1 / 20

Minimising Lifecycle Transitions in Service-Oriented Business Processes

Minimising Lifecycle Transitions in Service-Oriented Business Processes. Roland Ukor and Andy Carpenter School of Computer Science, University of Manchester, UK. 10 th International BPMDS Workshop, 2009. Introduction. SOA based inter-organizational business processes

phil
Download Presentation

Minimising Lifecycle Transitions in Service-Oriented Business Processes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Minimising Lifecycle Transitions in Service-Oriented Business Processes Roland Ukor and Andy Carpenter School of Computer Science, University of Manchester, UK 10th International BPMDS Workshop, 2009

  2. Introduction • SOA based inter-organizational business processes • Service provider – consumer relationship • Outsourced business capabilities • e.g. credit rating, shipping. • Web services based interaction • Arbitrarily complex interaction protocols • Services advertised in registries

  3. Example: Order fulfillment process Business Process (of consumer) Business Capability Service Providers Agency 1 Credit Check Agency L1 Order FulfillmentProcess Shipper 1 Shipping Shipper L2

  4. Service Description in Registries • Abstract Service Definitions (ASD) • Functional, Non-functional and Behavioral description • Interface on which process interaction is based • Concrete Service Definitions (CSD) • Provider-specific description • Location and access information • Quality of Service (QoS) characteristics

  5. Service Selection Activities • Initiation and Analysis • Determine business capabilities to outsource. • Discovery • Find services with required capabilities • Ranking and Selection • Based on QoS metrics (e.g. cost, availability) • Performance Monitoring

  6. Service Selection and Process Lifecycle

  7. QoS based Selection in Operation Phase • Selects a CSD from discovered CSDs: • Case 1: Based on the same ASD for which the process is designed to interact. • Case 2: Based on a different ASD from that for which the process is designed to interact.

  8. Case 2: Selection of different CSD • Drivers • Performance • Context-Aware Selection • Issues • Potential data and behavioral incompatibilities • Can occur for multiple instances at the same time

  9. Addressing Compatibility Issues • Direct application of compatibility notions • Bi-similarity, Behavioral congruence, Behavioral inheritance, etc • Can result in smaller than desired set of service candidates • Candidates with “good” QoS may not make the shortlist

  10. Addressing Compatibility Issues • Mediator-based compatibility • Resolves data and behavioral incompatibility using mediators • Based on incrementally defined knowledge base • Mediators can be semi-automatically generated and are reusable • Allows for manual resolution of syntactic and semantic gaps • Triggers transient lifecycle transitions • Comes at a “notional cost” Process Mediator Protocol Service

  11. Mediator-based Compatibility • Determining the “notional cost” • Structural complexity • Syntactic and structural gap: • e.g. graph edit distances • Semantic gap: differences in meaning of concepts used • Policy-based constraints: • e.g. delivery before payment vs. payment before delivery.

  12. Relative Compatibility Based Selection • Objective: Minimize transient lifecycle transitions • Using mediator-based compatibility • Based on two principles: • Ignore marginal QoS improvements for candidates requiring mediators • Design least costly mediator with maximal impact

  13. Ignore Marginal QoS Improvements • Given a process that requires n capabilities {c1..cn} • There are two categories of candidates for each ci: • Ki0: Candidates requiring no mediation or for which mediators already exist • Ki1: Candidates requiring mediation but no mediator exists • All candidates Ki = Ki0 UKi1 • A candidate k in Ki1 is only selected if it provides better QoS than all candidates in Ki0 enough to justify the “notional cost” of the required mediator.

  14. Ignore Marginal QoS Improvements • A candidate k  Ki1 is only selected if: • it provides better QoS than all candidates in Ki0 enough to justify the “notional cost” of the required mediator. • Implementation • bias the utility of each candidate in the objective function based on the “notional cost” (costmedij)normalized to a value in the range [0,1]. • max Σ Σ uij. (1 – costmedij) . xij • uij is the computed utility of candidate kijKi, and xij = 1 if kij is selected for ci, otherwise 0. • (1 – costmedij) will be neutral for candidates in Ki0

  15. Least Costly Mediator with Maximal Impact • If a candidate to be selected requires mediation, then • Design least costly mediator with maximal impact • For each ci, • Let Pi represent the set of protocols for all candidates in Ki, where Pij is the protocol for candidate kij

  16. Horizontal Protocol Compatibility • Two protocols Pij and Pik are horizontally compatible w.r.t. a process BP, if: • A mediator M can be designed so that BP can safely interact with services that use Pij and Pik respectively. Pij Services BP M Pik Services

  17. Least Costly Mediator with Maximal Impact • If a candidate to be selected requires mediation, then • Design least costly mediator with maximal impact • For each ci, • For each PijPi, let HijPi represent horizontally compatible protocols. • For each p 2Hij, a candidate mediator Mp can be designed that will support all Pik p • Each candidate Mp has a “notional cost” and coverage (e.g. |p| or weighted by no of services using protocols in |p|). • Selection of a mediator to generate can be formulated as an optimization problem based on cost and coverage.

  18. Ongoing Work • Implementation • Evaluate different models for determining notional cost of constructing mediators. • Modify the bias factor to take horizontal compatibility into consideration.

  19. Conclusion • Dynamic service selection is a driver of lifecycle transitions • These transitions may be costly, but can be minimized using two principles for service selection and mediator design: • Ignore marginal QoS improvements • Design least costly mediators with maximal impact

  20. Thank you!

More Related