Automating performance-related impact analysis through event based traceability | Requirements Engineering Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Automating performance-related impact analysis through event based traceability

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Requirements Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Current impact analysis techniques tend to focus on assessing the impact of change upon the system's functionality, whilst a consideration of performance related requirements is often deferred until after implementation. This tendency can lead to costly and time-consuming mistakes that frustrate customers and require frantic last-minute efforts to fix. This paper proposes a method for supporting performance-related impact analysis in a heterogeneous software engineering environment. An event-based approach is taken to establish dynamic traceability links, capable of propagating data values and commands between requirements and performance models. Quantitative values in performance related requirements are adjusted to reflect proposed changes, and impacted models are re-executed to measure the impact of the change. The resulting outputs are then automatically compared to relevant performance requirements and a system-wide report showing the impact of the proposed change upon performance is generated.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 7.
Fig. 8.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. References to all of the requirements management tools discussed in this paper can be obtained from the Atlantic Systems Guild website at http://www.systemsguild.com/GuildSite/Robs/retools.html.

References

  1. Boehm B. Software and its impact: a quantitative assessment. Datamation 1973; 19:48–59

    Google Scholar 

  2. Fjelstad R, Hamlen W. Application program maintenance study—report to our respondents. Technical Report, IBM Corporation, DP Marketing Group, 1979

  3. Devanbu P, Brachman R, Selfridge P and Ballard B. LaSSIE: a knowledge-based software information system. Comm ACM 1991; 34(5):34–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bohner A, Arnold R. An introduction to software change impact analysis. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 1996

  5. Smith C, Williams L. Performance solutions: a practical guide to creating responsive, scalable software. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  6. Shan Y-P and Earle R. Enterprise computing with objects. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1999

  7. Dimitrov E, Schmietendorf A and Dumke R. UML-based performance engineering possibilities and techniques. IEEE Software 2002; 19(1):74–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Carriére S, Kazman R and Woods S. Assessing and maintaining architectural quality. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 3rd European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 3–5 March 1999

  9. Cleland-Huang J, Chang C, Kim H and Balakrishnan A. Requirements based dynamic metrics in object-oriented systems. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 5th International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, Toronto, Canada, 27–31 August 2001

  10. Wise J. Using UML for performance specification and analysis of distributed software systems. Master's Thesis, University of Illinois, 2002

  11. Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology. In: IEEE 830–1998, IEEE Recommended Practice for Software Requirements Specifications, 6th ed., IEEE Press, New York

  12. Palmer J. Traceability. In: Thayer RH, Dorfman M (eds) Software requirements engineering, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 1997

  13. Jarke M. Requirements traceability. Comm ACM 1998; 41(12):32–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gotel O, Finkelstein A. An analysis of the requirements traceability problem. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 1st International Conference on Requirements Engineering, San Diego, CA, 4–6th January 1993

  15. Ramesh B, Jarke M. Toward reference models for requirements traceability. IEEE Trans Soft Engin 2001; 27(1):58–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Weidenhaupt K, Pohl K, Jarke M and Haumer P. Scenarios in system development: current practice. IEEE Soft 1998; 15(2):34–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Pohl K. Process centered requirements engineering. Wiley, Chichester, UK, 1996

  18. Pinheiro F, Goguen J. An object-oriented tool for tracing requirements. IEEE Soft 1996; 13(2):52–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Tryggeseth E, Nytrø O. Dynamic traceability links supported by a system architecture description. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance, Bari, Italy, October 1997

  20. Antoniol G, Casazza G and Cimitile A. Traceability recovery by modeling programmer behavior. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 7th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, Brisbane, Australia, November 2000

  21. A survey of requirements engineering tools, Atlantic Systems Guild. http://www.systemsguild.com/GuildSite/Robs/retools.html. March 2003

  22. Azelborn B. Building a better traceability matrix with DOORS. In: Proceedings of Telelogic INDOORS US, San Diego, CA, 4–6 October 2000

  23. Gupta A, Hartkopf J and Ramaswamy S. Event notifier: a pattern of event notification. Java Report 1998; 3(7):19–36

    Google Scholar 

  24. Cleland-Huang J. Robust requirements traceability for handling evolutionary and speculative change. Dissertation, University of Illinois, 2002

  25. Nixon B. Management of performance requirements for information systems. IEEE Trans Soft Engin 2000; 26(12):1122–1146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Suntone Architecture Methodology: A 3-Dimensional Approach to Architectural Design. http://www.sun.com/service/sunps/jdc/suntoneam_wp_5.24.pdf.

  27. Paulk M, Curtis B, Chrissis M and Weber C. Capability maturity model for software. Carnegie Mellon University Press, Pittsburgh, PA, 1993

  28. Cleland-Huang J, Chang C, Hu H, Javvaji K, Sethi G and Xia J. Requirements driven impact analysis of system performance. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Joint Requirements Engineering Conference, Essen, Germany, September, 2002

  29. DePaul Center for Applied Requirements Engineering (2003) http://re.cs.depaul.edu

  30. Drala Event Broker software. Information available online at http://www.dralasoft.com/products/eventbroker/index.html. 2001

  31. Domges R, Pohl K. Adapting traceability environments to project specific needs. Comm ACM 1998; 41(12):55–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kotonya G, Sommerville I. Requirements engineering processes and techniques. Wiley, New York, 1998

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was partially funded by NSF grant CCR-0098346. We also wish to acknowledge the students who helped develop the EBT prototype—Kumar Javvaji, Fuhu Liu, Tim Peng Liu and Gaurav Sethi from the University of Illinois at Chicago, and Haroon Chaudhry and Amit Uchat from DePaul University. We would also like to give special thanks to Steve Chen for his invaluable comments and contributions. We also thank our industrial collaborators, especially Telelogic for providing DOORS requirements management software through their University Partnership program, and the vendors listed on our SABRE consortium Website, who have worked with us to provide EBT interfaces from their products.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, DePaul University, 243 So. Wabash Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60604-2287, USA

    Jane Cleland-Huang

  2. Department of Computer Science, Iowa State University, 226 Atanasoff Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011, USA

    Carl K. Chang

  3. CommWorks Corporation, 3800 Golf Road, Rolling Meadows, IL 60008, USA

    Jeffrey C. Wise

Authors
  1. Jane Cleland-Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carl K. Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jeffrey C. Wise
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jane Cleland-Huang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cleland-Huang, J., K. Chang, C. & C. Wise, J. Automating performance-related impact analysis through event based traceability. Requirements Eng 8, 171–182 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-003-0175-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-003-0175-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation