Steffen Becker
Catia Trubiani
ABSTRACT
Engineering high quality software is a tough task. In order to know whether a certain quality attribute has been achieved or degraded, it has to be quantified by analysis or measured. However, determining what to quantify and how these quantities are related to each other is the difficult part. Early analysis of the quality attributes of a software system on the basis of the system's planned architecture allows informed decisions on design trade-offs. Such decisions can be later validated by measurements on the running system.
In this paper, we revisit software quality attributes. In particular, we introduce a generic taxonomy of quality attributes, the relationship between the attributes is argued, and finally we devise future work leading to an attribute-based methodology for evaluating software architectures. The goal is reasoning about multiple quality attributes of software systems to achieve the ability to quantitatively evaluate and trade-off them.
- ISO/IEC 25010 - Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) - System and software quality models, 2011.Google Scholar
- A. Avizienis. Fault-tolerant computing-progress, problems and prospects. In IFIP Congress, pages 405--420, 1977.Google Scholar
- S. Balsamo, A. D. Marco, P. Inverardi, and M. Simeoni. Model-based performance prediction in software development: A survey. IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 30(5):295--310, 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. A. Barroso and U. Hölzle. The case for energy-proportional computing. IEEE Computer, 40(12):33--37, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. J. Bass, F. Bachmann, and M. Klein. Making variability decisions during architecture design. In Software Product-Family Engineering (PFE), pages 454--465, 2003.Google Scholar
- P. C. Clements. On the importance of product line scope. In Software Product-Family Engineering(PFE), pages 70--78, 2001. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. C. Clements. Process validation, session report. In Software Product-Family Engineering(PFE), pages 388--389, 2001. Google ScholarDigital Library
- V. Cortellessa and C. Trubiani. Towards a library of composable models to estimate the performance of security solutions. In WOSP, pages 145--156, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- V. Cortellessa, C. Trubiani, L. Mostarda, and N. Dulay. An Architectural Framework for Analyzing Tradeoffs between Software Security and Performance. In ISARCS, pages 1--18, 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Dobrica and E. Niemelä. A survey on software architecture analysis methods. IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 28(7):638--653, 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Kazman, L. J. Bass, M. Webb, and G. D. Abowd. Saam: A method for analyzing the properties of software architectures. In International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pages 81--90, 1994. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Kazman, M. H. Klein, M. Barbacci, T. A. Longstaff, H. F. Lipson, and S. J. Carrière. The architecture tradeoff analysis method. In ICECCS, pages 68--78, 1998.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. H. Klein, R. Kazman, L. J. Bass, S. J. Carrière, M. Barbacci, and H. F. Lipson. Attribute-based architecture styles. In WICSA, pages 225--244, 1999. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J.-C. Laprie. Dependability modelling and evaluation of software and hardware systems. In Fehlertolerierende Rechensysteme, pages 202--215. Springer, 1984. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Q-ImPrESS Consortium. The Q-ImPrESS project. Project website: http://www.q-impress.eu, 2010.Google Scholar
- P. Ranganathan. Recipe for efficiency: principles of power-aware computing. Commun. ACM, 53:60--67, April 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. J. Rodríguez, C. Trubiani, and J. Merseguer. Fault-Tolerant Techniques and Security Mechanisms for Model-based Performance Prediction of Critical Systems. In ISARCS, 2012.Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. S. Trivedi. Reliability evaluation for fault-tolerant systems. In Computer Performance and Reliability, pages 403--416, 1983. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. G. Williams and C. U. Smith. Pasasm: a method for the performance assessment of software architectures. In WOSP, pages 179--188, 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Yang, G. Huang, W. Zhu, X. Cui, and H. Mei. Quality attribute tradeoff through adaptive architectures at runtime. Journal of Systems and Software, 82(2):319--332, 2009. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Towards a methodology driven by relationships of quality attributes for qos-based analysis
Recommendations
A survey on quality attributes in service-based systems
Service-based systems have become popular in the software industry. In software engineering, it is widely acknowledged that requirements on quality attributes (e.g., performance, security, reliability) significantly impact the design of software ...
A Survey on Quality Attributes and Quality Models for Embedded Software
This article describes how software quality engineering is an inevitable activity, which must be accomplished during software development process in order to avoid software failures and ensuring its quality. Embedded systems are computer platforms, ...
Object Oriented Metrics and Quality Attributes: A Survey
INFOS '16: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Informatics and SystemsDesign phase is considered one of the most important phases of software development process. Considering design quality is a significant indicator to guarantee a good product. Despite the fact that this phase is more important, it takes less effort in ...
Comments