S. Malabarba, R. Pandey, J. Gragg, E. Barr, and J. F. Barnes. Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes. In Proc. ECOOP, 2000.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....approach to upgrading takes advantage of the fact that long lived systems are robust : they tolerate node failures, and they allow nodes to recover and rejoin the system. Nodes are prepared for failures and know how to recover to a consistent state. This means that we Dynamic updating systems [18, 19, 21, 24, 25, 32] can reduce the time required to upgrade a node, but they still require time to install new code and to transform a node s state. can model a node upgrade as a soft restart. But even with this assumption, there are several challenges that a general approach for upgrading distributed systems must ....

....one domain of the system to another, e.g. a system may transform a monetary value from one currency to another as it is transferred between di#erent countries. Elements of our techniques for handling mixed mode systems may also apply to federated systems. 9. 5 Dynamic Updating Dynamic updating [18,19,21,24,25,32] enables nodes to upgrade with minimal service interruption. This is complementary to our approach and can reduce downtime during upgrades. 10 Thesis Schedule In her keynote address at SOSP 2001, Prof. Liskov outlined our techniques for supporting upgrades in distributed systems [31] In Summer ....

S. Malabarba, R. Pandey, J. Gragg, E. Barr, and J. F. Barnes. Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes. In European Conf. on Object-Oriented Programming, 2000.

....name clashes by limiting types passed between the applications. Another system that supports dynamic updates through reconfiguration [2] cannot handle updates that involve different versions of the same class or interface. A large class of systems that focus on dynamic adaptation of Java programs [1, 9, 14] solves the problem of class name clashes by using a modified version of JVM. Last, some For sake of brevity, we omit the discussion of the likelihood that the situations described here as sources of name clashes will occur in practice. For readers that will not find the practicality of the ....

....using a modified version of JVM. Last, some For sake of brevity, we omit the discussion of the likelihood that the situations described here as sources of name clashes will occur in practice. For readers that will not find the practicality of the situations evident, good arguments can be found in [ 1,8,9,12]. Fighting Class Name Clashes in Java Component Systems 3 existing Java component systems [4] simply do not support dynamic updates or coexistence of several versions of a class or an interface with the same name. 3 Removing Name Clashes in Byte Code Our solution to the problem of class name ....

Malabarba, S., Pandey, R., Gragg, J., Barr, E., Barnes, J. F.: Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes, ECOOP'00, 2000

....while the component application that uses For sake of brevity, we omit the discussion of the likelihood that the situations described here as sources of name clashes will occur in practice. For readers that will not find the practicality of the situations evident, good arguments can be found in [ 1,9,11,14]. the component is running. This can lead to a name clash between the old and the new version of the classes. As an example, consider a component with a class LoggerIrnpl that is to be updated. 2 An attempt to replace this class by a new version will cause a name clash because the Java virtual ....

....JDRUMS 2, provides more options for dynamic changes, but also brings security problems as during the update, it is possible to retrieve secret information that is not available during normal program execution. JDRUMS also disables the just in time compilation. The Dynamic Java Classes (DJC) [11] also allow updating Java classes at runtime. Again, the name clashes are removed by using a modified Java virtual machine with a dynamic classloader that allows a class to be defined multiple times. DJC also extend the Java security mechanism to cope with dynamic updates, and disable the just in ....

Malabarba, S., Pandey, R., Gragg, J., Barr, E., Barnes, J. F.: Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes, Proceedings of the European Conference on ObjectOriented Programming, June 2000

....[12] ARGUS [2] and POLYLITH [8] are coupled to particular research languages that generally lack support for mainstream software development. Other solutions have targeted development languages, but at a cost: HADAS [1] for Java) requires integrated tool support at runtime; dynamic Java classes [13] compromise portability by modifying the Java Virtual Machine; and dynamic classes for C [7] lack an effective means of completing module replacement, because existing instances cannot be changed (replacement is delayed until they go out of scope) Several surveys on these and other approaches ....

S. Malabarba, R. Pandey, J. Gragg, E. Barr, and J. F. Barnes. Runtime support for type-safe dynamic java classes. In ECOOP 14, pages 337--361, June 2000.

....while the component application that uses For sake of brevity, we omit the discussion of the likelihood that the situations described here as sources of name clashes will occur in practice. For readers that will not find the practicality of the situations evident, good arguments can be found in [1,9,11,14]. the component is running. This can lead to a name clash between the old and the new version of the classes. As an example, consider a component with a class LoggerImpl that is to be updated An attempt to replace this class by a new version will cause a name clash because the Java virtual ....

Malabarba, S., Pandey, R., Gragg, J., Barr, E., Barnes, J. F.: Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes, Proceedings of the European Conference on ObjectOriented Programming, June 2000

....program, they cannot replace existing bindings with new ones. Those systems that do allow replacement typically either limit what can be updated (e.g. only abstract types [7] whole programs [9] or class instances [12] when the updates can occur (e.g. only when updated code is inactive [7, 14, 6, 9]) or how the updates may occur (e.g. functions and values must not change their types [12] or changes to module and class signatures are restricted [14, 7] These limitations leave open the possibility that a software update may be needed yet cannot be accomplished without downtime. In many ....

.... abstract types [7] whole programs [9] or class instances [12] when the updates can occur (e.g. only when updated code is inactive [7, 14, 6, 9] or how the updates may occur (e.g. functions and values must not change their types [12] or changes to module and class signatures are restricted [14, 7]) These limitations leave open the possibility that a software update may be needed yet cannot be accomplished without downtime. In many cases, there are few safeguards to ensure update correctness. Some systems, for example, break type safety [22, 12, 6, 9, 5] or have only dynamic checking [3] ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

S. Malabarba, R. Pandey, J. Gragg, E. Barr, and J. F. Barnes. Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, June 2000.

....a running program, but cannot replace existing bindings with new ones. Those systems that do allow updates typically either limit what can be updated (e.g. only abstract types [4] whole programs [6] or class instances [10] when the updates can occur (e.g. only when updated code is inactive [4, 12, 19, 6]) or how the updates may occur (e.g. functions and values must not change their types [10] or changes to module and class signatures are restricted [12, 4] These limitations leave open the possibility that a software update may be needed yet cannot be accomplished without downtime. In many ....

.... types [4] whole programs [6] or class instances [10] when the updates can occur (e.g. only when updated code is inactive [4, 12, 19, 6] or how the updates may occur (e.g. functions and values must not change their types [10] or changes to module and class signatures are restricted [12, 4]) These limitations leave open the possibility that a software update may be needed yet cannot be accomplished without downtime. In many cases, it is dicult to know that the application of an update will not cause a crash in itself. Some systems, for example, break type safety [21, 10, 19, 6] or ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

S. Malabarba, R. Pandey, J. Gragg, E. Barr, and J. F. Barnes. Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, June 2000.

....a running program, but cannot replace existing bindings with new ones. Those systems that do allow updates typically either limit what can be updated (e.g. only abstract types [4] whole programs [6] or class instances [10] when the updates can occur (e.g. only when updated code is inactive [4, 12, 19, 6]) or how the updates may occur (e.g. functions and values must not change their types [10] or changes to module and class signatures are restricted [12, 4] These limitations leave open the possibility that a software update may be needed yet cannot be accomplished without downtime. In many ....

.... types [4] whole programs [6] or class instances [10] when the updates can occur (e.g. only when updated code is inactive [4, 12, 19, 6] or how the updates may occur (e.g. functions and values must not change their types [10] or changes to module and class signatures are restricted [12, 4]) These limitations leave open the possibility that a software update may be needed yet cannot be accomplished without downtime. In many cases, it is di#cult to know that the application of an update will not cause a crash in itself. Some systems, for example, break type safety [21, 10, 19, 6] ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

S. Malabarba, R. Pandey, J. Gragg, E. Barr, and J. F. Barnes. Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, June 2000.

No context found.

S. Malabarba, R. Pandey, J. Gragg, E. Barr and F. Barnes, Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes, in: Proc. of the European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Sophia Antipolis and Cannes, June 2000, Springer, To appear, Currently available at http://pdclab.cs. ucdavis.edu.

....library. Despite these advantages, there are several limitations of our approach. Static This approach is static. In order to dynamically change policies, one must have the ability to modify class definitions while they are running. We are currently working on an approach using dynamic classes [25]. Dynamic classes allows one to redefine a Java class at runtime. Using this infrastructure we have begun building a dynamic version of this system. Load time editing Another limitation is that the approach may repeatedly edit local resource files, thereby incurring unnecessary cost. The cost of ....

Malabarba S, Pandey R, Gragg J, Barr E, Barnes F. Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes. Proceedings of the European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Sophia Antipolis and Cannes, France. Springer-Verlag, 2000. To appear. http://pdclab.cs.ucdavis.edu.

....distributed systems, where the local policies in individual clusters must be discovered in order to construct and enforce global policies, and to verify consistency among the different local policies. When policies change, the runtime system instruments the protected classes, using dynamic classes [23], to enforce the new policy. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we describe the declarative security policy language and the meta policy model. We describe the implementation of the security infrastructure in Section 3. We present a performance analysis of the ....

....of our approach s effectiveness. 3.1. Background: dynamic classes Our implementation relies on dynamic classes to change policies. Using dynamic classes, we can instrument classes at runtime, and update their instances if needed. This is necessary to enforce policy changes. A previous paper [23] contains a full account of dynamic classes. In this section, we briefly outline the design and implementation, focusing on semantic and technical issues. We wished to extend, not replace or weaken, Java s type and dynamic linking systems. We designed the semantics and interface for dynamic ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

S. Malabarba, R. Pandey, J. Gragg, E. Barr and F. Barnes, Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes, in: Proc. of the European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Sophia Antipolis and Cannes, June 2000, Springer, To appear, Currently available at http://pdclab.cs. ucdavis.edu.

No context found.

S. Malabarba, R. Pandey, J. Gragg, E. Barr, and J. F. Barnes. Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes. In Proc. ECOOP, 2000.

No context found.

S. Malabarba, R. Pandey, J. Gragg, E. Barr and J.F. Barnes. Runtime Support for Type-Safe Dynamic Java Classes. Proc. of 14th European Conference on ObjectOriented Programming, 2000.

No context found.

Malabarba S, Pandey R, Gragg J, Barr E, Barnes J. F. Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes. ECOOP'00, 2000.

No context found.

Malabarba, S., Pandey, R., Gragg, J., Barr, E., Barnes, J.F.: Runtime Support for Type-Safe Dynamic Java Classes. In: ECOOP 2000 - Object-Oriented Programming, 14th European Conference. Volume 1850 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science., Springer (2000) 337--361

No context found.

Malabarba S, Pandey R, Gragg J, Barr E, Barnes J. F. Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes. ECOOP'00, 2000.

No context found.

S. Malabarba, R. Pandey, J. Gragg, E. Barr and J. F. Barnes, "Runtime support for type-safe dynamic Java classes", presented at In Proceedings of the Fourteenth European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, 2000.

No context found.

Malabarba, S., Pandey, R., Gragg, J., Barr, E., and Barnes, J.F. (2000). "Runtime Support for Type-Safe Dynamic Java Classes". Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1850. pp:337-361.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC