Sei sulla pagina 1di 4

Chapter 1.

Extending the architecting paradigm.

The classical Architecting Paradigm.

The recorded history of classical architecting, began in Egypt with the pyramids, the
complexity of which has been overwhelming designers and builders alike. From the lack of
tools for civil works came classical or civil architecture. Millennia later, technological
advances in shipbuilding created the new and complementary fields of marine engineering
and naval architecture. In this century, rapid advances in aerodynamics, chemistry,
materials, electrical energy, communications, surveillance, information processing, and
software have resulted in systems whose complexity is again overwhelming past methods
and paradigms.

The foundations of modern systems Architecting


Although the day-to-day practice may differ significantly, the foundations of modern
systems architecting are much the same across many technical disciplines.
Generally speaking, they are a systems approach, a purpose orientation, a modeling
methodology, ultra quality, certification and insight.

A system Approach.

A system approach is one that focuses on the systems as a whole, specifically linking
value judgments (what is desired) and design decisions (what is feasible). A true system
approach means that the design process includes the “problem” as well as the solution. At
the most fundamental level, systems are collections of different things that together
produce results unachievable by the elements alone. System are interesting because they
achieve results, and achieving those results requires different to interact.Taking a systems
approach means paying close attention to results, the reasons we build a system.
Architecture is not just about the structure of components. One of the essential features of
architectures of architectural design versus other sorts of engineering design is the degree
to which architectural design embraces results from the perspective of the
client/user/customer.

It is responsilibity of the architect to know and concentrate on the critical few details and
interfaces that really matter and not to become overloaded with the rest. To the extent that
the architect must be concerned with component design and construction, it is with those
specific details that critically affect the system as a whole. Some loaded question often
posed by builders, project managers is “How deeply should the architect delve into each
discipline into each discipline and each subsystems?”, also another question, “How can
the architect possibly know before there is a detailed system design, much less before
system test, what details of what subsystem are critical?”. A quick answer is: only through
experience, through encouraging open dialog with subsystem specialists; and by being a
quick, selective, tactful, and effective student of the system and its needs. Architecting is a
continuing day-to-day learning process.

Critical details aside, the architect’s greatest concerns and leverage are still, and should
be, with the systems’ connections and interfaces: First, because they distinguish a system
from its components; second, interest of the systems architect; and third,because
subsystem specialists are likely to concentrate most on the core and least on the periphery
of their subsystems.

A purpose Orientation

System architecting is a process driven by a client’s purpose or purposes. Clearly, if a


system is to succeed, it must satisfy a useful purpose at affordable cost for an acceptable
period of time. The explicit value judgments in these criteria: a useful purpose, an
affordable cost, and an acceptable period of time. Satisfying a useful purpose is
predominant, without it being satisfied, all others are irrelevant Architecting therefore
begins with, and is responsible for maintaining the integrity of the system’s utility or
purpose.

When a system fails to achieve a useful purpose, it is doomed. When it achieves some
purpose but at an unfavorable costs, its survival is in doubt, but it may survive. Curiously,
the end use of a system is not always what was originally proposed as its purpose. An
Example, The ARPANET-INTERNET communication network originated as a government-
furnished computer-to-computer linkage in support of university research; it is now the
most used, and pair for, by individuals for e-mail and information accessing. Why?
Because, as circumstances changed, providers and users redefined the meaning of
useful, affordable, and acceptable.

A modeling Methodology

Modeling is the creation of abstractions or representations of the system to predict and


analyze performance, costs, schedules, and risk and to provide guidelines for systems
research development, design, manufacture, and management. Modeling is the
centerpiece of systems architecting. Models are in fact created by many participants, not
just architects.These models must somehow be made consistent with overall system
imperatives. Be consistent with the architect’s system model, a model that evolves,
becoming more and more concrete and specific as the system is built. It provides a
standard against which consistency can be maintained and is powerful tool in maintaining
the larger objective of system integrity. And finally, when the system is operational and a
deficiency or failure appears, a model is brought into play to help determine the causes
and cures of the problem.

In brief, Modeling is a multipurpose, progressive activity, evolving and becoming less


abstract and more concrete as the system is built and used.

Ultraquality Implementation

Is defined as a level of quality so demanding that it is impractical to measure defects,


much less certify the system prior to use. Ultraquality is a recognition than the more
components there are in a system, the more reliable each component must be to a point
where, at the element level, defects become impractical to measure within the time and
resources available.
The subject would be moot if it were not for the implications of this “limit state” of zero
defects to design. But experience has shown that rigorous engineering is not enough to
achieve ultraquality systems. Ultraquality is achieved by a mixture of analytical and
heuristic methods. The analytical side is represented by detailed failure analysis and even
the employment of proof techniques in system design. Flight computers are a good
example of the mixture of analytical and heuristic considerations in ultra quality systems.

Certification

Is a formal statement by the architect to the client or user that the system, as built, meets
the criteria both for client acceptance and for builder receipt of payment, that is, it is ready
for user (to fulfill its purposes). Is the “final exams” of system test and evaluation. To be
accepted, it must be well supported, objective, and fair to client and builder alike.

Clearly, if certification is to be unchallenged, then there must be no perception of conflict of


interest of the architect. This imperative has led to three widely accepted, professionally
understood, constraints on the role of the architect:

1.- A disciplines avoidance of value judgments. As a matter of principle, the client should
judge on desirability and the architect should decide (only) on feasibility. It may make the
architect famous, but the client will feel used.

2.-A clear avoidance of perceived conflict of interest through participation in research and
development, including ownership or participation in organizations that can be, or are,
building the system.

3.-An arms-length relationship with project management. The primary reason for this
arrangement is the overload and distraction of the architect created by the time-consuming
responsibilities of project management. A second conflict, similar to that of participating in
research and development, is created whenever architects give project work to
themselves.

Insight and Heuristics

Insight, or ability to structure a complex situation in a way that greatly increase


understanding of it, is strongly guided by lessons learned from one’s own or others’
experiences and observations. Given enough lessons, their meaning can be codified into
succinct expressions called “heuristic” a Greek term for guide.

The wisdom that distinguishes the great architect from the rest is the insight and the
inspiration, that combined with well-chosen methods and guidelines and fortunate
circumstances, creates masterworks. Unfortunately, wisdom does not come easily. As one
conundrum puts it:
• Success comes from wisdom.
• Wisdom comes from Experience.
• Experience comes from mistakes.

The required mistakes and experience and wisdom gained from them can be those of
one’s predecessors, not necessarily one’s own.

The architecture paradigm summarized.


System architecting borrows from it its basic attributes:
1. Architect is principally an agent of the client, not the builder. The architect must act in
the best interests of the client for whom the system is being developed.
2. The architect works jointly with the client and builder on problem and solution definition.
3. The architect’s product or “deliverable” is an architecture representation, a set of
abstracted design off the system.
4. The architect’s product is not just physical representations, where and adequate
system architecture description must cover whatever aspects of physical structure,
behavior, cost, performance, human organization, or other elements are needed to clarify
the clients’ priorities.
5. An initial architecture is a Vision.

Architecting takes place within the context of an acquisition process.

Potrebbero piacerti anche