Maintainability of Transformations in Evolving
MDE Ecosystems
Jokin García Pérez
Supervisor: Prof. Oscar Díaz
[email protected]
Index
1. Background
2. Problem statement
3. Model transformation co-evolution
4. Adapter-based approach to co-evolve generated SQL in M2T transformations
5. Testing MOFScript transformations with HandyMOF
6. Conclusions
7. Future work
Index
1. Background
2. Problem statement
3. Model transformation co-evolution
4. Adapter-based approach to co-evolve generated SQL in M2T transformations
5. Testing MOFScript transformations with HandyMOF
6. Conclusions
7. Future work
What is MDE?
What is MDE?
It’s all about models
1
Models are the
primary artifact
1
Models are the
primary artifact
2
Models are
abstractions of reality
abstractedIn
REALITY
1
Models are the
primary artifact
2
Models are
abstractions of reality
abstractedIn
REALITY
3
Models conform
to metamodels
Metamodel
1
Models are the
2
primary artifact
Models are
abstractions of reality
abstractedIn
REALITY
3
Models conform
to metamodels
4
Models are
transformed
Metamodel
transformation
Ecosystem
Balance
Human
eats
Mussel
Phitoplankton
Zooplankton
Fish
MDE Ecosystem
Holistic maintenance
Metamodel
Conforms To
M2M
Transf.
M2M
Transf.
M2T
Transf.
Maintainability
50-90% of the total sw cost
MDE Maintainability
- Increase of the number of artifacts
- Increase in the complexity of artifacts
- Larger upfront investment
Evolution
Multidimensional
Co-Evolution
Adaptation
Index
1. Background
2. Problem statement
3. Model transformation co-evolution
4. Adapter-based approach to co-evolve generated SQL in M2T transformations
5. Testing MOFScript transformations with HandyMOF
6. Conclusions
7. Future work
Problem statement
Change detection
Change impact
analysis
Change
propagation
Verify and validate
Problem statement
Change detection
Problem statement
MMa
MMt
MMb
Ma
Tab
Mb
Δ?
MMb’
M2T
Δ?
Platform
Platform’
Problem statement
Change detection
Change impact
analysis
Problem statement
MMa
Ma
MMt
Tab
MMb
?
M2T
MMb’
Mb
?
Platform
Platform’
Problem statement
Change detection
Change impact
analysis
Change
propagation
Problem statement
MMa
MMt
MMb
Ma
Tab
Mb
Δ
MMb’
M2T
Platform
Δ
Platform’
Problem statement
Change detection
Change impact
analysis
Change
propagation
Verify and validate
Problem statement
MMa
MMt
MMb
Ma
Tab
Mb
MMb’
M2T
Platform
Platform’
Index
1. Background
2. Problem statement
3. Model transformation co-evolution
4. Adapter-based approach to co-evolve generated SQL in M2T transformations
5. Testing MOFScript transformations with HandyMOF
6. Conclusions
7. Future work
Index
3. Model transformation co-evolution
1. Problem statement
2. Solution
3. Case study
4. Proof-of-concept
Context
1
2
Metamodel evolution
Alternative versions, adapt to formalism, correct errors, refactor, …
Model co-evolution to metamodel changes
Bibliography
Problem
statement
Problem
Metamodel evolution
1
2
Problem
statement
Impacts on transformations
MMa
MMt
Ma
Tab
Manual migration of these transformations
Cumbersome and error-prone
MMb
Mb
Problem
1
Semi-automatic migration process
Impacts on transformations
Problem
statement
Index
3. Model transformation co-evolution
1. Problem statement
2. Solution
3. Case study
4. Proof-of-concept
Process
1
MM and evolved
MM
Detection: simple
changes
2 Detection: complex
changes
3
Solution
Simple changes
Changes
Co-evolution
Similarity analysis
Similarity model
Co-evolved
transf.
Transf.
4
CNF conversion
Normalized
transf.
Detection stage
1
Retrieve simple changes
2
Convert simple changes to complex
Solution
Using a comparison tool
If they are semantically related
AddModelElement
UpdateAttribute
RemoveModelElement
SplitClass
Co-evolution stage
Solution
Define correspondences that map the original transformation into an evolved
transformation
Taxonomy of changes based on the impact
Non Breaking Changes (NBC)
Breaking and Resolvable Changes (BRC)
Breaking and Unresolvable Changes (BUC)
“Everything is a model” philosophy: implemented as HOTs
Co-evolution stage
Auxiliary steps
Conjunctive Normal Form conversion
not ((A and B) or C) -> (not A or not B) and not C
Similarity analysis
Similarity = 1
Target 1
Source 1
Similarity = 0
Target 2
Solution
Minimum deletion
Solution
Delete only the strictly necessary rule fragments
String concatenation
s3 <- s1 + s2. If s1 is removed: s3 <- s2
Collections
Set{A, B, C}. If A is removed: Set{B, C}
Boolean expressions
not ErasmusGrant or (speakEnglish and enrolledLastYear). If speakEnglish is removed: not ErasmusGrant
or enrolledLastYear
Index
3. Model transformation co-evolution
1. Problem statement
2. Solution
3. Case study
4. Proof-of-concept
Metamodels
Case study
1
Extract superclass
Case study
The AssistantMVC's Multiple class is introduced in the target metamodel
Extract superclass is a NBC case. No action is needed
2
Delete metaproperty
The metaproperty optional is deleted from ExamElement
minimum deletion is applied
Case study
2
Delete metaproperty
Opposite filters in two rules
Rule
1
(value>5 and optional) or long
(value > 5 or long)
Rule
2
not ((value>5 and optional) or long)
(not value>5 or not optional) and not long
(not value>5 and not long)
Case study
3
Type change
Case study
The AssistantMVC's fontName metaproperty is changed from string to integer
BUC in most of the cases. Only few cases are NBC
4
Split class
Case study
The AssistantMVC's OpenElement class is splitted into OpenElement_1 and
OpenElement_2
4
Split class
One rule will become two, and bindings will be moved to
the corresponding rule depending on the used metaproperty
Case study
5
Add class and property
New subclass ExerciseElement and metaproperty style
Case study
Index
3. Model transformation co-evolution
1. Problem statement
2. Solution
3. Case study
4. Proof-of-concept
Proof of concept
Prototype for Ecore-based MMs and ATL
Simple changes -> Complex changes
HOT to adapt transformation to changes
Index
1. Background
2. Problem statement
3. Model transformation co-evolution
4. Adapter-based approach to co-evolve generated SQL in M2T transformations
5. Testing MOFScript transformations with HandyMOF
6. Conclusions
7. Future work
Index
4. Adapter-based approach to co-evolve generated SQL in M2T transformations
1. Problem statement
2. Case study
3. Solution
4. Evaluation
5. Proof-of-concept
Context
Problem
statement
1
Software componets on top of platforms
2
Platform evolution is a common situation
Dependencies
DB, API, …
Blog
CMS
Wiki
Application
API
Context
3
Perpetual beta state of platforms
4
External dependency
Increase frequency of releases
Out of our control
Problem
statement
Context
Domain model
M2T Transf.
Model refs.
Transformation
code
Embedded platform code
Problem
statement
Code
Problem
Problem
statement
Different versions of the platform leave the code
and M2T transformation outdated
M2T
?
Code
DB
Δ
DB’
Solution
Problem
statement
Adapter to adapt generated code to new platform
M2T
Adapter
Code
DB
Code
Δ
DB’
Index
4. Adapter-based approach to co-evolve generated SQL in M2T transformations
1. Problem statement
2. Case study
3. Solution
4. Evaluation
5. Proof-of-concept
MediaWiki DB in Wikiwhirl
Case study
MediaWiki
+ 40.000
+ 200
Used by Wikipedia
and more than 40.000 wikis
Schema upgrades
Case study
MediaWiki DB in Wikiwhirl
Case study
Platform-dependent
concepts
Refs. to domain model
Index
4. Adapter-based approach to co-evolve generated SQL in M2T transformations
1. Problem statement
2. Case study
3. Solution
4. Evaluation
5. Proof-of-concept
Solution overview
Solution
Synchronize the generated code with platform
Using adapters at runtime
M2T
print("INSERT into categorylinks (cl_from, cl_to, cl_sortkey,
cl_timestamp) VALUES (@pageId, '" + categoryTitle + "','" + pageTitle)
Adapter
New columns “cl_type”, “cl_sortkey_prefix” and
“cl_collation”
Code
DB’
INSERT INTO categorylinks (cl_from, cl_to, cl_sortkey, cl_timestamp, cl_type,
cl_sortkey_prefix, cl_collation) VALUES (@pageId, ‘Softwareproject’, ‘House_Testing’,
(DATE_FORMAT(CURRENT_TIMESTAMP(), ‘%Y%m%d%k%i%s’), ‘page’, ‘’, ‘0’);
Process outline
Solution
Comparison
(EMFCompare)
Domain
model
Difference
model
Transformation
(M2T + adapter)
New schema
model
Old schema
model
Injection
(Schemol)
Injection
(Schemol)
3
Code
(MediaWiki DB)
2
1
New MediaWiki
schema
Old MediaWiki
schema
Process outline
Comparison
(EMFCompare)
All in one click
Domain
model
Difference
model
Transformation
(M2T + adapter)
2
New schema
model
Old schema
model
Injection
(Schemol)
Injection
(Schemol)
3
Code
(MediaWiki DB)
Solution
1
New MediaWiki
schema
Old MediaWiki
schema
Differences between platforms: DB schema
Injection
(Schemol)
Solution
Comparison
(EMFCompare)
Process: Schema Modification Operators (SMO)
SMO
% of usage
Change
type
Solution
Adaptation
Create table
8.9
NBC
New comment in the transformation on the existence of this table in the new version
Drop table
3.3
BRC
Delete statement associated to the table
Rename table
1.1
BRC
Update name
Copy table
2.2
NBC
(None)
Add column
38.7
NBC/ BRC
For insert statements: if the attribute is Not Null, add the new column in the statement with a
default value (from the DB if there is available or according to the type if there is not)
Drop column
26.4
BRC
Delete the column and the value in the statement
Rename column
16
BRC
Update name
Copy column
0.4
BRC
Like add column case
Move column
1.5
BRC
Like drop column + add column cases
Adaptation
Plaform-specific, schema-independent
1
“println” instructions are replaced with “printSQL”
2
Import “printSQL” library
3
ZQL extension
4
For each printSQL invocation
Iterate over the changes reported in the Difference model
Checks if any of the changes impacts the current statement
Needed information to adapt the statement is retrieved and added to a list of
parameters: the statement, affected table, column, …
A function that adapts the statement is called and new statement is printed
Solution
Adaptation output
Solution
Added
columns
Delete
tables
Delete
columns
Dump changes from code to transformation
Solution
Assist manual propagation
Record generation with change to be done and where (line and column in the transformation)
M2T
transformation
print(“select * from …”)
HOT
M2T
transformation’
printSQL(“select * from …”, line, column)
RECORD:
#Added columns cl_type, cl_sortkey_prefix and cl_collation
#transformation line: 12, column: 11
INSERT INTO categorylinks (cl_from, cl_to, cl_sortkey, cl_timestamp, cl_type,
cl_sortkey_prefix, cl_collation) VALUES (@pageId, ‘Softwareproject’, ‘House_Testing’,
(DATE_FORMAT(CURRENT_TIMESTAMP(), ‘%Y%m%d%k%i%s’), ‘page’, ‘’, ‘0’);
Roles
Producer
Injector for target platform
Implement adapter as a library for transformation
Consumer
Import adapter library in the transformation
Execute the batch
Solution
Index
4. Adapter-based approach to co-evolve generated SQL in M2T transformations
1. Problem statement
2. Case study
3. Solution
4. Evaluation
5. Proof-of-concept
Cost equations
Manual Cost = D + P * #Impacts
D: Detection time
P: Propagation time
Assisted Cost = C + V * #Impacts
C: Configuration time
V: Verification time
Evaluation
Manual vs Assisted
Evaluation
Index
4. Adapter-based approach to co-evolve generated SQL in M2T transformations
1. Problem statement
2. Case study
3. Solution
4. Evaluation
5. Proof-of-concept
Proof of concept
Library for MOFScript transformation
Batch that automatized the whole process: injection, comparison, execution
Empirical evaluation
Index
1. Background
2. Problem statement
3. Model transformation co-evolution
4. Adapter-based approach to co-evolve generated SQL in M2T transformations
5. Testing MOFScript transformations with HandyMOF
6. Conclusions
7. Future work
Index
5. Testing MOFScript transformations with HandyMOF
1. Motivating scenario
2. Problem
3. Solution
4. Proof-of-concept
5. Demo
Motivating scenario
M2T
Case study
Motivating scenario
Case study
Java
Model
MofScript
Transformation
Index
5. Testing MOFScript transformations with HandyMOF
1. Motivating scenario
2. Problem
3. Solution
4. Proof-of-concept
5. Demo
1
line
line
2
line
line
Problem
Traceability
?
M2T
Index
5. Testing MOFScript transformations with HandyMOF
1. Motivating scenario
2. Problem
3. Solution
4. Proof-of-concept
5. Demo
Traceability in HandyMOF
1
HOT transformation
M2T
M2T
2
Solution
Execution
M2T
Traces
Calculates physical
positions
3
executed
?
Solution
White-box testing
Highly coupled to the language
M2T: no winner language
Hybrid approach
1
Generate test suite with black-box testing
2
Check
lines covered by this suite
?
Solution
Testing in HandyMOF
1
Test model generation
Pramana
2
Trace generation
Solution
Testing in HandyMOF
3
Solution
Finding minimal model suite
Model suite
Minimal model suite
Architecture
metamodels
models
transformations
Solution
Pramana
HandyMOF
TraceGenerator
MinimalModelSuiteFinder
traces
generated
code
Index
5. Testing MOFScript transformations with HandyMOF
1. Motivating scenario
2. Problem
3. Solution
4. Proof-of-concept
5. Demo
Proof of concept
HandyMOF tool
Visualizes graphically traceability between transformation and code
Coverage analysis of test suite in transformation
Index
5. Testing MOFScript transformations with HandyMOF
1. Motivating scenario
2. Problem
3. Solution
4. Proof-of-concept
5. Demo
http://onekin.org/downloads/public/screencasts/handyMOF.htm
Index
1. Background
2. Problem statement
3. Model transformation co-evolution
4. Adapter-based approach to co-evolve generated SQL in M2T transformations
5. Testing MOFScript transformations with HandyMOF
6. Conclusions
7. Future work
Model transformation co-evolution
Conclusions
Semi-automatic process to adapt transformations to metamodel evolution
Derive complex changes from simple changes
Minimum deletion
Map the original transformation into an evolved transformation that tackles MM changes
Ecore-based MMs
ATL transformations
Co-evolve generated code
Premises: platform instability and transformation coupling
Mechanism to adapt code generated by M2T transformations to platform
evolution
Apply in a specific case study
MediaWiki DB
Assist dumping changes to the transformation
Conclusions
Testing M2T transformations
1
line
2
line
3
executed
line
line
?
Conclusions
General contributions
Conclusions
Point out and study the coupling between artifacts in MDE ecosystem and its
implication
MM – M2M transf., Platform – M2T transf.
Improve traceability mechanisms
M2T transf. - code
Synchronization techniques for co-evolution
MM – M2M transf. (HOT), Platform – M2T transf. (Adapter)
Index
1. Background
2. Problem statement
3. Model transformation co-evolution
4. Adapter-based approach to co-evolve generated SQL in M2T transformations
5. Testing MOFScript transformations with HandyMOF
6. Conclusions
7. Future work
Model transformation co-evolution
Empirical assessment
Real scenario
Future work
Co-evolve generated code
Generalization: other platforms
Methodology for adapter development
Future work
Testing M2T transformations
Assist in creating missing models
Improve minimal model suite algorithm
Add other M2t transformation languages
Evaluation
Future work
Future research
Good practices in transformations
M2T transf.: model world – text world
Future work
Dissemination & contrast
Model Transformation Co-evolution: A Semi-automatic Approach
Software Language Engineering (SLE) 2012, Dresden (Germany)
An Adapter-Based Approach to Co-evolve Generated SQL in M2T
Transformations
Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE) 2014, Thessaloniki (Greece)
Testing MOFScript Transformations with HandyMOF
International Conference on Model Transformations (ICMT) 2014, York (UK)
Comments
Questions
Prototypes: www.onekin.org/content/jokin-garcia-0
[email protected]