Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An intermediate metamodel with scenarios and resources for generating performance models from UML designs

  • Special Issue Paper
  • Published:
Software & Systems Modeling Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Performance analysis of a software specification in a language such as UML can assist a design team in evaluating performance-sensitive design decisions and in making design trade-offs that involve performance. Annotations to the design based on the UML Profile for Schedulability, Performance and Time provide necessary information such as workload parameters for a performance model, and many different kinds of performance techniques can be applied. The Core Scenario Model (CSM) described here provides a metamodel for an intermediate form which correlates multiple UML diagrams, extracts the behaviour elements with the performance annotations, attaches important resource information that is obtained from the UML, and supports the creation of many different kinds of performance models. Models can be made using queueing networks, layered queues, timed Petri nets, and it is proposed to develop the CSM as an intermediate language for all performance formalisms. This paper defines the CSM and describes how it resolves questions that arise in performance model-building.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Buhr R.J.A., Casselman R.S. (1995) Use Case Maps for Object-Oriented Systems. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  2. Balsamo S., Di Marco A., Inverardi P., Simeoni M. (2004) Model-based performance prediction in software developement: a survey. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 30(5): 295–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Carroll J.M., Rosson M.B., Chin G., Koenemann J. (1998) Requirements development in scenario-based design. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 24(12): 1156–1170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cortellesa, V. Deriving a queueing network based performance model from UML diagrams. In: Proceedings of 2nd International Workshop on Software and Performance (WOSP2000), Ottawa, Canada, pp.58–70 (2000)

  5. DSTC, et al. MOF query/views/transformations: second revised submission. OMG document ad/04-01-06 (2004)

  6. Franks, G., Majumdar, S., Neilson, J., Petriu, D., Rolia, J., Woodside,M. Performance analysis of distributed server systems. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Software Quality (6ICSQ), Ottawa, Ontario, pp. 15–26 (1996)

  7. Jain R. (1991) The Art of Computer Systems Performance Analysis. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Kahkipuro, P. UML-based performance modeling framework for component-based systems. In: Performance Engineering. Dumke, R., Rautenstrauch, C., Schmietendorf, A., Scholz, A., (eds.),pp. 167–184 Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (2001)

  9. Kerber L. (2001). Scenario-based performance evaluation of SDL/MSC-specified systems. In: Dumke R., Rautenstrauch C., Schmietendorf A., Scholz A. (eds). Performance Engineering. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp. 185–201

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lassila, O., Swick R.R., (eds.) Resource description framework (RDF) model and syntax specification, W3C Recommendation 22, World Wide Web Consortium (1999)

  11. Liu J. (2000) Real-Time Systems. Prentice Hall, Englwood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  12. Lopez-Grao, J.P., Merseguer, J., Campos, J. From UML activity diagrams to stochastic petri nets: application to software performance engineering. In: 4th International Workshop on Software and Performance (WOSP 2004), Redwood City, CA, pp. 25–36 (2004)

  13. Object Management Group: MOF 2.0 query/views/transformations RFP. RFP ad/02-04-10 (2002)

  14. Object Management Group: UML profile for schedulability, performance, and time specification. OMG Adopted Specification ptc/02-03-02, July 1 (2002)

  15. Object Management Group: Meta object facility (MOF) 2.0 core specification. OMG Adopted Specification ptc/03-10-04,(2003)

  16. Object Management Group: UML profile for modeling and analysis of real-time and embedded systems (MARTE) RFP (2005)

  17. Object Management Group: Unified modeling language: superstructure, version 2. OMG Adopted Specification, formal/05-07-04 (2005)

  18. Petriu, D.C., Shen, H. Applying the UML performance profile: graph grammar-based derivation of LQN models from UML specifications. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Modeling Tools and Techniques for Computer and Communication System Performance Evaluation, London, England (2002)

  19. Petriu, D., Woodside, M. Software performance models from system scenarios in use case maps. In: Proceedings of the 12 International Conference on Modeling Tools and Techniques for Computer and Communication System Performance Evaluation (Performance TOOLS 2002), London (2002)

  20. Petriu D.C., Woodside C.M. (2003). Performance analysis with UML. In: Selic B., Lavagno L., Martin G. (eds). UML for Real. Kluwer,Dordrecht, pp. 221–240

    Google Scholar 

  21. Petriu, D.B., Woodside, M. A metamodel for generating performance models from UML Designs. In: Proceedings of the UML 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS 3273),Lisbon, vol. 3273, pp. 41–53 (2004)

  22. Puma Project: XML schema for the Core Scenario Model, www.sce.carleton.ca/rads/puma/csm

  23. Smith, C.U., Llado, C.M.:Performance model interchange format (PMIF 2.0): XML definition and implementation. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Quantitative Evaluation of Systems (QEST 2004), IEEE Computer Society (2004)

  24. Smith C.U., Williams L.G. (2002) Performance Solutions. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  25. Woodside M. (2001) Software resource architecture. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. (IJSEKE) 11(4): 407–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Woodside, M., Petriu, D.C., Petriu, D.B., Shen, H., Israr, T., Merseguer, J. Performance by unified model analysis (PUMA). In: Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Software and Performance (WOSP 2005), Palma de Mallorca (2005)

  27. Wu X., Woodside, M. Performance modeling from software components. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Software and Performance (WOSP 2004), Redwood Shores, CA, pp. 290–301 (2004)

  28. Xu, J., Woodside, M., Petriu D. Performance analysis of a software design using the UML profile for schedulability, performance and time. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Computer Performance Evaluation, Modeling Techniques and Tools (TOOLS 2003), Urbana, Illinois, USA, pp. 291–310 (2003)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departmemt of Systems and Computer Engineering, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada, K1S 5B6

    Dorin B. Petriu & Murray Woodside

Authors
  1. Dorin B. Petriu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Murray Woodside
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dorin B. Petriu.

Additional information

Communicated by Ana Moreira and Thomas Baar.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Petriu, D.B., Woodside, M. An intermediate metamodel with scenarios and resources for generating performance models from UML designs. Softw Syst Model 6, 163–184 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-006-0026-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-006-0026-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation