Analysing software requirements specifications for performance

ABSTRACT

The earliest moment when performance issues can be addressed is the initial specification of a software system, during the formulation of the architecture, and well before the design stage. A common form of specification at this stage is a set of scenarios to be executed by the system, which embody the Use Cases, and identify the sequence of responsibilities to be carried out in different kinds of responses. On the basis that earlier analysis is better, a performance modeling capability has been installed in a scenario modeling tool for Use Case Maps that is part of a proposed standard for User Requirements Notation. Using examples, the paper shows how this kind of early analysis can address high-level performance questions, at a comparable level of abstraction to the specification. The imprecision of early knowledge, and the risk of ignoring some performance limitations, are key factors whose impact is addressed.

REFERENCES

• 1: 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]
• 2: Len Bass , Paul Clements , Rick Kazman, Software architecture in practice, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1998
• 3: Grady Booch , James Rumbaugh , Ivar Jacobson, The Unified Modeling Language user guide, Addison Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Redwood City, CA, 1999
• 4: R. J. A. Buhr and R. S. Casselman, High-Level Design of Object-Oriented and Real-Time Systems: A Unified Approach with Use Case Maps. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1995.
• 5: R. J. A. Buhr, Use Case Maps as Architectural Entities for Complex Systems, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.24 n.12, p.1131-1155, December 1998 [doi>10.1109/32.738343 ]
• 6: L. Chung, B. A. Nixon, E. Yu, and J. Mylopoulos, Non-Functional Requirements in Software Engineering. Boston: Kluwer, 2000.
• 7: G. Franks, S. Majumdar, J. Neilson, D. Petriu, J. Rolia, and M. Woodside, "Performance Analysis of Distributed Server Systems," in The Sixth International Conference on Software Quality (6ICSQ), Ottawa, Ontario, 1996, pp. 15-26.
• 8: G. Franks and M. Woodside, "Effectiveness of early replies in client-server systems," Proceedings of Performance 99, Performance Evaluation, vol. 36-37, pp. 165-183, August 1999.
• 9: Pekka Kahkipuro, UML-Based Performance Modeling Framework for Component-Based Distributed Systems, Performance Engineering, State of the Art and Current Trends, p.167-184, January 2001
• 10: Andrew Miga , Daniel Amyot , Francis Bordeleau , Donald Cameron , C. Murray Woodside, Deriving Message Sequence Charts from Use Case Maps Scenario Specifications, Proceedings of the 10th International SDL Forum Copenhagen on Meeting UML, p.268-287, June 27-29, 2001
• 11: Brian A. Nixon, Management of Performance Requirements for Information Systems, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.26 n.12, p.1122-1146, December 2000 [doi>10.1109/32.888627 ]
• 12: D. Petriu and M. Woodside, "Incorporating Performance Analysis in the Early Stages of Software Development Using Generative Programming Principles," in Third Workshop on Generative Programming (ECOOP 2001 Workshop), Budapest, June 2001.
• 13: Dorin C. Petriu , C. Murray Woodside, Software Performance Models from System Scenarios in Use Case Maps, Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computer Performance Evaluation, Modelling Techniques and Tools, p.141-158, April 14-17, 2002
• 14: Andreas Schmietendorf , Evgeni Dimitrov, Possibilities of Performance Modelling with UML, Performance Engineering, State of the Art and Current Trends, p.78-95, January 2001
• 15: W. Craig Scratchley , C. Murray Woodside, Evaluating Concurrency Options in Software Specifications, Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, p.330, March 24-28, 1999
• 16: K. H. Siddiqui and C. M. Woodside, "Performance Aware Software Development (PASD) Using Resource Demand Budgets", submitted for publication, 2002.
• 17: Connie U. Smith, Performance Engineering of Software Systems, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1990
• 18: 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
• 19: C. U. Smith, L.G. Williams, "Performance Solutions", Addison-Wesley, 2001.
• 20: M. Woodside, "Layered Performance Modeling and Layered Queueing: Quick Tutorial," internal report, Carleton University, Ottawa, April 2001.
• 21: C. M. Woodside, "Software Resource Architecture", Int. Journal on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (IJSEKE), vol. 11, no. 4 pp. 407-429, 2001.
• 22: Murray Woodside , Dorin Petriu , Khalid Siddiqui, Performance-related completions for software specifications, Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering, May 19-25, 2002, Orlando, Florida [doi>10.1145/581339.581346]
• 23: C. Murray Woodside , Vidar Vetland , Marc Courtois , Stefan Bayarov, Resource Function Capture for Performance Aspects of Software Components and Sub-Systems, Performance Engineering, State of the Art and Current Trends, p.239-256, January 2001

INDEX TERMS

Keywords:
completion, nonfunctional requirements, performance, specifications, use case maps