1 / 22

Grid Quality Certification Model for Research Projects

This article discusses the Grid Quality Certification Model (GQCM) and its feasibility study, comparing it to other QA standards. It also presents the timeline, feedback, publications, and a possible first implementation.

ibrownell
Download Presentation

Grid Quality Certification Model for Research Projects

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Quality Certification Model for Grid Research Projectsthe ETICS feasibility Study Adriano Rippa (adriano.rippa@eng.it) - Engineering Ingegneria Informatica s.p.a. On behalf of the ETICS Project

  2. Summary • Grid Quality Certification Model (GQCM) - UPDATE • Comparing GQCM and other QA standards • Timeline • Gotten feedbacks • Publications • A possible first implementation ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  3. In Madison we left here… • The Grid Quality Assurance Certification Process (GQACP) was organized in three perspectives looking at Code, Platforms and Standards quality aspects. • Now it asses the quality against the same macro-aspects but… Code Standards Platforms ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  4. …Now we are here • GQCM has been reorganized as follows: • A new name! • GQCM has been described according to several ISO standards (e.g. ISO/IEC 25000, 14598) • GQCM has been restructured according to ISO 25041 • Quality attributes has been named using the same terminology as ISO 9126 • More metrics has been added including bounds and target values ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  5. GQCM: the structure • GQCM is structured in Evaluation Modules (EM) according to ISO 25041 • The set of evaluation techniques are grouped in families. Every family is an EM • 5 EMs: • EM: Static analysis • EM: Coding style • EM: Structural testing • EM: Functional testing • EM: Standards compliance ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  6. Evaluation Modules 1/5 • EM Static analysis • Quality characteristics: • Reliability – maturity • Maintainability – analysability • Maintainability – changeability • Maintainability – testability • Technique: • Static analysis of classes. Statistics on measures are used as predictor of quality characteristics. • Applicability: • Object oriented programming languages. • Input: • source code, each class of the code is analysed ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  7. Evaluation Modules 2/5 • EM Coding style • Quality characteristics: • Maintainability – analysability • Technique: • Static analysis of the source code. • Applicability: • Most programming language • Input: • source code ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  8. Evaluation Modules 3/5 • EM Structural testing • Quality characteristics: • Functionality – accuracy • Reliability – maturity • Technique: • Structural testing. The intention of this EM is to test specific classes that are identified by static measures as being statistically more likely to have many errors. • Applicability: • Object oriented programming languages • Input: • source code ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  9. Evaluation Modules 4/5 • EM Functional testing • Quality characteristics: • Functionality – accuracy • Functionality – interoperability • Reliability – maturity • Portability – adaptability • Portability - installability • Technique: • Functional testing • The purpose of this EM is both to check platform compliance and to check to functional abilities of the software product. • Applicability: • General • Input: • compiled code • user documentation ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  10. Evaluation Modules 5/5 • EM Standards compliance • Quality characteristics: • Functionality – standards compliance • Technique: • Functional testing • This EM has a good potential for automating the test. • Applicability: • Standard specific • Input: • compiled code ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  11. GQCM: Final Score • Final score should be provided according to the following schema. The items which should be available for the users are: • A table summarizing the results • A list of passed and non passed tests • All the important information as: • Software product (e.g. name, version, executable code, documentation..) • Platform (name, version, date) • Quality characteristics (name, evaluation result, evaluation module identification) • Standard compliance (for each standard: name, version, date) • Identification of evaluation report (organization, report number, date) • Identification of certification body (organization, contact information) • Certification data (dates, certification number) • Electronic signature of certification record ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  12. GQCM: Summarizing Table example G = Good M = Medium P = Poor ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  13. GQCM integration in an ISO 9126 certified organization • Facts: • ISO 9126 define quality attributes • GQCM support the measure and evaluation of quality metrics • Why they are compatible each other? • Many ISO9126 aspects can be evaluated by GQCM GQCM apply what ISO 9126 asks • Any tool implementing GQCM and can be integrated as supporting ISO9126 adoption • So • GQCM can be both an independent quality model and a “tool” to be easily compliant with ISO 9126 ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  14. GQCM integration in a CMMi certified organization • Facts • CMM is process oriented (it gives guidelines). • GQCM is product oriented. • Hypothesis: • CMM2 • asks to “control and value” • GQCM proposes the measures and metrics to be collected, hence controlling and evaluating specific sw related items • CMM3 • asks to “use internal standards and have a reference model” • GQCM proposes code and implementation conventions (how to organise and structure code, how to define tests, etc.) ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  15. GQCM integration in a CMM certified organization • CMM4 • asks to “have measured and controlled processes using quantitative and statistical techniques” • GQCM proposes the continuous collection of quality data to perform trends analysis. • CMM5 • asks to have an “improvement process and quality based on measurement” • GQCM provides numerical reference to set the improvement processes. • Our Thesis • GQCM is not in contrast with CMMI and can be integrated in organization as a tool to support CMMI adoption ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  16. The timeline EGEE ’07 1-5 October Budapest OGF 21 15-19 October Seattle OGF 20/EGEE UF 7-11 May Manchester Now EELA 3° Conference 3-5 December Catania AHM 23-25 May Madison OCTOBER MAY DECEMBER FEBRUARY QUALIPSO Conference 16-17 January 2008 Rome ECHOGRID/EUChinagrid Conference 24-25 April Beijing Belief Conference 25-28 June Rio de Janeiro ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  17. GQCM: publications • 2 papers submitted • 2 papers accepted • When/Where • EELA third conference • 3-5 December 2007 • Catania/Italy • QUALIPSO first conference • 16-17 January 2008 • Rome/Italy • The first quality oriented conference! ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  18. GQCM: feedbacks • The model has got good feedbacks and acknowledgements • People are asking for more information • Some issues about the name of the model (solved) • One issue about ISO9000 compliance (outside the scope?) • Requests for metrics about the process  outside the scope? ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  19. GQCM: future and open issues • Within ETICS 2 • Implementation • Improvements • Pilot projects to test it • ISO standardisation • Open issue • First implementation? ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  20. What we have now? • Programming languages  Java/Phyton • Others? • JDepend can calculate • Number of classes indicator of the extensibility of the package • Afferent Couplings indicator of the package’s responsibility • Efferent Couplings … independence • Abstractness 0/1  package concrete – abstract • Instability 0/1 • Distance  indicator of the package bilance between abstractness and stability • PMD scans Java source code and looks for potential problems like: • Possible bugs - empty try/catch/finally/switch statements • Dead code - unused local variables, parameters and private methods • Suboptimal code - wasteful String/StringBuffer usage • Overcomplicated expressions - unnecessary if statements, for loops that could be while loops • Duplicate code - copied/pasted code means copied/pasted bugs • Cobertura/Emma • Coverage: class, method, lines, block • FindBugs reports • high/medium/low priority bugs for java • JUnit • Java unit tests • PyUnit • Python unit tests • PyCyclomaticComplexity • Python Cyclomatic Complexity ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  21. A possible first “implementation”? • We can implement partially three evaluation modules • EM: Static Analysis (Only one measure..) • WMC: looks at the complexity of classes • EM: Coding Style • Only some measurement but we can have a realistic value from it • EM: Structural Testing • it is expected that a small part of the code contain a relative large number of the defects in the code. Some metrics are used to identify potential problematic classes. • Use other test cases than already used for statement coverage. • The first implementation will aim at the programming languages Java and Python. […] ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

  22. Q&A http://www.eu-etics.org ETICS All Hands Meeting - Geneva 21-23/11/2007

More Related