Summarizing application performance from a components perspective

ABSTRACT

In the era of distributed development, it is common for large applications to be assembled from multiple component layers that are developed by different development teams. Layered applications have deep call paths and numerous invocations (average call stack depth of up to 75, and upto 35 million invocations in the applications we studied) making summarization of performance problems a critical issue. Summarization of performance by classes, methods, invocations or packages is usually inadequate because they are often at the wrong level of granularity. We propose a technique that uses thresholding and filtering to identify a small set of interesting method invocations in components deemed interesting by the user. We show the utility of this technique with a set of 7 real-life applications, where the technique was used to identify a small set (10-93) of expensive invocations which accounted for 82-99% of the overall performance costs of the application. Our experience shows that this type of characterization can help quickly isolate the specific parts of a large system that can benefit most from performance tuning.

REFERENCES

• 1: Glenn Ammons , Thomas Ball , James R. Larus, Exploiting hardware performance counters with flow and context sensitive profiling, Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 1997 conference on Programming language design and implementation, p.85-96, June 16-18, 1997, Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
• 2: G. Ammons, J-D Choi, M. Gupta, N. Swamy. Finding and Removing Performance Bottlenecks in Large Systems. In Proc. of the ACM SIGPLAN 2004 European Conference on Object Oriented Programming, July 2004.
• 3: Real-time ArcFlow. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/pi.
• 4: Thomas Ball , James R. Larus, Efficient path profiling, Proceedings of the 29th annual ACM/IEEE international symposium on Microarchitecture, p.46-57, December 02-04, 1996, Paris, France
• 5: T. Ball, J. R. Larus, and G. Rosay. Analyzing path profiles with the Hot Path Browser. In Workshop on Profile and Feedback-Directed Compilation, 1998.
• 6: Thomas Ball , Peter Mataga , Mooly Sagiv, Edge profiling versus path profiling: the showdown, Proceedings of the 25th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.134-148, January 19-21, 1998, San Diego, California, United States [doi>10.1145/268946.268958]
• 7: Thomas Ball , James R. Larus, Optimally profiling and tracing programs, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), v.16 n.4, p.1319-1360, July 1994 [doi>10.1145/183432.183527]
• 8: Robert J. Hall, Call Path Refinement Profiles, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.21 n.6, p.481-496, June 1995 [doi>10.1109/32.391375]
• 9: Robert J. Hall, CPPROFJ: Aspect-Capable Call Path Profiling of Multi-Threaded Java Applications, Proceedings of the 17th IEEE international conference on Automated software engineering, p.107, September 23-27, 2002
• 10: James R. Larus, Whole program paths, Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 1999 conference on Programming language design and implementation, p.259-269, May 01-04, 1999, Atlanta, Georgia, United States
• 11: Gary Sevitsky , Wim de Pauw , Ravi Konuru, An Information Exploration Tool for Performance Analysis of Java Programs, Proceedings of the Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems, p.85, March 12-14, 2001

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.5 Testing and Debugging

General Terms:
Performance

Keywords:
blame assignment, performance analysis, regression, segmented cumulative costs