What is architecture?
Generally speaking, architecture of a system provides a very high level view of the parts of the system and how they are related to form the whole system. That is, architecture partitions the system in logical parts such that each part can be comprehended independently, and then describes the system in terms of these parts and the relationship between these parts
.Any complex system can be partitioned in many di erent ways, each providing a useful view and each having di erent types of logical parts. The same holds true for a software system—there is no unique structure of the system that can be described by its architecture; there are many possible structures.
Due to this possibility of having multiple structures, one of the most widely accepted definitions of software architecture is that the software architecture of a system is the structure or structures of the system, which comprise software elements, the externally visible properties of those elements, and the relationships among them [6]. This definition implies that for elements in an architecture, we are only interested in those abstractions that specify those properties that other elements can assume to exist and that are needed to specify relationships. Details on how these properties are supported are not needed for architecture. This is an important capability that allows architecture descriptions to represent a complex system in a succinct form that is easily comprehended.
An architecture description of a system will therefore describe the di erent structures of the system. The next natural question is why should a team building a software system for some customer be interested in creating and documenting the structures of the proposed system. Some of the important uses that software architecture descriptions play are [6, 23, 54]:Understanding and communication. An architecture description is primarily to communicate the architecture to its various stakeholders, which include the users who will use the system, the clients who commissioned the system, the builders who will build the system, and, of course, the architects. Through this description the stakeholders gain an understanding of some macro properties of the system and how the system intends to ful-fill the functional and quality requirements. As the description provides a common language between stakeholders, it also becomes the vehicle for negotiation and agreement among the stakeholders, who may have conflicting goals.Reuse. The software engineering world has, for a long time, been working toward a discipline where software can be assembled from parts that are developed by di erent people and are available for others to use. If one wants to build a software product in which existing components may be reused, then architecture becomes the key point at which reuse at the highest level is decided. The architecture has to be chosen in a manner such that the components which have to be reused can fit properly and together with other components that may be developed. Architecture also facilitates reuse among products that are similar and building product families such that the common parts of these di erent but similar products can be reused. Architecture helps specify what is fixed and what is variable in these diferent products, and can help minimize the set of variable elements such that di erent products can share software parts to the maximum. Again, it is very hard to achieve this type of reuse at a detail level.Construction and Evolution. As architecture partitions the system into parts, some architecture-provided partitioning can naturally be used for constructing the system, which also requires that the system be broken into parts such that di erent teams (or individuals) can separately work on dif erent parts. A suitable partitioning in the architecture can provide the project with the parts that need to be built to build the system. As, almost by definition, the parts specified in an architecture are relatively independent (the dependence between parts coming through their relationship), they can be built independently.Analysis. It is highly desirable if some important properties about the behavior of the system can be determined before the system is actually built. This will allow the designers to consider alternatives and select the one that will best suit the needs. Many engineering disciplines use models to analyze design of a product for its cost, reliability, performance, etc. Architecture opens such possibilities for software also. It is possible (though the methods are not fully developed or standardized yet) to analyze or predict the properties of the system being built from its architecture. For example, the reliability or the performance of the system can be analyzed. Such an analysis can help determine whether the system will meet the quality and performance requirements, and if not, what needs to be done to meet the requirements. For example, while building a website for shopping, it is possible to analyze the response time or throughput for a proposed architecture, given some assumptions about the request load and hardware. It can then be decided whether the performance is satisfactory or not, and if not, what new capabilities should be added (for example, a di erent architecture or a faster server for the back end) to improve it to a satisfactory level.Not all of these uses may be significant in a project and which of these uses is pertinent to a project depends on the nature of the project. In some projects communication may be very important, but a detailed performance analysis may be unnecessary (because the system is too small or is meant for only a few users). In some other systems, performance analysis may be the primary use of architecture.
Generally speaking, architecture of a system provides a very high level view of the parts of the system and how they are related to form the whole system. That is, architecture partitions the system in logical parts such that each part can be comprehended independently, and then describes the system in terms of these parts and the relationship between these parts
.Any complex system can be partitioned in many di erent ways, each providing a useful view and each having di erent types of logical parts. The same holds true for a software system—there is no unique structure of the system that can be described by its architecture; there are many possible structures.
Due to this possibility of having multiple structures, one of the most widely accepted definitions of software architecture is that the software architecture of a system is the structure or structures of the system, which comprise software elements, the externally visible properties of those elements, and the relationships among them [6]. This definition implies that for elements in an architecture, we are only interested in those abstractions that specify those properties that other elements can assume to exist and that are needed to specify relationships. Details on how these properties are supported are not needed for architecture. This is an important capability that allows architecture descriptions to represent a complex system in a succinct form that is easily comprehended.
An architecture description of a system will therefore describe the di erent structures of the system. The next natural question is why should a team building a software system for some customer be interested in creating and documenting the structures of the proposed system. Some of the important uses that software architecture descriptions play are [6, 23, 54]:Understanding and communication. An architecture description is primarily to communicate the architecture to its various stakeholders, which include the users who will use the system, the clients who commissioned the system, the builders who will build the system, and, of course, the architects. Through this description the stakeholders gain an understanding of some macro properties of the system and how the system intends to ful-fill the functional and quality requirements. As the description provides a common language between stakeholders, it also becomes the vehicle for negotiation and agreement among the stakeholders, who may have conflicting goals.Reuse. The software engineering world has, for a long time, been working toward a discipline where software can be assembled from parts that are developed by di erent people and are available for others to use. If one wants to build a software product in which existing components may be reused, then architecture becomes the key point at which reuse at the highest level is decided. The architecture has to be chosen in a manner such that the components which have to be reused can fit properly and together with other components that may be developed. Architecture also facilitates reuse among products that are similar and building product families such that the common parts of these di erent but similar products can be reused. Architecture helps specify what is fixed and what is variable in these diferent products, and can help minimize the set of variable elements such that di erent products can share software parts to the maximum. Again, it is very hard to achieve this type of reuse at a detail level.Construction and Evolution. As architecture partitions the system into parts, some architecture-provided partitioning can naturally be used for constructing the system, which also requires that the system be broken into parts such that di erent teams (or individuals) can separately work on dif erent parts. A suitable partitioning in the architecture can provide the project with the parts that need to be built to build the system. As, almost by definition, the parts specified in an architecture are relatively independent (the dependence between parts coming through their relationship), they can be built independently.Analysis. It is highly desirable if some important properties about the behavior of the system can be determined before the system is actually built. This will allow the designers to consider alternatives and select the one that will best suit the needs. Many engineering disciplines use models to analyze design of a product for its cost, reliability, performance, etc. Architecture opens such possibilities for software also. It is possible (though the methods are not fully developed or standardized yet) to analyze or predict the properties of the system being built from its architecture. For example, the reliability or the performance of the system can be analyzed. Such an analysis can help determine whether the system will meet the quality and performance requirements, and if not, what needs to be done to meet the requirements. For example, while building a website for shopping, it is possible to analyze the response time or throughput for a proposed architecture, given some assumptions about the request load and hardware. It can then be decided whether the performance is satisfactory or not, and if not, what new capabilities should be added (for example, a di erent architecture or a faster server for the back end) to improve it to a satisfactory level.Not all of these uses may be significant in a project and which of these uses is pertinent to a project depends on the nature of the project. In some projects communication may be very important, but a detailed performance analysis may be unnecessary (because the system is too small or is meant for only a few users). In some other systems, performance analysis may be the primary use of architecture.
Role of Software Architecture