Streaming Services in SSCC - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

Streaming Services in SSCC

Description:

Title: Synchronization strategies for global computing Author: Ivan Lanese Last modified by: Ivan Created Date: 2/22/1999 11:07:13 AM Document presentation format – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:32
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 29
Provided by: IvanL154
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Streaming Services in SSCC


1
Streaming Services in SSCC
Ivan Lanese Computer Science Department University
of Bologna Italy
Joint work with Francisco Martins, Vasco
Vasconcelos and Antonio Ravara Univerisities of
Lisbon, Portugal
2
Roadmap
  • Stream SCC syntax and semantics
  • SSCC vs SCC
  • A simple type system
  • Some conclusions

3
Roadmap
  • Stream SCC syntax and semantics
  • SSCC vs SCC
  • A simple type system
  • Some conclusions

4
Idea of the calculus
  • SCC not easy to use
  • Main problems related to interactions among
    different services
  • Looking for a simpler to use variant
  • Main idea adding a dedicated construct (stream)
    for orchestrating different services
  • Should be general enough to program different
    interactions
  • Allows to simplify service invocation
  • No more need for a process producing values
  • Other differences non persistent service
    definitions
  • Recursion to make them persistent

5
SSCC syntax
6
SSCC services
  • Services are defined by their name a and their
    protocol P
  • Service definition and service invocation are
    symmetric
  • Invocations and definitions interact by producing
    sessions executing their protocol
  • Sessions are not available when programming
  • Only runtime construct

7
SSCC conversations
  • Sessions can exchange information via concretion
    and abstraction as in SCC
  • We can imagine to extend conversations with
    constructs taken from other works on sessions
    (e.g., choice)

8
Orchestrating SSCC services
  • Many services concurrently executing in a system
  • Data from one service used by other services
  • Need for inter-service communication primitives
  • Difficult tradeoff
  • Expressive primitives for modeling different
    coordination patterns
  • SCC return not expressive enough
  • Constrained primitives to induce a structured
    form of programming and help typing and analysis
  • p-calculus channels not structured enough
  • We propose the stream construct
  • Induce a clear style of programming

9
  • P and Q are concurrently executing
  • f is the name of a communication stream from P to
    Q
  • Two possible semantics f ordered or unordered
  • P can feed values inside f (feed v.P)
  • Non blocking
  • Values stored in f
  • Q can read values from f (f(x).Q)
  • Blocking
  • Reads from stream f
  • Possible to read from multiple named sources

10
A working stream
  • Q is blocked, P can execute
  • Now Q can execute too
  • P1 is still enabled

11
Some programming patterns
12
Roadmap
  • Stream SCC syntax and semantics
  • SSCC vs SCC
  • A simple type system
  • Some conclusions

13
Chaining services
  • In SCC if a returns many values then many
    instances of b are executed
  • No easy way to avoid this
  • Full control in SSCC
  • Also, slightly changing the specific

14
Synchronization (Workflow Pattern 3)
  • Auxiliary session (or service) required in SCC

15
While (part of Workflow Pattern 10)
  • The two definitions of IfSignal are almost
    identical

16
Asking two services in parallel
  • Ask for flight and hotel in parallel and give
    back the flight first and then the hotel
  • In SCC the two values are obtained in different
    subsessions
  • Returning them would mix the two
  • Either add some information to the value
  • Or synchronize the two sessions
  • I have no idea about other solutions
  • Naming streams is important

17
Merging two streams
  • EATCS and EAPLS return streams
  • of conference announcements
  • I want an email for each announcement
  • The two services (EATCS and EAPLS) have had to be
    modified to send the results via pub
  • Recursion is important

18
Differences
  • Main difference stream vs return
  • Stream is orthogonal w.r.t. the session structure
    (which becomes transparent)
  • Values returned where they are needed
  • More compositional (more easy to add macros)
  • Streams have a name
  • Different sources of data can be distinguished
  • Other things are less important and orthogonal
  • Recursion
  • Persistent vs non-persistent service definitions

19
Expressiveness issues
  • Most of the things can be expressed in both the
    formalisms
  • Some complex examples in SCC are not manageable
  • SSCC allows a more clear programming style
  • No auxiliary sessions or services

20
Roadmap
  • Stream SCC syntax and semantics
  • SSCC vs SCC
  • A simple type system
  • Some conclusions

21
Idea of the type system
  • Simple type system
  • Checks that data are used in the right way
  • Integer output never matched by unit input
  • Checks protocol compatibility
  • For each input there is the corresponding output
  • Ensures that protocols are sequential
  • Good progamming style
  • Facilitates the checking for protocol
    compatibility

22
Type system
  • Types for values
  • Unit, Int, Basic types
  • U Service types
  • Protocols
  • ?T.U Input
  • !T.U Output
  • end End of protocol
  • X Variable
  • rec X.U Recursive types
  • Processes typed as
  • G set of assumptions, U protocol, T type of the
    fed stream
  • Sessions typed as services, and stream as T
    where T is the type of the transmitted values

23
Typed examples
24
Roadmap
  • Stream SCC syntax and semantics
  • SSCC vs SCC
  • A simple type system
  • Some conclusions

25
What else exists on SSCC
  • Reduction and LTS semantics
  • Correspondence result
  • The implementation of all the van der Aalst
    Workflow Patterns not requiring killing abilities
  • A subject reduction result for the type system

26
Conclusions
  • We think that SSCC is an improvement w.r.t. SCC
    from the usability point of view
  • SSCC deals with services conversations
    coordination

27
Future work
  • More complex type systems
  • Deadlock avoidance
  • Many possible causes of deadlock
  • Protocols not compatible
  • Empty stream
  • Service not available (or not invoked)
  • Mix of previous reasons
  • Kill primitive
  • The approach from SCC can be imported
  • Is it the right one?

28
End of talk
  • Thanks!
  • Questions?
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com