Refine
Document Type
- Conference proceeding (14)
- Journal article (4)
Language
- English (18)
Has full text
- yes (18)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (18)
Institute
- Informatik (18)
Publisher
- IEEE (4)
- Springer (4)
- ACM (3)
- Cornell Universiy (1)
- PeerJ (1)
- RWTH Aachen (1)
- SCITEPRESS (1)
- Springer International Publishing (1)
- Springer Science + Business Media B.V (1)
Context
Microservices as a lightweight and decentralized architectural style with fine-grained services promise several beneficial characteristics for sustainable long-term software evolution. Success stories from early adopters like Netflix, Amazon, or Spotify have demonstrated that it is possible to achieve a high degree of flexibility and evolvability with these systems. However, the described advantageous characteristics offer no concrete guidance and little is known about evolvability assurance processes for microservices in industry as well as challenges in this area. Insights into the current state of practice are a very important prerequisite for relevant research in this field.
Objective
We therefore wanted to explore how practitioners structure the evolvability assurance processes for microservices, what tools, metrics, and patterns they use, and what challenges they perceive for the evolvability of their systems.
Method
We first conducted 17 semi-structured interviews and discussed 14 different microservice-based systems and their assurance processes with software professionals from 10 companies. Afterwards, we performed a systematic grey literature review (GLR) and used the created interview coding system to analyze 295 practitioner online resources.
Results
The combined analysis revealed the importance of finding a sensible balance between decentralization and standardization. Guidelines like architectural principles were seen as valuable to ensure a base consistency for evolvability and specialized test automation was a prevalent theme. Source code quality was the primary target for the usage of tools and metrics for our interview participants, while testing tools and productivity metrics were the focus of our GLR resources. In both studies, practitioners did not mention architectural or service-oriented tools and metrics, even though the most crucial challenges like Service Cutting or Microservices Integration were of an architectural nature.
Conclusions
Practitioners relied on guidelines, standardization, or patterns like Event-Driven Messaging to partially address some reported evolvability challenges. However, specialized techniques, tools, and metrics are needed to support industry with the continuous evaluation of service granularity and dependencies. Future microservices research in the areas of maintenance, evolution, and technical debt should take our findings and the reported industry sentiments into account.
Towards a practical maintainability quality model for service- and microservice-based systems
(2017)
Although current literature mentions a lot of different metrics related to the maintainability of service-based systems (SBSs), there is no comprehensive quality model (QM) with automatic evaluation and practical focus. To fill this gap, we propose a Maintainability Model for Services (MM4S), a layered maintainability QM consisting of service properties (SPs) related with automatically collectable Service Metrics (SMs). This research artifact created within an ongoing Design Science Research (DSR) project is the first version ready for detailed evaluation and critical feedback. The goal of MM4S is to serve as a simple and practical tool for basic maintainability estimation and control in the context of BSs and their specialization
microservice-based systems (μSBSs).
In a time of digital transformation, the ability to quickly and efficiently adapt software systems to changed business requirements becomes more important than ever. Measuring the maintainability of software is therefore crucial for the long-term management of such products. With service-based systems (SBSs) being a very important form of enterprise software, we present a holistic overview of such metrics specifically designed for this type of system, since traditional metrics – e.g. object oriented ones – are not fully applicable in this case. The selected metric candidates from the literature review were mapped to 4 dominant design properties: size, complexity, coupling, and cohesion. Microservice-based systems (μSBSs) emerge as an agile and fine grained variant of SBSs. While the majority of identified metrics are also applicable to this specialization (with some limitations), the large number of services in combination with technological heterogeneity and decentralization of control significantly impacts automatic metric collection in such a system. Our research therefore suggests that specialized tool support is required to guarantee the practical applicability of the presented metrics to μSBSs.
Maintainability assurance techniques are used to control this quality attribute and limit the accumulation of potentially unknown technical debt. Since the industry state of practice and especially the handling of service- and microservice-based systems in this regard are not well covered in scientific literature, we created a survey to gather evidence for a) used processes, tools, and metrics in the industry, b) maintainability-related treatment of systems based on service orientation, and c) influences on developer satisfaction w.r.t. maintainability. 60 software professionals responded to our online questionnaire. The results indicate that using explicit and systematic techniques has benefits for maintainability. The more sophisticated the applied methods the more satisfied participants were with the maintainability of their software while no link to a hindrance in productivity could be established. Other important findings were the absence of architecture-level evolvability control mechanisms as well as a significant neglect of service-oriented particularities for quality assurance. The results suggest that industry has to improve its quality control in these regards to avoid problems with long living service-based software systems.
While the recently emerged microservices architectural style is widely discussed in literature, it is difficult to find clear guidance on the process of refactoring legacy applications. The importance of the topic is underpinned by high costs and effort of a refactoring process which has several other implications, e.g. overall processes (DevOps) and team structure. Software architects facing this challenge are in need of selecting an appropriate strategy and refactoring technique. One of the most discussed aspects in this context is finding the right service granularity to fully leverage the advantages of a microservices architecture. This study first discusses the notion of architectural refactoring and subsequently compares 10 existing refactoring approaches recently proposed in academic literature. The approaches are classified by the underlying decomposition technique and visually presented in the form of a decision guide for quick reference. The review yielded a variety of strategies to break down a monolithic application into independent services. With one exception, most approaches are only applicable under certain conditions. Further concerns are the significant amount of input data some approaches require as well as limited or prototypical tool support.
The euphoria around microservices has decreased over the years, but the trend of modernizing legacy systems to this novel architectural style is unbroken to date. A variety of approaches have been proposed in academia and industry, aiming to structure and automate the often long-lasting and cost-intensive migration journey. However, our research shows that there is still a need for more systematic guidance. While grey literature is dominant for knowledge exchange among practitioners, academia has contributed a significant body of knowledge as well, catching up on its initial neglect. A vast number of studies on the topic yielded novel techniques, often backed by industry evaluations. However, practitioners hardly leverage these resources. In this paper, we report on our efforts to design an architecture-centric methodology for migrating to microservices. As its main contribution, a framework provides guidance for architects during the three phases of a migration. We refer to methods, techniques, and approaches based on a variety of scientific studies that have not been made available in a similarly comprehensible manner before. Through an accompanying tool to be developed, architects will be in a position to systematically plan their migration, make better informed decisions, and use the most appropriate techniques and tools to transition their systems to microservices.
To bring a pattern-based perspective to the SOA vs. microservices discussion, we qualitatively analyzed a total of 118 SOA patterns from 2 popular catalogs for their (partial) applicability to microservices. Patterns had to hold up to 5 derived microservices principles to be applicable. 74 patterns (63%) were categorized as fully applicable, 30 (25%) as partially applicable, and 14 (12%) as not applicable. Most frequently violated microservices characteristics werde Decentralization and Single System. The findings suggest that microservices and SOA share a large set of architectural principles and solutions in the general space of service-based systems while only having a small set of differences in specific areas.
While there are several theoretical comparisons of Object Orientation (OO) and Service Orientation (SO), little empirical research on the maintainability of the two paradigms exists. To provide support for a generalizable comparison, we conducted a study with four related parts. Two functionally equivalent systems (one OO and one SO version) were analyzed with coupling and cohesion metrics as well as via a controlled experiment, where participants had to extend the systems. We also conducted a survey with 32 software professionals and interviewed 8 industry experts on the topic. Results indicate that the SO version of our system possesses a higher degree of cohesion, a lower degree of coupling, and could be extended faster. Survey and interview results suggest that industry sees systems built with SO as more loosely coupled, modifiable, and reusable. OO systems, however, were described as less complex and easier to test.