Performance analysis of real-time component architectures: a model interchange approach

ABSTRACT

Model interchange approaches support the analysis of software architecture and design by enabling a variety of tools to automatically exchange performance models using a common schema. This paper builds on one of those interchange formats, the Software Performance Model Interchange Format (S-PMIF), and extends it to support the performance analysis of real-time systems. Specifically, it addresses real-time system designs expressed in the Construction and Composition Language (CCL) and their transformation into the S-PMIF for additional performance analyses. This paper defines extensions and changes to the S-PMIF meta-model and schema required for real-time systems. It describes transformations for both simple, best-case models and more detailed models of concurrency and synchronization. A case study demonstrates the techniques and compares performance results from several analyses.

REFERENCES

• 1: Murray Woodside , Greg Franks , Dorina C. Petriu, The Future of Software Performance Engineering, 2007 Future of Software Engineering, p.171-187, May 23-25, 2007 [doi>10.1109/FOSE.2007.32]
• 2: Scott Hissam , Gabriel Moreno , Judith Stafford , Kurt Wallnau, Enabling predictable assembly, Journal of Systems and Software, v.65 n.3, p.185-198, 15 March 2003 [doi>10.1016/S0164-1212(02)00038-9]
• 3: Larsson, M., Predicting quality attributes in component-based software systems. 2004, Mälardalen University.
• 4: Yan Liu , Alan Fekete , Ian Gorton, Design-Level Performance Prediction of Component-Based Applications, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.31 n.11, p.928-941, November 2005 [doi>10.1109/TSE.2005.127]
• 5: Paulo Merson , Scott Hissam, Predictability by construction, Companion to the 20th annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming, systems, languages, and applications, October 16-20, 2005, San Diego, CA, USA [doi>10.1145/1094855.1094900]
• 6: Hissam, S.A., G.A. Moreno, and K.C. Wallnau, Using containers to enforce smart constraints for performance in industrial systems. 2005, Software Engineering Institute - Carnegie Mellon University: Pittsburgh, PA.
• 7: Gabriel A. Moreno, Creating custom containers with generative techniques, Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Generative programming and component engineering, October 22-26, 2006, Portland, Oregon, USA [doi>10.1145/1173706.1173712]
• 8: Bass, L., et al., Reasoning Frameworks. 2005, Software Engineering Institute - Carnegie Mellon University: Pittsburgh, PA.
• 9: James Ivers , Gabriel A. Moreno, Model-driven development with predictable quality, Companion to the 22nd ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object oriented programming systems and applications companion, October 21-25, 2007, Montreal, Quebec, Canada [doi>10.1145/1297846.1297933]
• 10: Wallnau, K.C. and J. Ivers, Snapshot of CCL: A language for predictable assembly. 2003, Software Engineering Institute - Carnegie Mellon University: Pittsburgh, PA.
• 11: Hissam, S.A., et al., Pin component technology (V1.0) and its C interface. 2005, Software Engineering Institute - Carnegie Mellon University: Pittsburgh, PA.
• 12: M. González Harbour , J. J. Gutiérrez García , J. C. Palencia Gutiérrez , J. M. Drake Moyano, MAST: Modeling and Analysis Suite for Real Time Applications, Proceedings of the 13th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems, p.125, June 13-15, 2001
• 13: Connie U. Smith , Catalina M. Llado, Performance Model Interchange Format (PMIF 2.0): XML Definition and Implementation, Proceedings of the The Quantitative Evaluation of Systems, First International Conference, p.38-47, September 27-30, 2004 [doi>10.1109/QEST.2004.34]
• 14: Connie U. Smith , Catalina M. Lladó , Vittorio Cortellessa , Antinisca Di Marco , Lloyd G. Williams, From UML models to software performance results: an SPE process based on XML interchange formats, Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on Software and performance, p.87-98, July 12-14, 2005, Palma, Illes Balears, Spain [doi>10.1145/1071021.1071030]
• 15: Lloyd G. Williams , Connie U. Smith, Information Requirements for Software Performance Engineering, Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Modelling Techniques and Tools for Computer Performance Evaluation: Quantitative Evaluation of Computing and Communication Systems, p.86-101, September 20-22, 1995
• 16: Performance solutions: a practical guide to creating responsive, scalable software, Addison Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Redwood City, CA, 2002
• 17: L&S, Computer Technology, Inc., Performance Engineering Services Division, in # 110, PO Box 9802, [phone], www.spe-ed.com: Austin, TX 78766.
• 18: Connie U. Smith , Catalina M. Llado , Ramon Puigjaner , Lloyd G. Williams, Interchange Formats for Performance Models: Experimentation and Ouput, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Quantitative Evaluation of Systems, p.91-100, September 17-19, 2007 [doi>10.1109/QEST.2007.24]
• 19: W3C, World Wide Web Consortium. 2001, www.w3c.org.
• 20: Rick Kazman , Gregory Abowd , Len Bass , Paul Clements, Scenario-Based Analysis of Software Architecture, IEEE Software, v.13 n.6, p.47-55, November 1996 [doi>10.1109/52.542294]
• 21: Kazman, R., et al. The Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method. in International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (ICECCS98). 1998.
• 22: Lloyd G. Williams , Connie U. Smith, PASA^SM: a method for the performance assessment of software architectures, Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on Software and performance, July 24-26, 2002, Rome, Italy [doi>10.1145/584369.584397]
• 23: Simonetta Balsamo , Paola Inverardi , Calogero Mangano, An approach to performance evaluation of software architectures, Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on Software and performance, p.178-190, October 12-16, 1998, Santa Fe, New Mexico, United States [doi>10.1145/287318.287354]
• 24: Simonetta Balsamo , Moreno Marzolla, Performance evaluation of UML software architectures with multiclass Queueing Network models, Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on Software and performance, p.37-42, July 12-14, 2005, Palma, Illes Balears, Spain [doi>10.1145/1071021.1071025]
• 25: 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]
• 26: Juan Pablo López-Grao , José Merseguer , Javier Campos, From UML activity diagrams to Stochastic Petri nets: application to software performance engineering, Proceedings of the 4th international workshop on Software and performance, January 14-16, 2004, Redwood Shores, California
• 27: Dorin Petriu , Murray Woodside, Analysing software requirements specifications for performance, Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on Software and performance, July 24-26, 2002, Rome, Italy [doi>10.1145/584369.584371]
• 28: Savino, N., et al. Extending UML to Manage Performance Models for Software Architectures: A Queuing Network Approach. in Proc. 9th Int. Symposium on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, SPECTS. 2002. San Diego, CA.
• 29: Smith, C.U. and C.M. Lladó, Performance Model Interchange Format (PMIF 2.0): XML Definition and Implementation Update Technical Report.. 2007, L&S Computer Technology, Inc.: Santa Fe, NM.
• 30: Connie U. Smith , Catalina M. Lladó , Vittorio Cortellessa , Antinisca Di Marco , Lloyd G. Williams, From UML models to software performance results: an SPE process based on XML interchange formats, Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on Software and performance, p.87-98, July 12-14, 2005, Palma, Illes Balears, Spain [doi>10.1145/1071021.1071030]
• 31: 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]
• 32: Andrea D'Ambrogio, A model transformation framework for the automated building of performance models from UML models, Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on Software and performance, p.75-86, July 12-14, 2005, Palma, Illes Balears, Spain [doi>10.1145/1071021.1071029]
• 33: Bertolino, A., et al., From UML to Execution Graphs and Queueing Networks: Design and Implementation of the XML--based tool XPRIMAT. 2004, Universita del L'Aquila: L'Aquila, Italy.
• 34: Vittorio Cortellessa , Michele Gentile , Marco Pizzuti, XPRIT: An XML-Based Tool to Translate UML Diagrams into Execution Graphs and Queueing Networks, Proceedings of the The Quantitative Evaluation of Systems, First International Conference, p.342-343, September 27-30, 2004 [doi>10.1109/QEST.2004.53]
• 35: Hassan Gomaa , Daniel A. Menascé, Performance Engineering of Component-Based Distributed Software Systems, Performance Engineering, State of the Art and Current Trends, p.40-55, January 2001
• 36: Gordon P. Gu , Dorina C. Petriu, XSLT transformation from UML models to LQN performance models, Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on Software and performance, July 24-26, 2002, Rome, Italy [doi>10.1145/584369.584402]
• 37: Xiuping Wu , Murray Woodside, Performance modeling from software components, Proceedings of the 4th international workshop on Software and performance, January 14-16, 2004, Redwood Shores, California
• 38: Steffen Becker , Heiko Koziolek , Ralf Reussner, Model-Based performance prediction with the palladio component model, Proceedings of the 6th international workshop on Software and performance, February 05-08, 2007, Buenes Aires, Argentina [doi>10.1145/1216993.1217006]
• 39: Vincenzo Grassi , Raffaela Mirandola , Antonino Sabetta, A model-driven approach to performability analysis of dynamically reconfigurable component-based systems, Proceedings of the 6th international workshop on Software and performance, February 05-08, 2007, Buenes Aires, Argentina [doi>10.1145/1216993.1217011]
• 40: Vittorio Cortellessa, How far are we from the definition of a common software performance ontology?, Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on Software and performance, p.195-204, July 12-14, 2005, Palma, Illes Balears, Spain [doi>10.1145/1071021.1071044]
• 41: Frank Budinsky , Ed Merks , David Steinberg, Eclipse Modeling Framework 2.0 (2nd Edition), Addison-Wesley Professional, 2006
• 42: Smith, C.U. and L.G. Williams, Performance Engineering Evaluation of CORBA-based Distributed Systems with SPEED, in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, R. Puigjaner, Editor. 1998, Springer: Berlin, Germany.
• 43: Connie U. Smith , Lloyd G. Williams, Performance Engineering Evaluation of Object-Oriented Systems with SPE*ED, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Performance Evaluation: Modelling Techniques and Tools, p.135-154, June 03-06, 1997
• 44: Hughes, P., SP Principles. 1988, STC Technology.
• 45: Beilner, H., J. Mäter, and N. Weissenburg. Towards a Performance Modeling Environment: News on HIT. in Proceedings 4th International Conference on Modeling Techniques and Tools for Computer Performance Evaluation. 1988: Plenum Publishing.
• 46: M. G. Harbour , M. H. Klein , J. P. Lehoczky, Timing Analysis for Fixed-Priority Scheduling of Hard Real-Time Systems, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.20 n.1, p.13-28, January 1994 [doi>10.1109/32.263752]

INDEX TERMS

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

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
        D.2.12 Interoperability

  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.6 SIMULATION AND MODELING
      I.6.4 Model Validation and Analysis

General Terms:
Design, Performance

Keywords:
architecture analysis, component-based systems, model interchange, performance, performance analysis, performance model, real-time systems, software performance engineering