Generation of feasible deployment configuration alternatives for Data Distribution Service based systems

Abstract Data distribution service (DDS) has been defined by the OMG to provide a standard data-centric publish-subscribe programming model and specification for distributed systems. DDS has been applied for the development of high performance distributed systems such as in the defense, finance, automotive, and simulation domains. To support the analysis and design of a DDS-based distributed system, the OMG has proposed the DDS UML Profile. A DDS-based system usually consists of multiple participant applications each of which has different responsibilities in the system. These participants can be allocated in different ways to the available resources, which leads to different configuration alternatives. Usually, each configuration alternative will perform differently with respect to the execution and communication cost of the overall system. In general, the deployment configuration is selected manually based on expert knowledge. This approach is suitable for small to medium scale applications but for larger applications this is not tractable. In this paper, we provide a systematic approach for deriving feasible deployment alternatives based on the application design and the available physical resources. The application design includes the design for DDS topics, publishers and subscribers. For supporting the application design, we propose a DDS UML profile. Based on the application design and the physical resources, the feasible deployment alternatives can be algorithmically derived and automatically generated using the developed tools. We illustrate the approach for deriving feasible deployment alternatives of smart city parking system.

[1]  Bora Uçar,et al.  Task assignment in heterogeneous computing systems , 2006, J. Parallel Distributed Comput..

[2]  Lars Grunske,et al.  Let the Ants Deploy Your Software - An ACO Based Deployment Optimisation Strategy , 2009, 2009 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering.

[3]  Wei Zheng,et al.  Definition of Task Allocation and Priority Assignment in Hard Real-Time Distributed Systems , 2007, RTSS 2007.

[4]  Lars Grunske,et al.  ArcheOpterix: An extendable tool for architecture optimization of AADL models , 2009, 2009 ICSE Workshop on Model-Based Methodologies for Pervasive and Embedded Software.

[5]  Bedir Tekinerdogan,et al.  Deriving Feasible Deployment Alternatives for Parallel and Distributed Simulation Systems , 2013, TOMC.

[6]  Richard F. Paige,et al.  Taming EMF and GMF using model transformation , 2010, MODELS'10.

[7]  Neeraj Suri,et al.  Dependability driven integration of mixed criticality SW components , 2006, Ninth IEEE International Symposium on Object and Component-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing (ISORC'06).

[8]  Marija Mikic-Rakic,et al.  An Extensible Framework for Improving a Distributed Software System's Deployment Architecture , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[9]  Weijia Jia,et al.  Rendezvous Planning in Mobility-Assisted Wireless Sensor Networks , 2007, RTSS 2007.

[10]  Bedir Tekinerdogan,et al.  S-IDE: A tool framework for optimizing deployment architecture of High Level Architecture based simulation systems , 2013, J. Syst. Softw..

[11]  Ralf H. Reussner,et al.  Towards a generic quality optimisation framework for component-based system models , 2011, CBSE '11.

[12]  Thomas L. Saaty What is the analytic hierarchy process , 1988 .

[13]  Bedir Tekinerdogan,et al.  Obstacles in Data Distribution Service Middleware: A Systematic Review , 2017, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..