computer Assessment
计算机Assessment代写 To demonstrate your system working you are required to submit a video, usually a screen capture video, ideally as short as
Please be aware that this is an individual assignment and as such will be checked for plagiarism. You should ensure that the work is yours and yours alone, citing any third-party sources as applicable. Plagiarism is a serious academic offense. Submission of your work implies your claim that it is your individual work and has not previously been submitted for academic credit.
If you have any questions about the assignment please see the module organiser David Cutting in the first instance or use any of the support options listed in this document.
1. Assessment Details 计算机Assessment代写
The Casidave Calcutron Web Calculator is the world’s most over-engineered yet deeply unreliable calculator. It has been implemented using several cloud technologies including stateless, containers, CI, and is currently deployed on the QPC.
Your assignment is to start with this as a base and to add more functionality as specified in this document. There is some potential for a choice for what specifically you wish to implement. 计算机Assessment代写
Note the Web Calculator only deals in whole numbers (integers).
Currently the calculator consists of three container components:
webcalc-frontend – this is a simple container that contains some static HTML and JavaScript that implements the calculator. When calculations are required it makes an XMLHttpRequest in Javascript to one of the worker services. The endpoints it uses for these requests are configured within the Javascript.
Repository: http://gitlab.hal.davecutting.uk/root/webcalc-frontend
Live Demo: http://frontend.webcalc.qpc.hal.davecutting.uk/
webcalc-add – this is a PHP based container that takes two HTTP GET parameters (x and y) and returns some JSON including the result of their sum. There is some rudimentary CI testing (unit testing of the function alone but not as a web service).
Repository: http://gitlab.hal.davecutting.uk/root/webcalc-add
Live Demo: http://add.webcalc.qpc.hal.davecutting.uk/?x=3&y=5
webcalc-subtract – this is a Node/Express based container than takes two HTTP GET parameters (x and y) and returns some JSON including the result of x-y. There is some rudimental CI testing (unit testing of the function along but not as a web service).
Repository: http://gitlab.hal.davecutting.uk/root/webcalc-subtract
Live Demo: http://subtract.webcalc.qpc.hal.davecutting.uk/?x=3&y=5
You are required to modify and extend this calculator as described in the following tasks.
1.1 Tasks 计算机Assessment代写
- New Functions
Add a minimum of four new functions to the calculator including the changes to the front-end as well as back-end implementations for each. See the assessment criteria for more information but in general higher marks are given for use of new languages (beyond those provided) and things such as CI pipelines. Points can also be awarded for use of novel technologies i.e. deployment using FaaS for one function as an example (new technology or language points are only awarded once).
Example mathematical functions to add would be multiple, divide, modulo, and square (note that webcalc only deals in whole numbers so divide would need to account for this). 计算机Assessment代写
- Improvement to Current Implementation
There are a number of issues with how the current webcalc works which include (but are likely not limited to):
- Lack of handling for asynchronous calls being blocked or actions happening while waiting for a response in the front end
- No error handling by the front end
- No error handling by either of the provided backend example services
- Static configuration of routes to services in the frontend
- CI testing for the provided backend services are unit tests on the function alone, i.e. they do not actually perform an HTTP request to check web API functionality
Plan and implement improvements to address some or all of the above, or other shortcomings or issues you perceive within the provided system. See the assessment criteria and submission instructions for more information on what may be assessed and how to show this working.
Open Challenges
You must do two of the following challenges and implement solutions – please note there are only two to choose from unless you suggest your own (see the end).
C1. Custom proxy router – currently each function endpoint has a custom URL configured in the frontend client. For this challenge you will build a self-container web proxy as a container to which the front end will pass all calls to (including the x, y, and operator). This proxy will then itself hold the specific endpoints for different methods and make the call before returning the answer. For full marks this service should be highly configurable and support some service discovery options (what methods are available for example). Note you are required to build this yourself rather than using a third-party service or container.
C2. Frontend service failure handler – the frontend currently stores a single URL for each function. This challenge is to update the frontend to support multiple URLs for each function. If a specific endpoint falls offline or errors the frontend should be able to continue using other endpoints instead. This may also include load balancing while multiple endpoints are available. In combination with C1 this would refer to multiple URLs for the proxy service provided by C1. Please note “frontend” as always refers to the HTML+JS component (the in-browser), should you implement this handler in the proxy it will not count for marks against C2. 计算机Assessment代写
If you have an idea for another “C” challenge then please speak to David Cutting within one week of the date released. If this is deemed acceptable it will then be added to this document as an option for everyone to do.
Monitoring and Metrics 计算机Assessment代写
Monitoring and testing service – all the testing currently happens during the build cycle with CI testing. Implement a separate service (this could be a container or other service) that when used makes HTTP requests with random numbers to the mathematical functions and checks (a) correctness of results against expectations and (b) overall performance in time (in an ideal world this service should periodically check performance and record results in addition to an on-demand operation). Note you are required to build this yourself rather than using a third-party service or container.
For full marks you are expected to have some form of monitoring periodically test and alert on failure of your calculator (this can be an external service or container as you like as long as you have done the first part from scratch yourself).
Stateful Saving of Current Value 计算机Assessment代写
Currently there is no way to store the current result. For this section you should implement, using any technology (containers, FaaS, database, etc) you like a way to:
- Save the current result and return (and display) an identifier for this saved value
- Provide the option to enter an identifier and thus recall the saved value to the frontend 计算机Assessment代写
Multi-Vendor Architecture
Complete a justified design (you are not required to implement) for how the web calculator could be fully deployed onto multiple cloud vendors with a common broker/router. Include diagrams and text as appropriate demonstrating how your design would ensure ultimate resilience and continue to badly add numbers together even after a zombie uprising.
1.2 Deployment Environment
As it stands the current webcalc is deployed on the QPC Kubernetes system with source code and docker registry in the QPC gitlab install. It is suggested that you continue to use this architecture for your project, or at least most of it, but this isn’t a requirement.
You are free to use any provider(s) you like and their technology stacks but be aware that (a) less support will be available and (b) you must make any code accessible when you submit (see submission section for details). It’s strongly suggested you discuss with the teaching team before selecting a platform other than QPC Kubernetes/gitlab.
2. Assessment Criteria 计算机Assessment代写
The following are the criteria against which your submission will be marked and their conceptual marking equivalents.
Marking Criteria
| Criteria | Outstanding 85% + | Excellent 70%-85% | Very Good 60%-70% | Good 50%-60% | Acceptable 40%-50% | Unacceptable < 40% |
| Task A. Additional Mathematical Functions
4 x 7% (total of 28% for A) | Perfect implementation of function in a new language or paradigm with excellent CI tests fully covering functionality | Excellent implementation of function in a new language or paradigm with excellent CI tests. Some very minor weaknesses in implementation such as a lack of sensible error conditions. | Good implementation of a function usually in a new language with good CI tests. Some weaknesses in some aspects of implementation.
| Function implemented well in a new language or with significant updates to provided models with CI tests. Some aspects of the implementation missing or lacking. | Function implemented and working but little extension shown beyond provided examples. | Function not fully or at all implemented, significant errors may be present in submission. 计算机Assessment代写 |
Task B.Addressing shortcomings12% | Excellent understanding of the key shortcomings shown with exemplary well demonstrated implementation leading to a robust functional system. | Very good understanding of the key shortcomings shown with strong well demonstrated implementation leading to a robust functional system.
| Good understanding of the key shortcomings shown with well demonstrated implementation leading towards a robust functional system. | Demonstrates understanding of some key shortcomings which are well addressed in a suitable fashion leading towards an improved system. | Some shortcomings addressed correctly or showing good intention and nearly functional solutions. | Shortcomings addressed in minor part or not at all. |
| Task C. Challenges
2 x 10% (total of 20% for C) | Excellent and perfectly demonstrated implementation of challenge to a near industry standard incorporating best practices and documentation as appropriate. | Excellent and very well demonstrated implementation of challenge to a very high standard incorporating best practices and documentation as appropriate.
| Very good solutions well demonstrated incorporating some significant best practices and documentation as appropriate. | Good solutions clearly demonstrated and meeting the goals set well but with some weaknesses in design or implementation. | Solutions meeting (or almost meeting) the challenge set but with major weaknesses in design or implementation. | Solutions failing to meet the requirements, containing significant errors or lacking in functionality. |
Task D. Monitoring & Metrics计算机Assessment代写15%
| Excellent industry quality monitoring with all aspects considered and full periodic testing and alerting.
| Excellent monitoring showing near industry quality with nearly all aspects considered and full periodic testing and alerting.
| Very good monitoring showing strong consideration of nearly all aspects with periodic testing and alerting. | Good monitoring showing promise but with some significant weaknesses and/or some failings of periodic testing and alerting. | Basic monitoring in place with simple connections but with major weaknesses and/or no periodic alerting. | Fails to perform any effective monitoring or be close to operational. |
| Task E. Stateful Saving
15%
| Excellent fully-featured saving and recall including error handling and exceptions.
| Excellent saving and recall including error handling. | Save and recall working well with some quality features. | Saving and recall working correctly. | Saving and recall almost working with some errors. | Fails to meet requirement to save or recall and with no or little attempt. |
Task F. Architectural Design10% | Excellent fully justified designs showing an appreciation for the core issues of high-availability over multiple vendors.
| Excellent designs with strong justification showing appreciation for the core issues. | Generally excellent designs and justification with some issues or weaknesses. | Good designs and justification with some weaknesses throughout or significant weaknesses in one area. | Fair designs and justification but with weaknesses or issues throughout. | Poor quality or badly justified designs showing no real understanding of the core issues. |
3. Feedback
Feedback in the form of marks will be provided as soon as practicable after submission with the expectation that marking will be complete (and marks provided) within two working weeks.
Individual feedback will take the form of a numeric score against each of the assessment criteria (there may be brief comments for these criteria if appropriate), a total made from these scores weighted by section, and an overall textual comment on the totality of the submission.
Generalised feedback will be provided to the class as a whole including overall trends and areas of particular concern.
Anyone wishing to discuss their marks in more detail are welcome to do so using any of the support arrangements outlined in this document.
4. Submission 计算机Assessment代写
Submission will be via Canvas and also through repository access. Please read this section carefully to avoid any mistakes which could lead to marks being lost.
Note: three uploads are required – unless you complete all three then this assignment will be regarded as not submitted. It is your responsibility to check the validity/lack of corruption of any uploads.
Late penalties will be applied to this assignment based on the latest timestamp of any uploaded item.
You are required to:
- Provide repository access if not using the QPC gitlab (gitlab.hal.davecutting.uk – if you are using this then you don’t need to do anything other than provide the links in your report) so for example the EEECS gitlab or any other repository service. It is your responsibility to discuss this with a member of the teaching team to allow them access (or a link to a public repository) if this is the case.
- Upload three items to the relevant assignment option on Canvas:
- A completed report based on the template provided (you must use the template) named as <student_number>.pdf to the REPORT assignment on Canvas.
- A demonstration video showing the operation of your system (see 4.1 for more details) to the VIDEO assignment on Canvas.
- A zip file containing copy of all source code you have written (this is required in addition to the repository access for the external examiner) to the CODE assignment on Canvas.
- Validate your uploads by viewing them via Canvas and making sure they are correct and uncorrupted. Previously students have uploaded the wrong assignments or an early version etc – it is your responsibility to ensure the correct item is uploaded.
4.1 Video Submission
To demonstrate your system working you are required to submit a video, usually a screen capture video, ideally as short as possible. This should show each of the key elements of your solution working (with inspection mode or similar to show network traffic to the endpoints).
You should use this video to highlight any specifics you wish to, for example any particularly detailed functionality included.
You are not required to specifically present or explain your work but we will not be running all code ourselves (some samples will be run) so this allows us to see it does actually operate! Be sure to cover all the features.
Please be mindful of filesize and compress/re-encode if needed. Previously we’ve had submissions of 1GB or more for a short video! This will take a long time to upload and upload (and check) must be completed by the deadline to avoid penalties.
更多代写： HomeWork cs作业 金融代考 postgreSQL代写 IT assignment代写 统计代写 数据分析作业代写
