![](bg6.png)
efficiency characteristics, we generate a PSMInst, see deployment instance on Fig. 3.
Sum of nodes’ provided computation power for a given type is less than the required
computation power for the node type, thereby the efficiency requirements is fulfilled.
5 Conclusions
We provide the MDA models and transformation extensions for handling efficiency
requirements in the MDA. The PIM is characterized by efficiency requirements and
constraints, the PSMSpec contains a software system architecture, a deployment
specification and the efficiency requirements, and the PSMInst represent a instance of
the deployment specification. In the paper, we provide the efficiency estimation, using
the behavior metric and illustrate the method with an example.
We only consider the efficiency requirements for the system throughput, however,
time constraints are another type of the efficiency requirements to be investigated. We
also consider only an “average case”, though we should also be able to consider worst
case, etc. In the future, it would be advisable to take into consideration several
platforms types, e.g. Java, .Net, etc. Moreover, the method provided in the paper does
not take into consideration the network communication overhead.
References
1. C. U. Smith and L. G. Williams. Performance Solutions: A Practical Guide to Creating
Responsive, Scalable Software. Addison-Wesley, 2002.
2. V. Cortellessa, A. Di Marco, P. Inverardi, “Software Performance Model Driven
Architecture”, Proc. of ACM SAC 2006, Model Transformation track, 2006.
3. The Object Management Group: MDA Guide. Ver. 1.0.1. http://
www.omg.org/docs/omg/03-06-01.pdf (2003).
4. V. Cortellessa, A. Di Marco, P. Inverardi, “Nonfunctional Modeling and Validation in
Model-Driven Architecture”, Proc 6th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software
Architecture (WICSA 2007), Mumbai, India, 2007.
5. M. Woodside, G. Franks, D. C. Petriu, “The Future of Software Performance Engineering”,
Proc. of Future of Software Engineering'07, 2007.
6. The Object Management Group: Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure, Version 2.0,
OMG document formal/05-07-04 (2004).
7. The Object Management Group (OMG). UML Profile for Modeling and Analysis of Real-
time and Embedded Systems (MARTE), 2007. http://www.omgmarte.org.
8. B. Dufour, K. Driesen, L. Hendren, and C. Verbrugge. Dynamic metrics for Java. ACM
SIGPLAN Notices, pp. 149-168, Nov. 2003.
9. T. Lindholm, F. Yellin: The JavaTM Virtual Machine Specification. http://
java.sun.com/docs/books/jvms/ second_edition/html/VMSpecTOC.doc.html
10. F. Marinescu. EJB Design Patterns - Advanced Patterns, Processes, and Idioms, John Wiley
and Sons, 2002.
98