Download
1 / 17
170 likes | 293 Vues
This document outlines the critical role of Transaction Processing Systems (TPS) in information systems and emphasizes the need for effective physical design methodology. It covers the applications and scope of TPS, recommending a physical design charting approach based on diagrammatic representations. Key elements of physical design, including separating processes from data stores by various criteria such as time and place, are discussed. Additionally, it delves into common design methodologies and the oversimplification that can occur in design examples, drawing on insights from established texts.
E N D
Transaction Processing Systems:The Need for Physical Design Methodology Teaching Paul Rosenthal California State University, Los Angeles
Outline • Importance of TPS Applications • Scope of TPS Applications • Recommended Physical Design Charting Approach • Typical Physical Design Methodologies • Oversimplification of Design Examples
Transaction Processing Systems • Transaction Processing Systems applications (TPS) are the core of information systems (IS) impact on the public. • In the typical business organization, because of the number of clerical workers normally involved, they constitute the majority of IS project funding requirements.
A Typical Text’s View Turban, McLean & Wetherbe (2004). IT for Management.
The Need for Physical Design Methodology Teaching For TPS, a physical design is created from a DFD based logical design, by separating processes and data stores by: • time (daily vs. monthly, day vs. night ...), • place (client or server), • centralized vs. distributed..., • online vs. batch, • manual vs. automated, etc.
Typical Physical Design Methodologies Whitten (2004) - Their physical data flow diagram based method for an online system demonstrates: • person/machine boundaries • network architecture • technology assignment • process distribution • data distribution
Typical Physical Design Methodologies Pressman (2004) – diagrams a process view of the transition to design
Oversimplification of Scope Shelly, Cashman & Rosenblatt (2006)
