SlideShare une entreprise Scribd logo
1  sur  58
Towards Distributed Information Access Possibilities and Implementation Victor de Graaff November 18 th  2009
Master thesis defense ,[object Object],[object Object],Victor de Graaff University of Twente Computer Science Software Engineering dr. Luís Ferreira Pires dr. ir. Marten van Sinderen ing. Gerke Stam, TSi Solutions Student: University: Master: Track: Graduation Committee:
Introduction Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview  Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
What is an information broker? Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview  Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks
What is an information broker? Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview  Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks
Current situation Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview  Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks
What is an information broker? Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview  Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks
Main objective Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview  Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks To determine the most suitable  architecture  and  technology  to realize  distributed  access on  real-time  to information on products. Architecture Structure of the system. Technology Software to support that structure. Distributed Information comes from different places. Real-time Information comes at the time it is needed.
Sub-objectives Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview  Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Approach Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview  Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Overview Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview   Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks
Requirements Introduction Requirements Approach Stakeholders Use cases Functional  requirements Non-functional requirements Weighting  factors Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Approach (1) Introduction Requirements Approach Stakeholders Use cases Functional  requirements Non-functional requirements Weighting  factors Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Approach (2) Introduction Requirements Approach Stakeholders Use cases Functional  requirements Non-functional requirements Weighting  factors Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Stakeholders Introduction Requirements Approach Stakeholders Use cases Functional  requirements Non-functional requirements Weighting  factors Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Use cases Introduction Requirements Approach Stakeholders Use cases Functional  requirements Non-functional requirements Weighting  factors Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks retrieve available products for one provider Information Broker retrieve available information on  products for several providers purchase/cancel (combined)  product configure which producers are available configure which consumers are  allowed to use/offer products retrieve information on  previous product purchase Producer Consumer request info request info provide info initiate direct to corresponding producer(s) handle purchase/cancellation configure configure request info request info provide/enrich info
Functional requirements Introduction Requirements Approach Stakeholders Use cases Functional  requirements Non-functional requirements Weighting  factors Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Non-functional requirements Introduction Requirements Approach Stakeholders Use cases Functional  requirements Non-functional requirements Weighting  factors Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Weighting factors (1) Introduction Requirements Approach Stakeholders Use cases Functional  requirements Non-functional requirements Weighting  factors Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],4 4 4 5 3 4 1 5
Weighting factors (2) Introduction Requirements Approach Stakeholders Use cases Functional  requirements Non-functional requirements Weighting  factors Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],4 5 4 3 5 4 4 3
Comparison of Integration Technologies Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies  Approach Point-to-Point  Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies   Approach Point-to-Point  Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Approach C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1
Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies  Approach Point-to-Point  Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Point-to-Point integration C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1
Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies  Approach Point-to-Point  Hub-and-  Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Single hub Hub-and-Spoke N C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1
Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies  Approach Point-to-Point  Hub-and-  Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Multi hub Hub-and-Spoke C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1
Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies  Approach Point-to-Point  Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Enterprise Message Bus EMB Adapter A A A A A A A A C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1
IC IC Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies  Approach Point-to-Point  Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Enterprise Service Bus ESB IC Intelligent Connector IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1
Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies  Approach Point-to-Point  Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Conclusion N EMB A A A A A A ESB Enterprise Message Bus Enterprise Service Bus Point-to-Point Hub-and-Spoke IC IC IC IC IC IC C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1 C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1 C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1 C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1
Application Integration Architectures Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Consumer B Consumer C Consumer A Consumers Producer A Producer B Producer C Producers Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and- Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Hub-and-Spoke Architecture Information Broker Services
Consumer B Consumer C Consumer A Consumers Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks EMB Architectures (1) Load Balancer Services Producer A Producer B Producer C EMB in combination with a load balancer: Enterprise Message Bus Producers Information Broker
Enterprise Message Bus Producer A Producer B Producer C Consumer B Consumer C Consumer A Consumers Producers Information Broker Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks EMB Architectures (2) Service 3 Service 2 Service 1 Two EMBs: Enterprise Message Bus
Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks EMB Architectures (3) Producers Information Broker Producer A Producer B Producer C Consumer A Consumer B Consumer C Consumers Service 1 Service 2 Service 3 One EMB: Enterprise Message Bus
Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ESB Architectures (1) Consumer B Consumer C Consumer A Consumers Load Balancer Services Producer A Producer B Producer C Enterprise Service Bus Producers Information Broker ESB in combination with a load balancer:
Enterprise Service Bus Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ESB Architectures (2) Producer A Producer B Producer C Consumer B Consumer C Consumer A Consumers Producers Information Broker Service 3 Service 2 Service 1 Enterprise Service Bus Two ESBs:
Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ESB Architectures (3) Producers Information Broker Producer A Producer B Producer C Consumer A Consumer B Consumer C Consumers Service 1 Service 2 Service 3 Enterprise Service Bus One ESB:
Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],Conclusion (1)
Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Conclusion (2) ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Choosing an Implementation Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Approach Mule ServiceMix OpenESB Comparison Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Approach Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Approach Mule ServiceMix OpenESB Comparison Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Mule Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Approach Mule ServiceMix OpenESB Comparison Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
ServiceMix Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Approach Mule ServiceMix OpenESB Comparison Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
OpenESB Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Approach Mule ServiceMix OpenESB Comparison Proof of Concept Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Comparison Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Approach Mule ServiceMix OpenESB Comparison Proof of Concept Final Remarks Requirement Weight Mule ServiceMix OpenESB Global configuration 1 2 0 2 Message speed 4 2 0 1 Fail fast adequacy 3 2 2 2 Total 16 6 12
Proof of Concept Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of  Concept Problem  situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing  environment Conclusion Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Problem situation (1) Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of  Concept Problem  situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing  environment Conclusion Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Problem situation (2) Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of  Concept Problem  situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing  environment Conclusion Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Basics of Mule (1) Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of  Concept Problem  situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing  environment Conclusion Final Remarks Service Transport Inbound router Component Outbound router Transport Exception listener
Basics of Mule (2) Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of  Concept Problem  situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing  environment Conclusion Final Remarks <<Endpoint>> HTTP <<Endpoint>> JMS <<Component>> POJO Application or component T T T Inbound router Outbound router The component's response is sent to the outbound router for endpoint dispatching An inbound event gets routed to the component's entry point through transformers The component's response can be returned to the caller if the endpoint is synchronous Application or component
Basics of Mule (3) Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of  Concept Problem  situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing  environment Conclusion Final Remarks <<Endpoint>> HTTP <<Endpoint>> JMS <<Component>> POJO Application or component Application or component T T T Inbound router Outbound router Service Transport Inbound router Component Outbound router Transport
Configuring Mule (1) Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of  Concept Problem  situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing  environment Conclusion Final Remarks <<Endpoint>> HTTP <<Endpoint>> dtsRequests VM <<Component>> WSProxyService POJO Consumer External Services <<Endpoint>> dtsResponses VM <<Component>> DTSResponseAgg POJO T T Main service:
Configuring Mule (2) Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of  Concept Problem  situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing  environment Conclusion Final Remarks <<Endpoint>> dtsRequests VM <<Endpoint>> externalWebservice HTTP VM Message T <<Endpoint>> dtsResponses VM T External service:
Testing environment Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of  Concept Problem  situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing  environment Conclusion Final Remarks ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Conclusion Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of  Concept Problem  situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing  environment Conclusion Final Remarks
Final Remarks Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Conclusions Future research ,[object Object],[object Object]
Conclusions Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Conclusions Future research ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Future research Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Conclusions Future  research ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Questions

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Sirin et al A Model Identity Card to Support Simulation Model Development Pro...
Sirin et al A Model Identity Card to Support Simulation Model Development Pro...Sirin et al A Model Identity Card to Support Simulation Model Development Pro...
Sirin et al A Model Identity Card to Support Simulation Model Development Pro...
goknursirin
 
IFML - The interaction flow modeling language, the OMG standard for UI modeli...
IFML - The interaction flow modeling language, the OMG standard for UI modeli...IFML - The interaction flow modeling language, the OMG standard for UI modeli...
IFML - The interaction flow modeling language, the OMG standard for UI modeli...
Marco Brambilla
 
Test case prioritization using firefly algorithm for software testing
Test case prioritization using firefly algorithm for software testingTest case prioritization using firefly algorithm for software testing
Test case prioritization using firefly algorithm for software testing
Journal Papers
 

Tendances (13)

A Review of Feature Model Position in the Software Product Line and Its Extra...
A Review of Feature Model Position in the Software Product Line and Its Extra...A Review of Feature Model Position in the Software Product Line and Its Extra...
A Review of Feature Model Position in the Software Product Line and Its Extra...
 
Sta unit 5(abimanyu)
Sta unit 5(abimanyu)Sta unit 5(abimanyu)
Sta unit 5(abimanyu)
 
An Adjacent Analysis of the Parallel Programming Model Perspective: A Survey
 An Adjacent Analysis of the Parallel Programming Model Perspective: A Survey An Adjacent Analysis of the Parallel Programming Model Perspective: A Survey
An Adjacent Analysis of the Parallel Programming Model Perspective: A Survey
 
Integrating profiling into mde compilers
Integrating profiling into mde compilersIntegrating profiling into mde compilers
Integrating profiling into mde compilers
 
e-Learning platforms implementation on a Virtual Campus Project - A Polytechn...
e-Learning platforms implementation on a Virtual Campus Project - A Polytechn...e-Learning platforms implementation on a Virtual Campus Project - A Polytechn...
e-Learning platforms implementation on a Virtual Campus Project - A Polytechn...
 
Sirin et al A Model Identity Card to Support Simulation Model Development Pro...
Sirin et al A Model Identity Card to Support Simulation Model Development Pro...Sirin et al A Model Identity Card to Support Simulation Model Development Pro...
Sirin et al A Model Identity Card to Support Simulation Model Development Pro...
 
Research Questions for Validation and Verification in the Context of Model-Ba...
Research Questions for Validation and Verification in the Context of Model-Ba...Research Questions for Validation and Verification in the Context of Model-Ba...
Research Questions for Validation and Verification in the Context of Model-Ba...
 
IFML - The interaction flow modeling language, the OMG standard for UI modeli...
IFML - The interaction flow modeling language, the OMG standard for UI modeli...IFML - The interaction flow modeling language, the OMG standard for UI modeli...
IFML - The interaction flow modeling language, the OMG standard for UI modeli...
 
Mustaque_CV_mar
Mustaque_CV_marMustaque_CV_mar
Mustaque_CV_mar
 
Test case prioritization using firefly algorithm for software testing
Test case prioritization using firefly algorithm for software testingTest case prioritization using firefly algorithm for software testing
Test case prioritization using firefly algorithm for software testing
 
Detecting Aspect Intertype Declaration Interference at Aspect Oriented Design...
Detecting Aspect Intertype Declaration Interference at Aspect Oriented Design...Detecting Aspect Intertype Declaration Interference at Aspect Oriented Design...
Detecting Aspect Intertype Declaration Interference at Aspect Oriented Design...
 
Validation and Verification of SYSML Activity Diagrams Using HOARE Logic
Validation and Verification of SYSML Activity Diagrams Using HOARE Logic Validation and Verification of SYSML Activity Diagrams Using HOARE Logic
Validation and Verification of SYSML Activity Diagrams Using HOARE Logic
 
Part 2 question 1 provide a technical description of 4b5b d
Part 2 question 1 provide a technical description of 4b5b dPart 2 question 1 provide a technical description of 4b5b d
Part 2 question 1 provide a technical description of 4b5b d
 

Similaire à Presentation Master thesis defense

Iwsm2014 cost estimation of transition projects in application outsourcing ...
Iwsm2014   cost estimation of transition projects in application outsourcing ...Iwsm2014   cost estimation of transition projects in application outsourcing ...
Iwsm2014 cost estimation of transition projects in application outsourcing ...
Nesma
 
Agile Kolkata 2023 I EEBO Metrics in the Times of GenAI - Dinker Charak
Agile Kolkata 2023 I EEBO Metrics in the Times of GenAI - Dinker CharakAgile Kolkata 2023 I EEBO Metrics in the Times of GenAI - Dinker Charak
Agile Kolkata 2023 I EEBO Metrics in the Times of GenAI - Dinker Charak
AgileNetwork
 
Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
Nathaniel Palmer
 
Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
Nathaniel Palmer
 
EDRM LegalTech NY 2009 Luncheon Presentation
EDRM LegalTech NY 2009 Luncheon PresentationEDRM LegalTech NY 2009 Luncheon Presentation
EDRM LegalTech NY 2009 Luncheon Presentation
John Wang
 
Best Practices In Load And Stress Testing Cmg Seminar[1]
Best Practices In Load And Stress Testing Cmg Seminar[1]Best Practices In Load And Stress Testing Cmg Seminar[1]
Best Practices In Load And Stress Testing Cmg Seminar[1]
Munirathnam Naidu
 

Similaire à Presentation Master thesis defense (20)

Some practical considerations and a
Some practical considerations and aSome practical considerations and a
Some practical considerations and a
 
Web and load testing with Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate
Web and load testing with Visual Studio 2010 UltimateWeb and load testing with Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate
Web and load testing with Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate
 
Iwsm2014 cost estimation of transition projects in application outsourcing ...
Iwsm2014   cost estimation of transition projects in application outsourcing ...Iwsm2014   cost estimation of transition projects in application outsourcing ...
Iwsm2014 cost estimation of transition projects in application outsourcing ...
 
20140508 sip@isotc184 sc4
20140508 sip@isotc184 sc420140508 sip@isotc184 sc4
20140508 sip@isotc184 sc4
 
Evaluating Alternatives for Requirements, Envireonment, and Implemetation
Evaluating Alternatives for Requirements, Envireonment, and ImplemetationEvaluating Alternatives for Requirements, Envireonment, and Implemetation
Evaluating Alternatives for Requirements, Envireonment, and Implemetation
 
A STUDY OF FORMULATION OF SOFTWARE TEST METRICS FOR INTERNET BASED APPLICATIONS
A STUDY OF FORMULATION OF SOFTWARE TEST METRICS FOR INTERNET BASED APPLICATIONSA STUDY OF FORMULATION OF SOFTWARE TEST METRICS FOR INTERNET BASED APPLICATIONS
A STUDY OF FORMULATION OF SOFTWARE TEST METRICS FOR INTERNET BASED APPLICATIONS
 
Agile Kolkata 2023 I EEBO Metrics in the Times of GenAI - Dinker Charak
Agile Kolkata 2023 I EEBO Metrics in the Times of GenAI - Dinker CharakAgile Kolkata 2023 I EEBO Metrics in the Times of GenAI - Dinker Charak
Agile Kolkata 2023 I EEBO Metrics in the Times of GenAI - Dinker Charak
 
Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
 
Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
Understanding and Applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
 
Final Presentation.pptx
Final Presentation.pptxFinal Presentation.pptx
Final Presentation.pptx
 
A more successful model for multi-shore testing
A more successful model for multi-shore testingA more successful model for multi-shore testing
A more successful model for multi-shore testing
 
A new model for the selection of web development frameworks: application to P...
A new model for the selection of web development frameworks: application to P...A new model for the selection of web development frameworks: application to P...
A new model for the selection of web development frameworks: application to P...
 
MDA Vs Web Ratio for Non It
MDA Vs Web Ratio for Non ItMDA Vs Web Ratio for Non It
MDA Vs Web Ratio for Non It
 
EDRM LegalTech NY 2009 Luncheon Presentation
EDRM LegalTech NY 2009 Luncheon PresentationEDRM LegalTech NY 2009 Luncheon Presentation
EDRM LegalTech NY 2009 Luncheon Presentation
 
Tuomas Keränen - A Centralized Devops Platform - What and Why?
Tuomas Keränen - A Centralized Devops Platform - What and Why?Tuomas Keränen - A Centralized Devops Platform - What and Why?
Tuomas Keränen - A Centralized Devops Platform - What and Why?
 
Acquisition of IT Service Management tools
Acquisition of IT Service Management toolsAcquisition of IT Service Management tools
Acquisition of IT Service Management tools
 
Best Practices In Load And Stress Testing Cmg Seminar[1]
Best Practices In Load And Stress Testing Cmg Seminar[1]Best Practices In Load And Stress Testing Cmg Seminar[1]
Best Practices In Load And Stress Testing Cmg Seminar[1]
 
togaf_ovu.ppt
togaf_ovu.ppttogaf_ovu.ppt
togaf_ovu.ppt
 
The Challenges Of, And Advantages In, Establishing A Consistent Architectural...
The Challenges Of, And Advantages In, Establishing A Consistent Architectural...The Challenges Of, And Advantages In, Establishing A Consistent Architectural...
The Challenges Of, And Advantages In, Establishing A Consistent Architectural...
 
eccenca Eco System
eccenca Eco Systemeccenca Eco System
eccenca Eco System
 

Presentation Master thesis defense

  • 1. Towards Distributed Information Access Possibilities and Implementation Victor de Graaff November 18 th 2009
  • 2.
  • 3.
  • 4. What is an information broker? Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks
  • 5. What is an information broker? Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks
  • 6. Current situation Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks
  • 7. What is an information broker? Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks
  • 8. Main objective Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks To determine the most suitable architecture and technology to realize distributed access on real-time to information on products. Architecture Structure of the system. Technology Software to support that structure. Distributed Information comes from different places. Real-time Information comes at the time it is needed.
  • 9.
  • 10.
  • 11. Overview Introduction Motivation Objectives Approach Overview Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks
  • 12.
  • 13.
  • 14.
  • 15.
  • 16. Use cases Introduction Requirements Approach Stakeholders Use cases Functional requirements Non-functional requirements Weighting factors Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks retrieve available products for one provider Information Broker retrieve available information on products for several providers purchase/cancel (combined) product configure which producers are available configure which consumers are allowed to use/offer products retrieve information on previous product purchase Producer Consumer request info request info provide info initiate direct to corresponding producer(s) handle purchase/cancellation configure configure request info request info provide/enrich info
  • 17.
  • 18.
  • 19.
  • 20.
  • 21.
  • 22. Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Approach Point-to-Point Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Approach C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1
  • 23. Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Approach Point-to-Point Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Point-to-Point integration C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1
  • 24. Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Approach Point-to-Point Hub-and- Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Single hub Hub-and-Spoke N C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1
  • 25. Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Approach Point-to-Point Hub-and- Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Multi hub Hub-and-Spoke C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1
  • 26. Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Approach Point-to-Point Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Enterprise Message Bus EMB Adapter A A A A A A A A C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1
  • 27. IC IC Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Approach Point-to-Point Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Enterprise Service Bus ESB IC Intelligent Connector IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1
  • 28. Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Approach Point-to-Point Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Conclusion N EMB A A A A A A ESB Enterprise Message Bus Enterprise Service Bus Point-to-Point Hub-and-Spoke IC IC IC IC IC IC C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1 C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1 C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1 C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1
  • 29.
  • 30. Consumer B Consumer C Consumer A Consumers Producer A Producer B Producer C Producers Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and- Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks Hub-and-Spoke Architecture Information Broker Services
  • 31. Consumer B Consumer C Consumer A Consumers Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks EMB Architectures (1) Load Balancer Services Producer A Producer B Producer C EMB in combination with a load balancer: Enterprise Message Bus Producers Information Broker
  • 32. Enterprise Message Bus Producer A Producer B Producer C Consumer B Consumer C Consumer A Consumers Producers Information Broker Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks EMB Architectures (2) Service 3 Service 2 Service 1 Two EMBs: Enterprise Message Bus
  • 33. Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks EMB Architectures (3) Producers Information Broker Producer A Producer B Producer C Consumer A Consumer B Consumer C Consumers Service 1 Service 2 Service 3 One EMB: Enterprise Message Bus
  • 34. Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ESB Architectures (1) Consumer B Consumer C Consumer A Consumers Load Balancer Services Producer A Producer B Producer C Enterprise Service Bus Producers Information Broker ESB in combination with a load balancer:
  • 35. Enterprise Service Bus Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ESB Architectures (2) Producer A Producer B Producer C Consumer B Consumer C Consumer A Consumers Producers Information Broker Service 3 Service 2 Service 1 Enterprise Service Bus Two ESBs:
  • 36. Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Hub-and-Spoke EMB ESB Conclusion Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Final Remarks ESB Architectures (3) Producers Information Broker Producer A Producer B Producer C Consumer A Consumer B Consumer C Consumers Service 1 Service 2 Service 3 Enterprise Service Bus One ESB:
  • 37.
  • 38.
  • 39.
  • 40.
  • 41.
  • 42.
  • 43.
  • 44. Comparison Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Approach Mule ServiceMix OpenESB Comparison Proof of Concept Final Remarks Requirement Weight Mule ServiceMix OpenESB Global configuration 1 2 0 2 Message speed 4 2 0 1 Fail fast adequacy 3 2 2 2 Total 16 6 12
  • 45.
  • 46.
  • 47.
  • 48. Basics of Mule (1) Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Problem situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing environment Conclusion Final Remarks Service Transport Inbound router Component Outbound router Transport Exception listener
  • 49. Basics of Mule (2) Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Problem situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing environment Conclusion Final Remarks <<Endpoint>> HTTP <<Endpoint>> JMS <<Component>> POJO Application or component T T T Inbound router Outbound router The component's response is sent to the outbound router for endpoint dispatching An inbound event gets routed to the component's entry point through transformers The component's response can be returned to the caller if the endpoint is synchronous Application or component
  • 50. Basics of Mule (3) Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Problem situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing environment Conclusion Final Remarks <<Endpoint>> HTTP <<Endpoint>> JMS <<Component>> POJO Application or component Application or component T T T Inbound router Outbound router Service Transport Inbound router Component Outbound router Transport
  • 51. Configuring Mule (1) Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Problem situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing environment Conclusion Final Remarks <<Endpoint>> HTTP <<Endpoint>> dtsRequests VM <<Component>> WSProxyService POJO Consumer External Services <<Endpoint>> dtsResponses VM <<Component>> DTSResponseAgg POJO T T Main service:
  • 52. Configuring Mule (2) Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Problem situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing environment Conclusion Final Remarks <<Endpoint>> dtsRequests VM <<Endpoint>> externalWebservice HTTP VM Message T <<Endpoint>> dtsResponses VM T External service:
  • 53.
  • 54. Conclusion Introduction Requirements Comparison of Integration Technologies Application Integration Architectures Choosing an Implementation Proof of Concept Problem situation Basics of Mule Configuring Mule Testing environment Conclusion Final Remarks
  • 55.
  • 56.
  • 57.

Notes de l'éditeur

  1. Black and white to illustrate out of date