A model-driven approach to performability analysis of dynamically reconfigurable component-based systems

ABSTRACT

Dynamic reconfiguration techniques appear promising to build component-based (C-B) systems for application domains that have strong adaptability requirements, like the mobile and the service-oriented computing domains. However, introducing dynamic reconfiguration features into a C-B application makes even more challenging the design and verification of functional and non functional requirements. Our goal is to support the model-based analysis of the effectiveness of reconfigurable C-B applications, with a focus on the assessment of the non-functional performance and reliability attributes. As a first step towards this end, we address the issue of selecting suitable analysis models for reconfigurable systems, suggesting to this end the use of joint performance and reliability (performability) models. Furthermore, we propose a model-driven approach to automatically transform a design model into an analysis model. For this purpose, we build on the existence of intermediate languages that have been proposed to facilitate this transformation and we extend one of them, to capture the core features (from a performance/reliability viewpoint) of a dynamically reconfigurable C-B system. Finally, we illustrate by a simple application example the main steps of the proposed approach.

REFERENCES

• 1: Allen R., Douence R., Garlan D. "Specifying and Analyzing Dynamic Software Architectures" In Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, LNCS 1382, Springer Verlag, 1998.
• 2: T. Andrews et al. "Business Process Execution Language for Web Services Version 1.1" May 2003, on line at: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/ws-bpel/.
• 3: Colin Atkinson , Thomas Kühne, Model-Driven Development: A Metamodeling Foundation, IEEE Software, v.20 n.5, p.36-41, September 2003 [doi>10.1109/MS.2003.1231149]
• 4: Simonetta Balsamo , Antinisca Di Marco , Paola Inverardi , Marta Simeoni, Model-Based Performance Prediction in Software Development: A Survey, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.30 n.5, p.295-310, May 2004 [doi>10.1109/TSE.2004.9]
• 5: Jeremy S. Bradbury , James R. Cordy , Juergen Dingel , Michel Wermelinger, A survey of self-management in dynamic software architecture specifications, Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGSOFT workshop on Self-managed systems, p.28-33, October 31-November 01, 2004, Newport Beach, California [doi>10.1145/1075405.1075411]
• 6: P. J. Brown, J.D. Bovey, X. Chen "Context-aware applications: from the laboratory to the marketplace" IEEE Personal Communications, vol. 4, no. 5, Oct. 1997, pp. 58--64.
• 7: Vittorio Cortellessa , Antinisca Di Marco , Paola Inverardi, Software performance model-driven architecture, Proceedings of the 2006 ACM symposium on Applied computing, April 23-27, 2006, Dijon, France [doi>10.1145/1141277.1141565]
• 8: Ivica Crnkovic , Magnus Larsson, Building Reliable Component-Based Software Systems, Artech House, Inc., Norwood, MA, 2002
• 9: Di Marco A., Mirandola R. "Model Transformation in Software Performance Engineering" QoSA 2006, LNCS 2006.
• 10: Alfonso Fuggetta , Gian Pietro Picco , Giovanni Vigna, Understanding Code Mobility, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.24 n.5, p.342-361, May 1998 [doi>10.1109/32.685258]
• 11: David Garlan , Robert T. Monroe , David Wile, Acme: architectural description of component-based systems, Foundations of component-based systems, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 2000
• 12: V. Grassi, R. Mirandola A. Sabetta "A UML Profile to Model Mobile Systems" in Proc. of UML 2004, LNCS 3273 Springer Verlag 2004, pp. 128--142.
• 13: Vincenzo Grassi , Raffaela Mirandola , Antonino Sabetta, From design to analysis models: a kernel language for performance and reliability analysis of component-based systems, Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on Software and performance, p.25-36, July 12-14, 2005, Palma, Illes Balears, Spain [doi>10.1145/1071021.1071024]
• 14: V. Grassi "Performance Analysis of Mobile Systems" SFM 2005, LNCS 3465 Springer Verlag 2005, pp.107--154.
• 15: V. Grassi, R. Mirandola, A. Sabetta "A Model Transformation Approach for the Early Performance and Reliability Analysis of Component-Based Systems" in Proc. of CBSE 2006, LNCS 4063 Springer Verlag 2006, pp. 270--284.
• 16: Gordon P. Gu , Dorina C. Petriu, From UML to LQN by XML algebra-based model transformations, Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on Software and performance, p.99-110, July 12-14, 2005, Palma, Illes Balears, Spain [doi>10.1145/1071021.1071031]
• 17: B. R. Haverkort, R. Marie, G. Rubino, K Trivedi (eds.), Performability Modelling: Techniques and Tools, J. Wiley and Sons, 2001.
• 18: Christine Ruth Hofmeister, Dynamic reconfiguration of distributed applications, University of Maryland at College Park, College Park, MD, 1993
• 19: M.H. Kacem, M. N. Miladi, M. Jmaiel, A. H. Kacem, K. Drira, "Towards a UML profile for the description of dynamic software architectures" COEA 2005, pp 25--39.
• 20: KLAPER: http://valerianus.ce.uniroma2.it/wiki/klaper/start
• 21: Robin Kravets , P. Krishnan, Power management techniques for mobile communication, Proceedings of the 4th annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Mobile computing and networking, p.157-168, October 25-30, 1998, Dallas, Texas, United States [doi>10.1145/288235.288276]
• 22: IBM: www.research.ibm.com/autonomic/.
• 23: David C. Luckham , John J. Kenney , Larry M. Augustin , James Vera , Doug Bryan , Walter Mann, Specification and Analysis of System Architecture Using Rapide, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.21 n.4, p.336-355, April 1995 [doi>10.1109/32.385971]
• 24: E. Michael Maximilien , Munindar P. Singh, A Framework and Ontology for Dynamic Web Services Selection, IEEE Internet Computing, v.8 n.5, p.84-93, September 2004 [doi>10.1109/MIC.2004.27]
• 25: Nenad Medvidovic , Richard N. Taylor, A Classification and Comparison Framework for Software Architecture Description Languages, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.26 n.1, p.70-93, January 2000 [doi>10.1109/32.825767]
• 26: J. F. Meyer "On evaluating the performability of degradable computer systems" IEEE Trans. on Computers, 29 (8), 1980, pp. 720--731.
• 27: "MDA Guide Version 1.0.1" OMGDocument omg/03-06-01, on line at: www.omg.org/docs/omg/03-06-01.pdf.
• 28: "Meta Object Facility (MOF) 2.0 Core Specification", OMG Adopted Specification ptc/03-10-04, on line at: www.omg.org/docs/ptc/03-10-04.pdf.
• 29: http://www.modelware-ist.org/
• 30: "MOF 2.0 Query/Views/Transformations RFP", OMG Document ad/2002-04-10, on line at: www.omg.org/docs/ad/02-04-10.pdf.
• 31: Flavio Oquendo, Formally modelling software architectures with the UML 2.0 profile for π-ADL, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, v.31 n.1, January 2006 [doi>10.1145/1108768.1108773]
• 32: Flavio Oquendo, π-Method: a model-driven formal method for architecture-centric software engineering, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, v.31 n.3, May 2006 [doi>10.1145/1127878.1127885]
• 33: "OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services" White Paper, The OWL Services Coalition, Nov. 2003, on line at: www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.0/owl-s.pdf.
• 34: SHARPE: on line at http://www.ee.duke.edu/~kst/
• 35: A. Solberg, K. E. Husa, J. Aagedal, E. Abrahamsen "QoS-Aware MDA" in Proc. SIVOES-MDA '03 (in conjunction with UML03) (2003).
• 36: Performance solutions: a practical guide to creating responsive, scalable software, Addison Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Redwood City, CA, 2002
• 37: "UML 2.0 Superstructure Specification" OMG Adopted Specification ptc/03-08-02, on line at: www.omg.org/docs/ptc/03-08-02.pdf.
• 38: "UML Profile for Schedulability, Performance, and Time Specification", OMG Adopted Specification ptc/02-03-02, on line at: www.omg.org/docs/ptc/02-03-02.pdf.
• 39: "UML Profile for Modeling Quality of Service and Fault Tolerance Characteristics and Mechanisms", OMG Adopted Specification ptc/04-09-012, on line at: www.omg.org/docs/ptc/04-09-01.pdf.
• 40: Michel Wermelinger , Antónia Lopes , José Luiz Fiadeiro, A graph based architectural (Re)configuration language, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, v.26 n.5, Sept. 2001
• 41: Murray Woodside , Dorina C. Petriu , Dorin B. Petriu , Hui Shen , Toqeer Israr , Jose Merseguer, Performance by unified model analysis (PUMA), Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on Software and performance, p.1-12, July 12-14, 2005, Palma, Illes Balears, Spain [doi>10.1145/1071021.1071022]
• 42: WorldWide Web Consortium (W3C). Web Services Glossary. http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-gloss/ (February 2004).
• 43: Laura Marie Feeney, An energy consumption model for performance analysis of routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks, Mobile Networks and Applications, v.6 n.3, p.239-249, June 2001 [doi>10.1023/A:1011474616255]

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.2 Design Tools and Techniques

Additional Classification:
  C. Computer Systems Organization
  C.4 PERFORMANCE OF SYSTEMS
      Subjects: Modeling techniques

General Terms:
Design, Performance, Reliability

Keywords:
dynamic reconfiguration, model-driven development, performability