- From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 07:26:38 -0600
- To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
- cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
This looks to me like a good definition within the context of looking at architecture, but in the context of RM it doesn't look entirely appropriate to me. In the same sense that some of the definitions of synchronous floating around look perfectly fine to me, but not appropriate for our particular context. -----Original Message----- From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 11:55 AM To: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org Subject: Re: FW: Reliable Messaging Summary On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 09:50:53AM -0600, Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) wrote: > > Reliability: A predictable quality of service. This is a separate > > issue from fault tolerance, availability, or security. I'd like to recommend Roy Fielding's definition. It's more broad than what's been suggested so far, but it seems bang on from my POV; "Reliability, within the perspective of application architectures, can be viewed as the degree to which an architecture is susceptible to failure at the system level in the presence of partial failures within components, connectors, or data. Styles can improve reliability by avoiding single points of failure, enabling redundancy, allowing monitoring, or reducing the scope of failure to a recoverable action." -- http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/net_app_arch.htm#sec_ 2_3_7 MB -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2003 08:26:54 UTC