Zur Kurzanzeige

dc.contributor.authorSeifermann, Stephan
dc.contributor.authorWerle, Dominik
dc.contributor.authorEbada, Mazen
dc.contributor.editorKelter, Udo
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-27T13:59:25Z
dc.date.available2023-02-27T13:59:25Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.issn0720-8928
dc.identifier.urihttp://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/40485
dc.description.abstractPredicting quality properties such as privacy are reasonable use cases for Data Flow Models (DFMs). For other use cases such as performance prediction, component-based software architecture models focusing on control flows are more suitable. Designers can derive a Control Flow Model (CFM) from a DFM but they have to make numerous design decisions like defining operation signatures. Currently, this derivation is a creative process without a clear design space and without guidelines for navigating this space. In this paper, we present design alternatives for given data flow examples and derive mapping rules that allow to choose between reasonable alternatives. Our results are a first step towards a catalogue of rules for deriving CFMs from DFMs in a systematic way and providing semi-automated transformations.en
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherGesellschaft für Informatik e.V.
dc.relation.ispartofSoftwaretechnik-Trends Band 39, Heft 4
dc.relation.ispartofseriesSoftwaretechnik-Trends
dc.subjectperformance
dc.subjectprediction
dc.subjectData Flow Model
dc.subjectControl Flow Model
dc.subjecttransformation
dc.titleMapping Data Flow Models to the Palladio Component Modelen
dc.typeText/Conference Paper
dc.pubPlaceBonn
mci.reference.pages41-43
mci.conference.sessiontitle10th Symposium on Software Performance (SSP)
mci.conference.locationWürzburg
mci.conference.date5.-6. November 2019


Dateien zu dieser Ressource

Thumbnail

Zur Kurzanzeige