Assessing component based ERP architecture for developing organizations Abstract-Various aspects of three proposed architectures for distributed software are examined. A Crucial need to create an ideal model for optimal architecture which meets the needs of the organization for flexibility, extensibility and integration, to fulfill exhaustive performance for potential talents processes and opportunities in the corporations a permanent and ongoing need. The excellence of the proposed architecture is demonstrated by presenting a rigor scenario based proof of adaptively and compatibility of the architecture in cases of merging and varying organizations, where the whole structure of hierarchies is revised. Keywords: ERP, Data-centric architecture, architecture Component-based, Plug in architecture, distributed systems I. Introduction Customers’ requirements control the creation and deployment of software. Customers demand more and better functionality, they want it tailored to their needs, and they want it “yesterday.” Very often, large shops prefer to develop their own in-house add-ons, or tweak and replace existing functions. Nobody wants to reinvent the wheel, but rather to integrate and build on existing work, by writing only the specialized code that differentiates them from their competition. Newer enterprise-class application suites consist of smaller stand-alone products that must be integrated to produce the expected higher-level functions and, at the same time, offer a consistent user experience. The ability to respond quickly to rapid changes in requirements, upgradeability, and support for integrating other vendors’ components at any time all create an additional push for flexible and extensible applications. Down in the trenches, developers must deal with complex infrastructures, tools and code. The last thing they need is to apply more duct tape to an already complex code base, so that marketing can sell the product with a straight face. Software Architecture [31; 32] describes the high-level structure of a system in terms of components and component interactions. In design, architecture is widely recognized as providing a beneficial separation of concerns between the gross system behavior of interacting components and that of its constituent components. Similarly this separation is also beneficial when considering deployed systems and evolution as it allows us to focus on change at the component level rather than on some finer grain. Masoud Rafighi Department of Computer Engineering and Information Technology University Of Qom Qom, Iran Yaghoub Farjami, Department of Computer Engineering and Information Technology University Of Qom Qom, Iran Nasser Modiri Department of Computer Engineering and Information Technology Zanjan Azad University Zanjan, Iran International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security (IJCSIS), Vol. 14, No. 1, January 2016 72 https://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ ISSN 1947-5500
21
Embed
Assessing component based ERP architecture for …pfigshare-u-files.s3.amazonaws.com/3688035/12Paper...Assessing component based ERP architecture for developing organizations Abstract:
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Assessing component based ERP architecture for developing organizations
Abstract:
Abstract-Various aspects of three proposed architectures for distributed software are examined. A Crucial need to create an ideal model for optimal architecture which meets the needs of the organization for flexibility, extensibility and integration, to fulfill exhaustive performance for potential talents processes and opportunities in the corporations a permanent and ongoing need.
The excellence of the proposed architecture is demonstrated by presenting a rigor scenario based proof of adaptively and compatibility of the architecture in cases of merging and varying organizations, where the whole structure of hierarchies is revised.
Keywords: ERP, Data-centric architecture, architecture Component-based, Plug in architecture, distributed systems
I. Introduction
Customers’ requirements control the creation and deployment of software. Customers demand more and better
functionality, they want it tailored to their needs, and they want it “yesterday.” Very often, large shops prefer to
develop their own in-house add-ons, or tweak and replace existing functions. Nobody wants to reinvent the
wheel, but rather to integrate and build on existing work, by writing only the specialized code that differentiates
them from their competition. Newer enterprise-class application suites consist of smaller stand-alone products
that must be integrated to produce the expected higher-level functions and, at the same time, offer a consistent
user experience. The ability to respond quickly to rapid changes in requirements, upgradeability, and support for
integrating other vendors’ components at any time all create an additional push for flexible and extensible
applications.
Down in the trenches, developers must deal with complex infrastructures, tools and code. The last thing they
need is to apply more duct tape to an already complex code base, so that marketing can sell the product with a
straight face.
Software Architecture [31; 32] describes the high-level structure of a system in terms of components and
component interactions. In design, architecture is widely recognized as providing a beneficial separation of
concerns between the gross system behavior of interacting components and that of its constituent components.
Similarly this separation is also beneficial when considering deployed systems and evolution as it allows us to
focus on change at the component level rather than on some finer grain.
Masoud Rafighi Department of Computer
Engineering and Information Technology
University Of Qom Qom, Iran
Yaghoub Farjami, Department of Computer
Engineering and Information Technology
University Of Qom Qom, Iran
Nasser Modiri Department of Computer
Engineering and Information Technology
Zanjan Azad University Zanjan, Iran
International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security (IJCSIS), Vol. 14, No. 1, January 2016
They are placed in the outer layers of software [22].
Components are integrated and modular, A unit is independent establishment and is independent of other components A unit of independent deployment [12,14]
Data is stored in a database and a common data is accessed by all customers [24, 26].
Layout
The plug-in creates a configuration file is executed and all the settings will be in the file [22].
Special languages for defining interfaces, (IDL).[11,12] There's a lot of software components 1.Input/output types 2.Functional behavior 3.Concurrent behavior 4.Timing behavior 5.Resource usage 6.Security[11,15]
The architecture emphasizes the accessing and updating data [24, 26].
Creation
In this architecture, plug-connected to the outer layer software [21].
IPC protocol IIOP (Internet Inter-ORB Protocol)[12,11] Not context dependent Not related to a specific area and can be used in the system [15]
The connection is established in two ways: When the shared data, as a passive source, acts like file. When the shared data is as a blackboard [24, 26].
Connection
Plugins can be deployed globally or only for a specific environment and not limited in its development. [19,20].
Components are interchangeable for example component B can be replaced with component A Compassable with other components A good combination of mechanisms is used [14,11]
It has high Corrigibility Due to the change of each customer having no effects on other customers [24, 26].
Development
This function is a component-based architecture [22].
The conference was published in Germany in 1968,is not selected from other architectures [9,10]
It's not selected from another architecture[26].
Elected or a combination of other
architectures
It will active Customization with attention to user’s needs Simple and Powerful Its structure is such that the position of other plugins can use functions [18].
Reuse of software in order to reduce development costs Variability, performance, Support for parallel distributed systems on runtime [15].
The data integrity is provided by mechanism of blackboard and common data is an independent part of the customer. Therefore, this style is scalable and can easily add new customers [24, 26].
The main advantage
Database is not a suitable place to store configuration information [21].
Data integration components can be hard to combine.[12]
In this style if a connection is established between the customers In spite of the fact that it will reduce Corrigibility, it will increase the efficiency [24, 26].
The main problem
VII. Problems architectures
The feasibility survey was conducted for exploring attitudes of the users and potential customers. It showed that
main obstacles which hinder usage of service are related to possible cloud service termination or failure and
vendor lock-in. [1] the rule engine component enables to inform the customer. If he can retrieve the data batch
from cloud in the required format and ensures possibility to use the backup data with the local system of the
customer and prevent from vendor lock-in situation.[1] Availability, data lock-in, data confidentiality and
auditability are the obstacles which affect adoption of cloud computing.[2] Although cloud computing
providers are facing several architecture and design challenges, however, security concerns,
Criterion
International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security (IJCSIS), Vol. 14, No. 1, January 2016
Second step: adding Specific data of both system in a single system Third step: adding services of both system in a single system Forth step: the aggregated system should connect to the data center
Fifth step: management of new and old systems must be removed and a single management stays on
aggregate systems.
Merge integration (Org, New Host ComponentA2)
Host Component A=Merge (New Host Component A2, Host Component A1)
Merge (Manager New Host Component A2, Manager Host Component A1)
Revoke Privileges Manager New Host Component A2
Revoke Privileges Manager Host Component A1
Grant Privileges Manager Host Component A
Figure 3. Add a system to organization which can merge with one of the systems.
International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security (IJCSIS), Vol. 14, No. 1, January 2016
13. Merge specific data of common subsystems of org1 and org2;
14. Merge services of common subsystems of org1 and org2;
15. Grant Privileges Manager Host Component I;
16. End for.
17. For uncommon subsystems in the org1 or org2
18. Add i relations with data center;
19. Grant Privileges Manager Host Component I;
20. End for.
21. If subsystem i need to connect with subsystem j;
22. Add relation between plug in interface i and service interface j;
23. End if
24. End.
Now that the problem development of the system and merging of the two organizations systems was resolved
with the proposed model, systems can transfer data between the old and new systems, the second Problem of
imprisonment or trapped data will solved by using the proposed architecture. With attention to development of
system the third problem programmer locked-in problem, the only programmer can develop the system further
will disappear.
XI. Conclusion According to studies, each of architectures has problems. In plug in architecture database is not appropriate
place to store information, component architecture is week in data integration, components will connect to
gather hardly and in datacenter architecture there is no link between systems and all systems are connected to
database, finally with the proposed architecture ‘CPDC Architecture’ which is a special combine of three
architecture not only solve all above problems but also Take advantages of them to Resolving problems like:
developing new systems, merging common systems of different organization, imprisonment or trapped data,
programmer locked-in problem, the only programmer can develop the system further. The architecture responds
to the issues, ensures scalability and versatility of the systems of organization and eventually ensures the
integrity between all systems. REFERENCES
[1] Cloud Computing and the Enterprise Needs for Data Freedom, The Third International Conference on Future Computational Technologies and Applications, Dalia Kriksciuniene, Donatas Mazeika, FUTURE COMPUTING 2011
[2] ERP SYSTEMS: PROBLEMS AND SOLUTION WITH SPECIAL ,REFERENCE TO SMALL & MEDIUM ENTERPRISES, Indu Saini,Dr. Ashu Khanna,Dr. Vivek Kumar, International Journal of Research in IT & Management, IJRIM , Volume 2, Issue 2 (February 2012)
[3] The Future of ERP Systems: look backward before moving forward, Ahmed Elragal , Moutaz Haddara, CENTERIS 2012 – Conference on ENTER prise Information Systems / HCIST 2012 – International Conference on Health and Social Care Information Systems and Technologies,ELSEVIER, Procedia Technology5( 2012 )21 – 30
[5] Ebook, Concepts in Enterprise Resource Planning, Third Edition, by Ellen F. Monk and Bret J. Wagner, 2009 [6] SaaS Enterprise Resource Planning Systems: Challenges of their adoption in SMEs, Jacek Lewandowski, Adekemi O. Salako, Alexeis
Garcia-Perez, IEEE 10th International Conference on e-Business Engineering, 2013 [7] Custom Development as an Alternative for ERP Adoption by SMEs: An Interpretive Case Study, Placide Poba-Nzaou & Louis
Raymond, Information Systems Management, 02 Sep 2013.Published online: 21 Oct 2013 [8] Self-development ERP System Implementation Success Rate Factors Analysis, Liu Chen, Liu Xinliang, IEEE XPLORE Symposium
on Robotics and Applications(ISRA) 2012 [9] McIlroy, Malcolm Douglas (January 1969). "Mass produced software components". Software Engineering: Report of a conference
sponsored by the NATO Science Committee, Garmisch, Germany, 7-11 Oct. 1968. Scientific Affairs Division, NATO. p. 79.
International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security (IJCSIS), Vol. 14, No. 1, January 2016
[10] Ralf H. Reussner, Heinz W. Schmidt, Iman H. Poernomo,”Reliability prediction for component-based software architectures”, Journal of Systems and Software, Volume 66, Issue 3, 15 June 2003, Pages 241-252
[11] D. Bennouar, T. Khammaci, A. Henni, A new approach for component’s port modeling in software architecture, Journal of Systems and Software, Volume 83, Issue 8, August 2010, Pages 1430-1442
[12] Majdi Abdellatief, Abu Bakar Md Sultan, Abdul Azim Abdul Ghani, Marzanah A. Jabar ,A mapping study to investigate component-based software system metrics, Journal of Systems and Software, Volume 86, Issue 3, March 2013, Pages 587-603
[13] Manuel Oriol, Thomas Gamer, Thijmen de Gooijer, Michael Wahler, Ettore,Ferranti, Fault-tolerant fault tolerance for component-based automation systems, in: Proceedings of the 4th International ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Architecting Critical Systems (ISARCS 2013), Vancouver, Canada, 2013.
[14] William Otte, Aniruddha S. Gokhale, Douglas C. Schmidt, Efficient and deterministic application deployment in component-based enterprise distributed real-time and embedded systems, Inf. Softw. Technol. 55 (2)(2013) 475–488.
[15] Séverine Sentilles, Aneta Vulgarakis, Tomáš Bureš, Jan Carlson, Ivica Crnkovic´,A Component model for control-intensive distributed embedded systems, in:Michel Chaudron, Clemens Szyperski, Ralf Reussner (Eds.), Component-Based Software Engineering, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5282, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, 2008, pp. 310–317.
[16] Johannes Mayer, Ingo Melzer, Franz Schweiggert, "Lightweight Plug-in-Based Application Development". Revised Papers from the International Conference NetObjectDays on Objects, Components, Architectures, Services, and Applications for a Networked World. pp. 87 - 102, 2002.
[17] Brad A. Myers. The Case for an Open Data Model. Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science Technical Report, no. CMU-CS-98-153 and Human Computer Interaction Institute Technical Report CMU-HCII-98-101. August, 1998.
[18] Birsan, D. 2005. On Plug-ins and Extensible Architectures. Queue 3, 2 (Mar. 2005), 40-46. [19] Rubel, D. 2006. The Heart of Eclipse. Queue 4, 8 (Oct. 2006), 36-44. [20] McIllroy, M. D.: Mass produced software components. In: Proceedings of the Nato Soft-ware Engineering Conference. 1968, pp. 138-
155. [21] Notes on the Eclipse Plug-in Architecture: http://www.eclipse.org/articles/Article-Plug-in-architecture/plugin_architecture.html [22] Introduction to Eclipse Plugin development: http://www.eclipsepluginsite.com/ [23] “The Data Distribution Service specification”, http://www.omg.org/spec/DDS/1.2/ [24] Lind P, Alm M (2006), "A database-centric virtual chemistry system", J Chem Inf Model 46 (3): 1034–9, doi:10.1021/ci050360b,
IEEEs [26] Y. BreitbartA. DeaconH.-J. SchekA. ShethG. Weikum, Merging application-centric and data-centric approaches to support transaction-
oriented multi-system workflows, ACM SIGMOD Record New York, NY, USA Volume 22 Issue 3, Sept. 1993 Pages 23 - 30 [27] M. Shaw and D. Garlan, Software architecture: perspectives on an emerging discipline. Prentice Hall, 1996. [28] M.J. Charistensen, R.H. Thayer. The Project Manager’s Guide to Software Engineering’s Best Practices.Wiley, 2002 [29] Alessandro Garcia, Cláudio Sant’Anna, Christina Chavez, Viviane Torres da Silva, Carlos J. P. de Lucena, Arndt von Staa, Separation
of Concerns in Multi-agent Systems: An Empirical Study, Chapter Software Engineering for Multi-Agent Systems II, Volume 2940 of the series Lecture Notes in Computer Science pp 49-72
[30] Gregor Kiczales, Mira Mezini, Separation of Concerns with Procedures, Annotations, Advice and Pointcuts, Chapter, ECOOP 2005 - Object-Oriented Programming, Volume 3586 of the series Lecture Notes in Computer Science pp 195-213
[31] D. E. Perry and A. L. Wolf, Foundations for the Study of Software Architectures, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 40-52, 1992.
[32] M. Shaw and D. Garlan, Software Architecture: Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline, Prentice Hall, 96. [33] J. Magee and J. Kramer, Dynamic Structure in Software Architectures, 4th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of
Software Engineering (FSE 4), San Francisco, California, USA, 21, pp. 3-14, October 1996. [34] S. Crane, N. Dulay, H. Fosså, J. Kramer, J. Magee, M.Sloman and K. Twidle, Configuration Management forDistributed Systems,
Proc. of the IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management (ISINM 95), Santa Barbara. AUTHORS
Masoud rafighi was born in Tehran, Iran on 1983/08/10. He is PHD student of Qom University. He receives M.Sc degree in computer engineering software from Azad University North Tehran Branch, Tehran, IRAN. He has recently been active in software engineering and has developed and taught various software related courses for the Institute and university for Advanced Technology, the University of Iran. His research interests are in software measurement, software complexity, requirement engineering, maintenance software, software security and formal methods of software development. He has written a book on software complexity engineering and published many papers. Yaghoub Farjami received his PhD degree in Mathematics (with the highest honor) in 1998 from Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran. He is Assistant Professor of Computer and Information Technology Department at University of Qom. His active fields of research are ERP, BI, and Information Security.
Nasser Modiri received his MS degree in MicroElectronics from university of Southampton, UK in 1986. He received PHD degree in Computer Networks from Sussex university of UK in 1989. He is a lecturer at department of computer engineering at Islamic Azad University of Zanjan, Iran. His research interests include Network Operation Centres, Framework for Securing Networks, Virtual Organizations, RFID, Product Life Cycle Development and Framework for Securing Networks.
International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security (IJCSIS), Vol. 14, No. 1, January 2016