, organizations, performer roles,
legacy implementations, and other factors.
• The SB and DB “instantiate” the BB by describing implementation details; BB
components are realized by SB and DB components and connectors that represent
software modules, computing platforms, people, connectivity, etc. While the SB
and DB are implementation specific, the level of detail between two DBs may be
quite different, e.g., identifying off-the-shelf software as a black box versus
describing the exchange of control and data between software modules. The SB
and DB may be inspired by any design principle that helps satisfy stakeholder
needs, including, but not limited to, what are commonly known as architectural
styles.
• Regardless of the blueprint type, evaluations are chosen to determine whether
stakeholder needs have been met based on the blueprint representation.
o Business Blueprint evaluation involves measuring the blueprint’s structure
(component size and coupling) to determine if heuristics have been
applied that yield a structure promoting qualities of interest.
o Solution Blueprint evaluation involves determining how well solutions (i)
satisfy functionality and data in the BB and (ii) match the BB component
boundaries.
o Because the Deployment Blueprint includes implementation details,
evaluations are specific to the implementation.
3
Part 1: Deriving Deployment Blueprints (DB)
Create a two Deployment Blueprints (DB) from the Business Blueprint derived in
Assignment 2 (See Figure 1).
– Description:
o The DB contains implementation-specific components and connectors that
realize BB functionality. The DB may be at any level of detail and DB
component boundaries may not map to BB components exactly. In general,
DB components will represent some combination of the following:
! solutions (e.g., software, hardware, people) responsible for delivering
the functionality and data in your BB. (The SB comprises these
solutions.)
! environment/infrastructure (e.g., computing platforms, networks,
display devices, databases, system software) required to support the
solutions.
– Deliverables:
o Representation (components and connectors)
! Graphic:
• As appropriate for selected style(s):
o Note: Generate the graphic in any tool.
o Note: The graphic should provide enough detail so
that…
! the primary style or design principle is evident
(e.g., if client/server is the primary style among
the four you chose [see below], client and server
components must be identifiable) and
! the solutions (e.g., software, hardware, people)
responsible for delivering the functionality and
data in your BB are identifiable. (The SB
comprises these solutions.)
o Note: Since your graphic reflects a style/design
principle, provide (i) a reference with an example of a
similar style/design principle graphic and (ii) a relevant
excerpt from that reference (e.g., if your blueprint
reflects client/server style, provide an excerpt from a
web page or other source with a client/server graphic).
! Text (Word or Excel):
• Description of each element in graphic (components and
connectors).
o Note: Every “box” and “line” must be described.
• Mapping from BB components (with respective functions and
data) to DB components and connectors.
o Note: Since the DB includes the solutions in the SB
(e.g., software, hardware, people) responsible for
4
delivering the functionality and data in your BB,
discuss the following:
! Which BB functionality each solution satisfies.
! Which BB data each solution satisfies.
! How I/O between functions is satisfied by
connections between DB components (e.g., if
function1 sends data1 to function2 and they are
satisfied by two DB solutions, then there must
be connectivity of some form between the two
solutions).
o Derivation Rationale
! Identify 4 architectural styles and/or other design principles that
provide the basis for your DB. Include a reference for each.
• Describe how those styles and principles address stakeholder
needs. (Be sure to discuss all stakeholder needs, even ones you
were unable to fully satisfy.)
• Identify potential conflicts and describe tradeoffs based on
priorities as well as style/principle effectiveness.
! If the DB represents a refactoring of BB components, explain how this
may sacrifice the BB’s “vision” and the and why the refactoring is
justified.
5
Part 2: Evaluating Solution Blueprint Compliance
Calculate the following compliance metrics for the solutions (technologies) in each
Deployment Blueprint that are responsible for delivering the functionality and data in
your BB.
For each component c and technology t, calculate CompFuncCoeff(c,t) and
CompDataCoeff(c,t).
CompFuncCoeff(c,t): Degree to which technology t complies to functions in
component c.
| ( ) |
| ( , ) | ( , ) CompFunc c
CompFunc c t
CompFuncCoeff c t regd =
where:
CompFuncregd(c,t) Set of functions in component c to which
technology t is registered (i.e., capable of
providing).
CompFunc(c) Set of functions defined in component c.
CompDataCoeff(c,t): Degree to which technology t complies to data in
component c.
| ( ) |
| ( , ) | ( , ) CompData c
CompData c t
CompDataCoeff c t regd =
where:
CompDataregd(c,t) Set of data in component c to which
technology t is registered.
CompData(c) Set of data defined in component c.
6
For each technology t, calculate CompFuncBoundaryError(t).
CompFuncBoundaryError(t): Degree to which technology t does not satisfy and
exceeds the functionality for the component with
which it best complies.

( ) ∑≠
= − ∈ +
m
m
c c
c BB m CompFuncBoundaryError(t) 1 max (CompFuncCoeff (c ,t)) CompFuncCoeff (c,t) 1
where:
max ( ( , )) 1 CompFuncCoeff c t cm ∈BB m Maximum CompFuncCoeff
value for technology t across
all components in the
Business Blueprint (BB).
∑c≠cm
CompFuncCoeff (c,t) Sum of CompFuncCoeff
values for technology t for all
other components.
7
Part 3: Planning Evaluation of Deployment Blueprints Using an ATAM Quality
Attribute Utility Tree
Generate an ATAM Quality Attribute Utility Tree for each Deployment Blueprint you
defined in Part 1.
• Level 1: “Utility”
o Define the root node “Utility” and discuss how you would aggregate
quality assessments to obtain an overall “goodness” of the system.
! Comment: Consider priorities assigned to qualities and what
manipulation is needed to normalize results across different types
of evaluation.
• Level 2: Qualities
o Define level 2 nodes for all qualities.
! Comment: Create level 2 nodes for all qualities specified in
Assignment 2 Part 1.
• Level 3: Sub-factors
o Define level 3 nodes that break down qualities in level 2.
! Comment: Sub-factors may be associated with a heuristic, style, or
pattern (e.g., “reducing coupling increases likelihood of
reusability”) or simply one aspect of the higher-level quality (e.g.,
“transaction response time” is one consideration when evaluating
performance).
• Level 4: Specific objectives under the sub-factors
o Define level 4 nodes that express objectives under the level 3 subfactors in the context of the deployment blueprint and prioritize those
objectives based on importance and ease by which they can be
achieved.
! Comment: An example of an objective under sub-factor
“transaction response time” might be “Course registration database
responds in no more than 3 seconds.”
! Comment: When prioritizing, use a (H)igh, (M)edium, (L)ow scale
for each of the following dimensions:
• Importance of the objective the success of the system.
• How easy it will be to achieve the objective.
! Comment: If you were able to obtain the relevant data/statistics, it
should be straightforward to determine if the objective has been
met.
8
• Level 5: Metrics for determining if an objective has been met.
o Define level 5 nodes that state specifically what data/statistics you
need to determine if a level 4 objective has been met and how you will
obtain those data/statistics. Rate each data/statistic based on the
degree to which it accurately predicts/assesses whether the objective
has been met.
! Comment: An example might be “Activate SQL database profiler
and record latencies for transactions X, Y, and Z while executing a
test script simulating peak load over a sustained period.”
! Comment: When rating, use a (H)igh, (M)edium, (L)ow scale.
! Comment: You may reference the coupling/cohesion and
size/complexity metrics from Part 1 and the compliance metrics
from Part 2.
! Comment: You may reference your scenarios from Assignment 1.
(Not for functional validation, per se, but for a context in which to
evaluate an objective.)
9
Comments
• This is your design with your chosen domain — I did my best not to constrain the
problem to give you the opportunity to be creative. This is a research task as
much as a specification task.
• As I mentioned in Assignment 2, you can think of the BB, SB, and DB as your
“back of the envelope” or “napkin” architectures: If someone asked you to sketch
your architecture with or without implementation details, what would you draw?
Each blueprint is focused on conveying some aspect of the architecture and no
more (i.e., promoting separation of concerns). The following summarizes what
we’re trying to communicate and what the sketch recipient needs to know for
each blueprint.
o The BB representation only specifies how responsibility for functionality
and data in the domain is allocated to a collection of (abstract)
components.
! What does the BB need to tell the recipient? – The recipient is
asking, “How would you recommend I divide up these
responsibilities?”
! Note that the BB itself does not describe why you’re making that
recommendation. That’s covered by your derivation plan and
accompanying evaluation of BB structure.
o The SB representation only specifies a set of technologies/solutions (e.g.,
software, hardware, people) and which functionality and data in the BB
each technology/solution satisfies.
! What does the SB need to tell the recipient? – The recipient is
asking, “To what degree do these technologies/solutions satisfy the
functional and data responsibilities in the BB and do they divide up
the responsibilities in the same way?”
! Note that the SB itself does not describe why you chose those
technologies/solutions. That’s covered by your evaluation of
technology/solution compliance to the BB.
o The DB representation only specifies how selected styles/design principles
are to be applied for a given deployment.
! What does the DB need to tell the recipient? – The recipient is
asking, “Where do the technologies/solutions in the SB fit in the
overall deployment and what are the necessary constraints on that
deployment?”
! Note that the DB itself does not describe why you established those
constraints. That’s covered by your styles and design guidelines.
• Architectural styles are not the only bases for your architecture. You may
reference any general principle that promotes the qualities demanded by your
stakeholders. Regardless, no derivation decision should be made without such
principles.
• Regardless what level of detail you specify in your DB, the DB satisfies the
functional requirements in your BB and maps to the BB component boundaries in
some way, whether fully respecting them or deviating from them.
10
• Some examples of styles:
o Blackboard
o Client-server
o Database-centric architecture
o Distributed computing
o Event Driven Architecture
o Peer-to-peer
o Pipes and filters
o Representational State Transfer (REST)
o Call-and-return modularity (including object-oriented programming)
o Service-oriented architecture
• Some examples of design principles:
o Network load balancing
o Replication
o Redundancy
References
• Bass, Clements, and Kazman, Software Architectures in Practice (1st Edition).
• BinSubaih and Maddock, “Using ATAM to Evaluate a Game-based
Architecture”, http://www.cs.rug.nl/~paris/ACE2006/papers/BinSubaih.pdf.
• Kazman, Klein, and Clements, “ATAM: Method for Architecture Evaluation,”
technical report CMU/SEI-2000-TR-004, August 2000,
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/pub/documents/00.reports/pdf/00tr004.pdf.

Open chat
Need help?
Hello
Can we help you?