Advertisement

Performance Prediction of Component-Based Systems

A Survey from an Engineering Perspective
  • Steffen Becker
  • Lars Grunske
  • Raffaela Mirandola
  • Sven Overhage
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3938)

Abstract

Performance predictions of component assemblies and the ability of obtaining system-level performance properties from these predictions are a crucial success factor when building trustworthy component-based systems. In order to achieve this goal, a collection of methods and tools to capture and analyze the performance of software systems has been developed. These methods and tools aim at helping software engineers by providing them with the capability to understand design trade-offs, optimize their design by identifying performance inhibitors, or predict a system’s performance within a specified deployment environment. In this paper, we analyze the applicability of various performance prediction methods for the development of component-based systems and contrast their inherent strengths and weaknesses in different engineering problem scenarios. In so doing, we establish a basis to select an appropriate prediction method and to provide recommendations for future research activities, which could significantly improve the performance prediction of component-based systems.

Keywords

Performance Prediction Software Component Software Development Process External Service Performance Prediction Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Smith, C.U.: Performance Engineering of Software Systems. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1990)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Smith, C.U., Williams, L.G.: Performance Solutions: a practical guide to creating responsive, scalable software. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Szyperski, C., Gruntz, D., Murer, S.: Component Software: Beyond Object-Oriented Programming, 2nd edn. ACM Press and Addison-Wesley, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sha, L., Rajkumar, R., Lehoczky, J.P.: Priority inheritance protocols: An approach to real-time synchronization. IEEE Trans. Comput. 39, 1175–1185 (1990)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Musa, J.D., Iannino, A., Okumoto, K.: Software Reliability – Measurement, prediction, application. McGraw-Hill, New York (1987)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dongarra, J., Martin, J., Vorlton, J.: Computer benchmarking: paths and pitfalls. IEEE Spectr. 24, 38–43 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Balsamo, S., Marco, A.D., Inverardi, P., Simeoni, M.: Model-Based Performance Prediction in Software Development: A Survey. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 30, 295–310 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yacoub, S.M.: Performance analysis of component-based applications. In: Chastek, G.J. (ed.) SPLC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2379, pp. 299–315. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen, S., Gorton, I., Liu, A., Liu, Y.: Performance Prediction of COTS Component-Based Enterprise Applications. In: Proceedings of 5th ICSE workshop on Component-Based Software Engineering (CBSE 2002) (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Denaro, G., Polini, A., Emmerich, W.: Early Performance Testing of Distributed Software Applications. In: Dujmovic, J.J., Almeida, V.A.F., Lea, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Software and Performance, WOSP 2004, Redwood Shores,California, USA, January 14-16, 2004, pp. 94–103. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sitaraman, M., Kulczycki, G., Krone, J., Ogden, W.F., Reddy, A.L.N.: Performance Specification of Software Components. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Software Reusability: Putting Software Reuse in Context, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, May 18-20, 2001, pp. 3–10. ACM Press, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hissam, S.A., Moreno, G.A., Stafford, J.A., Wallnau, K.: Packaging predictable assembly. In: Bishop, J.M. (ed.) CD 2002. LNCS, vol. 2370, pp. 108–124. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hissam, S., Hudak, J., Ivers, J., Klein, M., Larsson, M., Moreno, G., Northrop, L., Plakosh, D., Stafford, J., Wallnau, K., Wood, W.: Predictable Assembly of Substation Automation Systems: An Experiment Report. Technical Report CMU/SEI-2002-TR-031, Software Engineering Institute (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wallnau, K.C.: A Technology for Predictable Assembly from Certifiable Components. Technical Report CMU/SEI-2003-TR-009, Software Engineering Institute (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bertolino, A., Mirandola, R.: Towards Component-Based Ssoftware Performance Engineering. In: Proceedings of 6th ICSE workshop on Component-Based Software Engineering (CBSE 2003) (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bertolino, A., Mirandola, R.: CB-SPE tool: Putting component-based performance engineering into practice. In: Crnković, I., Stafford, J.A., Schmidt, H.W., Wallnau, K. (eds.) CBSE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3054, pp. 233–248. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    OMG: UML Profile for Schedulability, Performance, and Time. OMG Specification ptc/2002-03-02, Object Management Group (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wu, X., McMullan, D., Woodside, M.: Component-Based Performance Prediction. In: Proceedings of 6th ICSE workshop on Component-Based Software Engineering (CBSE 2003) (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wu, X., Woodside, C.M.: Performance Modeling from Software Components. In: Dujmovic, J.J., Almeida, V.A.F., Lea, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Software and Performance, WOSP 2004, Redwood Shores, California, USA, January 14-16, 2004, pp. 290–301. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Balsamo, S., Marzolla, M.: A Simulation-Based Approach to Software Performance Modeling. In: ESEC/FSE-11: Proceedings of the 9th European software engineering conference held jointly with 11th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering, pp. 363–366. ACM Press, New York (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Eskenazi, E.M., Fioukov, A.V., Hammer, D.K., Obbink, H., Pronk, B.: Analysis and Prediction of Performance for Evolving Architectures. In: IEEE (ed.) Proceedings of the 30th EUROMICRO Conference 2004, Rennes, France, 31 August - 3 September 2004, pp. 22–31. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Eskenazi, E., Fioukov, A., Hammer, D.: Performance prediction for component compositions. In: Crnković, I., Stafford, J.A., Schmidt, H.W., Wallnau, K. (eds.) CBSE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3054, pp. 280–293. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bondarev, E., de With, P.H., Chaudron, M.R.V.: Towards Predicting Real-Time Properties of a Component Assembly. In: IEEE (ed.) Proceedings of the 30th EUROMICRO Conference 2004, Rennes, France, 31 August - 3 September 2004, pp. 601–610. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Reussner, R.H., Firus, V., Becker, S.: Parametric Performance Contracts for Software Components and their Compositionality. In: Weck, W., Bosch, J., Szyperski, C. (eds.) Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Component-Oriented Programming (WCOP 2004) (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Menasce, D.A., Ruan, H., Gomaa, H.: A Framework for QoS-Aware Software Components. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Software and Performance, WOSP 2004, Redwood Shores, California, USA, January 14-16, 2004, pp. 186–196. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Diaconescu, A., Mos, A., Murphy, J.: Automatic Performance Management in Component Based Software Systems. In: IEEE (ed.) Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Autonomic Computing (ICAC 2004), New York, NY, USA, 17-19 May 2004, pp. 214–221. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Liu, Y., Fekete, A., Gorton, I.: Predicting the Performance of Middleware-Based Applications at the Design Level. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Software and Performance, WOSP 2004, Redwood Shores, California, USA, January 14-16, 2004, pp. 166–170. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wallnau, K.C., Stafford, J., Hissam, S., Klein, M.: On the Relationship of Software Architecture to Software Component Technology. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Component-Oriented Programming (WCOP 2001), Budapest, Hungary, June 19 (2001)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Solberg, A., Husa, K.E., Aagedal, J., Abrahamsen, E.: QoS-Aware MDA. In: Proceedings of the Workshop Model-Driven Architecture in the Specification, Implementation and Validation of Object-Oriented Embedded Systems (SIVOES-MDA 2003) in conjunction with UML 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Grassi, V., Mirandola, R.: A Model-Driven Approach to Predictive Non-Functional Analysis of Component-Based Systems. In: Baar, T., Strohmeier, A., Moreira, A., Mellor, S.J. (eds.) UML 2004. LNCS, vol. 3273, Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Petriu, D.B., Woodside, C.M.: A metamodel for generating performance models from UML designs. In: Baar, T., Strohmeier, A., Moreira, A., Mellor, S.J. (eds.) UML 2004. LNCS, vol. 3273, pp. 41–53. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Woodside, M., Petriu, D.C., Petriu, D.B., Shen, H., Israr, T., Merseguer, J.: Performance by Unified Model Analysis (PUMA). In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Software and Performance, WOSP 2005, Palma, Illes Balears, Spain, July 11-15, 2005. ACM Press, New York (forthcoming, 2005)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gu, G., Petriu, D.C.: From UML to LQN by XML Algebra-Based Graph Transformations. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Software and Performance, WOSP 2005, Palma, Illes Balears, Spain, July 11-15, 2005. ACM Press, New York (forthcoming, 2005)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Grassi, V., Mirandola, R., Sabetta, A.: From Design to Analysis Models: A Kernel Language for Performance and Reliability Analysis of Component-Based Systems. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Software and Performance, WOSP 2005, Palma, Illes Balears, Spain, July 11-15, 2005. ACM Press, New York (forthcoming, 2005)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zschaler, S.: Towards a Semantic Framework for Non-Functional Specifications of Component-Based Systems. In: IEEE (ed.) Proceedings of the 30th EUROMICRO Conference 2004, Rennes, France, 31 August - 3 September 2004, pp. 92–99. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Grassi, V., Mirandola, R.: Towards Automatic Compositional Performance Analysis of Component-Based Systems. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Software and Performance, WOSP 2004, Redwood Shores, California, USA, January 14-16, 2004, pp. 59–63. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Frølund, S., Koistinen, J.: Quality-of-Service Specification in Distributed Object Systems. Technical Report HPL-98-159, Hewlett Packard, Software Technology Laboratory (1998)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Larsson, M.: Predicting Quality Attributes in Component-Based Software Systems. PhD thesis, Mälardalen University (2004)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Meyer, B.: Applying “Design by Contract”. IEEE Computer 25, 40–51 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Liu, Y., Gorton, I., Liu, A., Jiang, N., Chen, S.: Designing a test suite for empirically-based middleware performance prediction. In: Noble, J., Potter, J. (eds.) Fortieth International Conference on Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems (TOOLS Pacific 2002). Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology, Sydney, Australia, ACS (2002)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Firus, V., Becker, S., Happe, J.: Parametric performance contracts for qml-specified software components. In: Formal Foundations of Embedded Software and Component-based Software Architectures (FESCA). Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, ETAPS 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Crnkovic, I., Firus, V., Grunske, L., Jezequel, J.M., Overhage, S., Reussner, R.: Unified Models for Predicting the Quality of Component-Based Software Architectures. In: Reussner, R., Stafford, J., Szyperski, C. (eds.) Architecting System with Trustworthy Components, Berlin. LNCS, Springer, Heidelberg (forthcoming, 2005) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steffen Becker
    • 1
  • Lars Grunske
    • 2
  • Raffaela Mirandola
    • 3
  • Sven Overhage
    • 4
  1. 1.Software Engineering GroupUniversity of OldenburgOldenburgGermany
  2. 2.School of Information Technology and Electrical EngineeringUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia
  3. 3.Dipartimento di Elettronica e InformazionePolitecnico di MilanoItaly
  4. 4.Dept. of Software Engineering and Business Information SystemsAugsburg UniversityAugsburgGermany

Personalised recommendations