Showing posts with label SOA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SOA. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Designing robust web API

Many companies over the past years have been exposing their services via web service API. Some are doing a better job than the other. Once the API s publicly available, people will write code based on it, every change will break the client and make them unhappy. It is very important to get the first version of your API right.

In this post, I summarize some good practices that I have used successfully in my previous projects.

Use a RESTful Model
Design the web service API model on HTTP, REST and JSON format.
There has been a lot of comparison between SOAP and REST that I don't want to repeat here. The winner is surely REST. In this "resource oriented model", every resource type will be represented as a collection. On the other hand, HTTP verbs will be used to manipulate the resources.

Restful URL typically comes with the collection URI as well the individual URI. Here are some common examples for a resource type Person:
  1. List all persons. GET /persons
  2. Find a person with a particular id. GET /persons/123
  3. Get partial fields. GET /persons/123?fields=(name,age)
  4. Find a person's particular friend. GET/persons/123/friends/456
  5. Find all persons named John. GET /persons/search?q=(name,eq,John)
  6. Find all dogs whose master is John. GET /persons/search?q=(name,eqJohn)/dogs
  7. Create a person with a server assigned id. POST /persons?name=Dave&age=10
  8. Create a person with a client assigned id. PUT /persons/123?name=Dave&age=10
  9. Ask the person to perform an action. POST /persons/123/action/travel?location=Euro
  10. Remove a person. DELETE /persons/123
  11. Return a page of result. GET /persons/search?q=(name,eq,John)&offset=1&limit=25
It is a good practice to categorize the API based on whether it is cacheable and whether it is idempotent. Cacheable API is typically implemented using HTTP GET, whose response can be cached somewhere and can be reused in subsequent request. Notice that cacheable API can help reducing the workload on the server, but on the other hand, not accurately tracking the actual usage of the client. Idempotent API can be invoked multiple times with the same effect of being invoked once, which is important in unreliable network where retry is very common. POST is the only mechanism to implement non-idempotent API.
For input parameters, I tend to put everything into the URL and not using the HTTP headers, which is used for OAuth headers.
In case of any error happens, it should fail fast and communicate the error clearly to the calling user. HTTP error code should be used for this purpose; response code 200 is typically used if the request is processed successfully; response code 400 is used if the server runs into some application logic problem; response code 500 is used if the API request send by the client is wrong. A human readable error message, together with the hint to fix that, should be sent back in the HTTP body response.
For those who is interested in seeing more examples, here is an earlier blog that I wrote.
Stabilize your APIAPI is public and hence must be stable. To achieve the stability, the API should expose as minimal as possible (notice it is much easier to add stuff later but very difficult to remove anything that you have expose). Also, the API should only expose the function semantics but nothing about its implementation details, which allows the implementation to continuously evolve without breaking the client interface. There is actually a development practice that I advocate about having the architect to write API interface that confines the functional expectation of every system component. API designed in this way usually ends up with a higher level of abstraction.

A good API should focus to do one thing well, rather than multiple things of different purposes. Each API must be self-contained and not relying on any specific call sequence to work correctly. The only exception is the authentication call which must the first call to make and precede any other application API calls. As far as API security, App level key, with OAuth2.0 protocol should be used for authentication and authorization purpose.

It should also be very intuitive to use and difficult to make undetected mistakes without needing to read through the documentation. This usually requires the API to have a high degree of consistency (such as parameter ordering, naming convention etc) as well as short but clear documentation with simple usage example code.

On the development process side, we should let more people to review the API design, and perhaps run some pilot client projects before exposing it to the general public.

Version your APIEven you try to stablise your API, change will still be needed over time. This can be due to new requirements that you don't originally expected has arrived.

If you follow the minimal API design approach, the newer version is usually about adding parameters to your original API rather than removing parameters. A good practice is to support both API interface (the older version as well as the newer version) behind the same URL. (e.g. http://xyz.com/v1/path/...). On the implementation side, you only have the implementation that takes the latest version API parameters as input. In other words, you are prepared to receive request of the older version as well as the latest version. But you substitute the default value of the parameters of the newer version that is missing in the older version. And then send this request (with all the parameters filled) to the latest implementation.

Notice that by keeping the original endpoint URL unchanged, you are committed to provide backward compatibility (able to handle an older version request).

If your later version of API have an incompatible change (e.g. having a new parameter that is mandatory). The general practice is to use a different URL endpoint for the new version (e.g. http://xyz.com/v2/path/...). You also keep the corresponding implementation (v1 and v2) behind those endpoints. Depends on your decision whether to keep supporting the older version, you may want to introduce a deprecation process. Unfortunately there is no standard way to indicate an API will be deprecated in the response. One possible way is to put a flag in the HTTP header of the response to indicate when the API will be deprecated.

Asynchronous Invocation
Most API tend to be synchronous which means the client makes a call, wait until the server finishes the processing and return the result. But if the server takes a longer time to finish its processing, then an asynchronous invocation mechanism is important.

One simple mechanism is the client request is immediately returned with a receipt, while the server queue up the request and processing it at a later time. The receipt will be used by the client later to poll the server with the processing status and claim the result once it is available.

Another mechanism is to have the client provide a callback address in its request, which gets return immediately. After the server finishes the processing at a later time, it will invoke the callback address to push the result back to the client. While this is more resource efficient than the polling mechanism above, it involves more setup on the client side, such as running the server to listen for callbacks, and make sure the server can be authenticated in its callback.

Friday, January 15, 2010

RoadMap to SaaS

I have observed a pattern from multiple enterprises moving from a traditional web app to a SaaS. Trying to capture this pattern and a number of lessons learned. I use a J2EE Web App architecture to illustrate but the same principles apply to other technology platforms.

Stage 1: Some working Web App

At the very beginning, we have an web application that works well. We analyze the function of the web application and group the implementation classes accordingly


Stage 2: Separate functionality across processes

We analyze the functions and partition them into different processes (JVM). The partition needs to be coarse-grain and each process will communicate with each other via a service interface exposed by a Facade class. The service interface can be any remote object invocation interface or XML over HTTP. Restful web service is the de-facto way for the service interface.


Stage 3: Move different processes to different machines

To scale out beyond a single server's capacity, we move the process to a separate machine. Notice that the machine can be a physical machine, or a virtual machine running on top of hypervisor.



Stage 4: Build service pools

If the service itself is stateless, we can easily scale out the service capacity by putting multiple machines (running the same service) into a server pool. A network load balancer will be used to spread the workload evenly to the member servers.

When the workload increase, more machines can be added to the pool to boost up the overall capacity of the service. Elastic scalability provided by Cloud computing provider make growing and shrinking the pool even more rapid, and can hence dynamic workload more effectively.



Stage 5: Scale the data tier by partitioning

After we scale out the processing tier, we found the data tier becomes the bottleneck. So we also need to distribute the data access workload by partition the database according to the data key. Here are some classical techniques how we can build a distributed database.


Stage 6: Add Cache to reduce server load

If the application is has a high read/write ratio, or has some tolerance of data staleness, we can add a cache layer to reduce the hit of the actual services. Clients will check the cache before sending the request to the service.

We need to make sure the cached items to remain fresh. There are various schemes to achieve this. e.g. cached items can be expired after certain timeout, or an explicit invalidation request can be make to specific cached items when the corresponding backend data has been changed.

We can use local cache (reside in the same machine as the client) or a distributed cache engine such as Memcached or Oracle Coherence.



Stage 7: Consider which service to expose to public

At this point, we want to expose some of the services to the public either because this can bring revenue to our company or can facilitate a better B2B integration with our business partners. There are a lot of considerations to decide what to be expose, such as security consideration, scalability, service level agreement, utilization tracking ... etc.


Stage 8: Deploy an ingress service gateway

Once we decide what services to be exposed, we decide to use a specialized ingress service gateway to handle the concern that we outline above. Most of the XML service gateway is equipped with message validation, security checking, message transformation, routing logic.



Stage 9: Deploy an egress service gateway

We not only providing service to the public, but may also consume other public services. In this case we deploy an egress service gateway which can help to lookup the service provider endpoints, extract the service policy of the public service providers ... etc.


One important function of the egress service gateway is to manage my dependencies to external service providers. It typically keeps a list of equivalent service providers together with their availability and response time, and routing my request to the one according to my selection criteria (e.g. cheapest, most-reliable, lowest-latency ... etc.)



Stage 10: Implement service version control

My service will evolve after exposing to the public. In the ideal case, only the service implementation change but not the service interface so there is no need to change the client code.

But mostly likely it is not that ideal. There are chances that I need to change the service interface or the message format. In this case, I may need to run multiple versions of the services simultaneously to make sure I am not breaking an existing clients. This means I need the ingress service gateway to be intelligent about routing the client request to the right version of the service implementation.


A typical way is to maintain a matrix of version and keep track of their compatibilities. For example, we can use a release convention such that all minor releases is required to be backward compatible but major release is not required for that. Having this compatibility matrix information, the ingress gateway can determine the client version from its incoming request and route it to the server which has the latest compatible version.


Stage 11: Outsource infrastructure to public Cloud provider

Purchase necessary hardware equipment and maintaining them can be very costly, especially when there are idle time in the usage of computing resources. Idle time is usually unavoidable because we need to budget the resource at the peak workload scenarios so there are idle time at non-peak hours.

For a more efficient use of computing resources, we can consider some public cloud provider such as Amazon AWS or Microsoft Azure.

But it is important that running an application in the cloud may need to redesign the application to cope with some unique characteristics of the cloud environment, such as how to deal with high network latency and bandwidth cost, as well as how to design application to live with an eventually consistent DB.

Friday, April 11, 2008

REST design pattern

Based on the same architectural pattern of the web, "REST" has a growing dominance of the SOA (Service Oriented Architecture) implementation these days. In this article, we will discuss some basic design principles of REST.

SOAP : The Remote Procedure Call Model

Before the REST become a dominance, most of SOA architecture are built around WS* stack, which is fundamentally a RPC (Remote Procedure Call) model. Under this model, "Service" is structured as some "Procedure" exposed by the system.

For example, WSDL is used to define the procedure call syntax (such as the procedure name, the parameter and their structure). SOAP is used to define how to encode the procedure call into an XML string. And there are other WS* standards define higher level protocols such as how to pass security credentials around, how to do transactional procedure call, how to discover the service location ... etc.

Unfortunately, the WS* stack are getting so complicated that it takes a steep learning curve before it can be used. On the other hand, it is not achieving its original goal of inter-operability (probably deal to different interpretation of what the spec says).

In the last 2 years, WS* technology development has been slowed down and the momentum has been shifted to another model; REST.

REST: The Resource Oriented Model

REST (REpresentation State Transfer) is introduced by Roy Fielding when he captured the basic architectural pattern that make the web so successful. Observing how the web pages are organized and how they are linked to each other, REST is modeled around a large number of "Resources" which "link" among each other. As a significant difference with WS*, REST raises the importance of "Resources" as well as its "Linkage", on the other hand, it push down the importance of "Procedures".

Unlike the WS* model, "Service" in the REST is organized as large number of "Resources". Each resource will have a URI that make it globally identifiable. A resource is represented by some format of "Representation" which is typically extracted by an idempotent HTTP GET. The representation may embed other URI which refers to other resources. This emulates an HTML link between web pages and provide a powerful way for the client to discover other services by traversing its links. It also make building SOA search engine possible.

On the other hand, REST down play the "Procedure" aspect and define a small number of "action" based on existing HTTP Methods. As we discussed above, HTTP GET is used to get a representation of the resource. To modify a resource, REST use HTTP PUT with the new representation embedded inside the HTTP Body. To delete a resource, REST use HTTP DELETE. To get metadata of a resource, REST use HTTP HEAD. Notice that in all these cases, the HTTP Body doesn't carry any information about the "Procedure". This is quite different from WS* SOAP where the request is always made using HTTP POST.

At the first glance, it seems REST is quite limiting in terms of the number of procedures that it can supported. It turns out this is not the case, REST allows any "Procedure" (which has a side effect) to use HTTP POST. Effectively, REST categorize the operations by its nature and associate well-defined semantics with these categories (ie: GET for read-only, PUT for update, DELETE for remove, all above are idempotent) while provide an extension mechanism for application-specific operations (ie: POST for application procedures which may be non-idempotent).


URI Naming Convention

Since resource is usually mapped to some state in the system, analyzing its lifecycle is an important step when designing how a resource is created and how an URI should be structured.

Typically there are some eternal, singleton "Factory Resource" which create other resources. Factory resource typically represents the "type" of resources. Factory resource usually have a static, well-known URI, which is suffixed by a plural form of the resource type. Some examples are ...
http://xyz.com/books
http://xyz.com/users
http://xyz.com/orders

"Resource Instance", which are created by the "Factory Resource" usually represents an instance of that resource type. "Resource instances" typically have a limited life span. Their URI typically contains some unique identifier so that the corresponding instance of the resource can be located. Some examples are ...
http://xyz.com/books/4545
http://xyz.com/users/123
http://xyz.com/orders/2008/04/10/1001

If this object is a singleton object of that type, the id is not needed.
http://www.xyz.com/library

"Dependent Resource" are typically created and owned by an existing resource during part of its life cycle. Therefore "dependent resource" has an implicit life-cycle dependency on its owning parent. When a parent resource is deleted, all the dependent resource it owns will be deleted automatically. Dependent resource use an URI which has prefix of its parent resource URI. Some examples are ...
http://xyz.com/books/4545/tableofcontent
http://xyz.com/users/123/shopping_cart

Creating Resource

HTTP PUT is also used to create the object if the caller has complete control of assigning the object id, the request body contains the representation of the Object after successful creation.
PUT /library/books/668102 HTTP/1.1
Host: www.xyz.com
Content-Type: application/xml
Content-Length: nnn

<book>
<title>Restful design</title>
<author>Ricky</author>
</book>
HTTP/1.1 201 Created

If the caller has no control in the object id, HTTP POST is made to the object's parent container with the request body contains the representation of the Object. The response body should contain a reference to the URL of the created object.
POST /library/books HTTP/1.1
Host: www.xyz.com
Content-Type: application/xml
Content-Length: nnn

<book>
<title>Restful design</title>
<author>Ricky</author>
</book>
HTTP/1.1 301 Moved PermanentlyLocation: /library/books/668102

To create a resource instance of a particular resource type, make an HTTP POST to the Factory Resource URI. If the creation is successful, the response will contain a URI of the resource that has been created.

To create a book ...
POST /books HTTP/1.1
Host: xyz.com
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: nnn

<book>
<title>...</title>
<author>Ricky Ho</author>
</book>
HTTP/1.1 201 Created
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
Location: /books/4545

<ref>http://xyz.com/books/4545</ref>

To create a dependent resource, make an HTTP POST (or PUT) to its owning resource's URI

To upload the content of a book (using HTTP POST) ...
POST  /books/4545  HTTP/1.1
Host: example.org
Content-Type: application/pdf
Content-Length: nnnn

{pdf data}
HTTP/1.1 201 Created
Content-Type: application/pdf
Location: /books/4545/content

<ref>http://xyz.com/books/4545/tableofcontent</ref>

HTTP POST is typically used to create a resource when its URI is unknown to the client before its creation. However, if the URI is known to the client, then an idempotent HTTP PUT should be used with the URI of the resource to be created. For example, the

To upload the content of a book (using HTTP PUT) ...
PUT  /books/4545/tableofcontent  HTTP/1.1
Host: example.org
Content-Type: application/pdf
Content-Length: nnnn

{pdf data}
HTTP/1.1 200 OK

Finding Resources

Make an HTTP GET to the factory resource URI, criteria pass in as parameters.
(Note that it is up to the factory resource to interpret the query parameter).

To search for books with a certain author ...
GET /books?author=Ricky HTTP/1.1
Host: xyz.com
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: nnn

<books>
<book>
<ref>http://xyz.com/books/4545</ref>
<title>...</title>
<author>Ricky</author>
</book>
<book>
<ref>http://xyz.com/books/4546</ref>
<title>...</title>
<author>Ricky</author>
</book>
</books>

Another school of thoughts is to embed the criteria in the URI path, such as ...
http://xyz.com/books/author/Ricky

I personally prefers the query parameters mechanism because it doesn't imply any order of search criteria.


Lookup a particular resource

Make an HTTP GET to the resource object URI

Lookup a particular book...
GET /books/4545 HTTP/1.1
Host: xyz.com
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: nnn

<book>
<title>...</title>
<author>Ricky Ho</author>
</book>

In case the resource have multiple representation format. The client should specify within the HTTP header "Accept" of its request what format she is expecting.


Lookup a dependent resource

Make an HTTP GET to the dependent resource object URI

Download the table of content of a particular book...
GET /books/4545/tableofcontent HTTP/1.1
Host: xyz.com
Content-Type: application/pdf
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: application/pdf
Content-Length: nnn

{pdf data}

Modify a resource

Make an HTTP PUT to the resource object URI, pass in the new object representation in the HTTP body

Change the book title ...
PUT /books/4545 HTTP/1.1
Host: xyz.com
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: nnn

<book>
<title>Changed title</title>
<author>Ricky Ho</author>
</book>
HTTP/1.1 200 OK

Delete a resource

Make an HTTP DELETE to the resource object URI

Delete a book ...
DELETE /books/4545 HTTP/1.1
Host: xyz.com
HTTP/1.1 200 OK

Resource Reference

In some cases, we do not want to create a new resource, but we want to add a "reference" to an existing resource. e.g. consider a book is added into a shopping cart, which is another resource.

Add a book into the shopping cart ...
POST  /users/123/shopping_cart  HTTP/1.1
Host: xyz.com
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: nnn

<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<add>
<ref>http://xyz.com/books/4545</ref>
</add>
HTTP/1.1 200 OK

Show all items of the shopping cart ...
GET  /users/123/shopping_cart  HTTP/1.1
Host: xyz.com
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: nnn

<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<shopping_cart>
<ref>http://xyz.com/books/4545</ref>
...
<shopping_cart>
Note that the shopping cart resource contains "resource reference" which acts as links to other resources (which is the books). Such linkages create a resource web so that client can discovery and navigate across different resources.


Remove a book from the shopping cart ...
POST  /users/123/shopping_cart  HTTP/1.1
Host: xyz.com
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: nnn

<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<remove>
<ref>http://xyz.com/books/4545</ref>
</remove>
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Note that we are using HTTP POST rather than HTTP DELETE to remove a resource reference. This is because we are remove a link but not the actual resource itself. In this case, the book still exist after it is taken out from the shopping cart.

Note that what the book is deleted, that all the shopping cart that refers to that book need to be fixed in an application specific way. One way is to do lazy checking. In other words, wait until the shopping cart checking out to check the book existence and fix it at that point.

Checkout the shopping cart ...
POST  /orders  HTTP/1.1
Host: xyz.com
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: nnn

<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<ref>http://xyz.com/users/123/shopping_cart</ref>
HTTP/1.1 201 Created
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
Location: /orders/2008/04/10/1001

<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<ref>http://xyz.com/orders/2008/04/10/1001</ref>
Note that here the checkout is implemented by creating another resource "Order" which is used to keep track of the fulfillment of the purchase.

Asynchronous Request

In case when the operation takes a long time to complete, an asynchronous mode should be used. In a polling approach, a transient transaction resource is return immediately to the caller. The caller can then use GET request to poll for the result of the operation

We can also use a notification approach. In this case, the caller pass along a callback URI when making the request. The server will invoke the callback URI to POST the result when it is done.

The basic idea is to immediately create a "Transaction Resource" to return back to the client. While the actual processing happens asynchronously in the background, the client at any time, can poll the "Transaction Resource" for the latest processing status.

Lets look at an example to request for printing a book, which may take a long time to complete

Print a book

POST  /books/123  HTTP/1.1
Host: xyz.com
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: nnn

?xml version="1.0" ?>
<print>http://xyz.com/printers/abc</print>
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
Location: /transactions/1234

<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<ref>http://xyz.com/transactions/1234</ref>
Note that a response is created immediately which contains the URI of a transaction resource, even before the print job is started. Client can poll the transaction resource to obtain the latest status of the print job.

Check the status of the print Job ...
GET /transactions/1234 HTTP/1.1
Host: xyz.com
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: nnn

<transaction>
<type>PrintJob</type>
<status>In Progress</status>
</transaction>
It is also possible to cancel the transaction if it is not already completed.

Cancel the print job

POST  /transactions/1234  HTTP/1.1
Host: xyz.com
Content-Type: application/xml; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: nnn

?xml version="1.0" ?>
<cancel/>
HTTP/1.1 200 OK


Conclusion
The Resource Oriented Model that REST advocates provides a more natural fit for our service web. Therefore, I suggest that SOA implementation should take the REST model as a default approach.