Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byAliza Tomlinson Modified about 1 year ago

1
McGill University School of Computer Science Ph.D. Candidate in the Modelling, Simulation, and Design Lab MPM’10 Márk Asztalos, Eugene Syriani, Manuel Wimmer, and Marouane Kessentini

2
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 OUTLINE Context Rule Composition Composability Criteria Composition Procedure Example: UML EJB 2.0 EJB 3.0 Conclusion 2

3
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 CONTEXT 3 Enterprise Development Company RequirementsRequirementsDevelopmentDevelopmentDesignDesignMaintenanceMaintenance

4
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 CONTEXT 4 Enterprise Development Company DevelopmentDevelopmentDesignDesign

5
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 CONTEXT 5 Enterprise Development Company DevelopmentDevelopmentDesignDesign v2.0 v3.0

6
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 AUTOMATICALLY IS IT POSSIBLE TO AUTOMATICALLY DERIVE T3? That is the question 6 UML meta-model EJB 3 meta-model EJB 2 meta-model T3 T1 T2 ?

7
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 IS IT POSSIBLE TO AUTOMATICALLY DERIVE T3? In general this is a very hard task rule level Instead we will try to solve the problem at the rule level 7 a1:Package b2:EJBArchive2 a1:Package b3:DeployDesc T c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 T a1:Package d2:EJBArchive3 a1:Package T T3 T1 T2 UML class TO EJB2 archive EJB2 archive TO EJB3 archive UML class TO EJB3 archive

8
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 ASSUMPTIONS Transformation Chain 8 exogenous We assume an exogenous chain of transformations Rules of the transformations are algebraic graph transformation rules [1] traceability links Rules must produce traceability links such that every newly created element must have at least one trace link [1] H. Ehrig, K. Ehrig, U. Prange, G. Taentzer. Fundamentals of Algebraic Graph Transformation. EATCS, Springer-Verlag, a1:Package d2:EJBArchive3 a1:Package T

9
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 WHAT DO WE MEAN BY COMPOSITION? For any model m 1, m 2 = T 1 (m 1 ) and m 3 = T 2 (m 2 ) we define m’ = T 3 (m 1 ) = T 2 T 1 (m 1 ) such that: Soundness & Completeness: – m 1 is preserved in m’ – All elements produced by T 2 are present in m’ – m’ contains no other elements then those in m 3 Elimination: – No element from m 2 shall be present in m’ – No traceability link involving elements from MM 2 must be present in m’ Transitivity – If there is a trace link 12 between an element e 1 m 1 and an element e 2 in m 2 AND there is a trace link 23 between e 2 and an element e 3 m 3 Then there must be a trace link 13 m’ between e 1 and e 3 9

10
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 ASSUMPTIONS Composability Criteria 10 Two rules (LHS 1, RHS 1 ) and (LHS 2, RHS 2 ) are composable if: Every element in LHS 2 that is part of MM 2 is present in RHS 1 a1:Package b2:EJBArchive2 a1:Package b3:DeployDesc T c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 T

11
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 RULE COMPOSITION PROCEDURE Composability Criteria The Composability Criteria specifies the pre-condition Composition Definition The Composition Definition specifies the post-condition In [1], Ehrig et. al. have proven that the composition of two graph transformation rules is possible 11 [1] H. Ehrig, K. Ehrig, U. Prange, G. Taentzer. Fundamentals of Algebraic Graph Transformation. EATCS, Springer-Verlag, 2006.

12
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 GRAPH TRANSFORMATION RULE APPLICATION 12 right left right left updownupdown right LKR G gLinkgLink gLink pLinkfLink left right left updownupdown H gLink pLinkfLink m If there exists an occurrence of L in G then replace it with R

13
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 RULE COMPOSITION PROCEDURE In [1], Ehrig et. al. have proven that the composition of two graph transformation rules is possible – By computing the so-called E-concurrent graph of the two rules BUT the theorem does not say how to precisely construct the new rule r’ = r 2 r 1 How to construct the L,K, and R parts of r’? 13 [1] H. Ehrig, K. Ehrig, U. Prange, G. Taentzer. Fundamentals of Algebraic Graph Transformation. EATCS, Springer-Verlag, 2006.

14
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 RULE COMPOSITION PROCEDURE Eliminate MM 2 elements and related trace links and compute transitive trace links 14 b2:EJBArchive2 a1:Package b3:DeployDesc a1,b2 d2:EJBArchive3 a1,b3 b2,d2 a1,d2

15
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 RULE COMPOSITION PROCEDURE 15 a1:Package b2:EJBArchive2 a1:Package b3:DeployDesc T c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 T r1:r1: r2:r2: E: b2:EJBArchive2 a1:Package T r3:r3: R3:R3: b2:EJBArchive2 a1:Package b3:DeployDesc T d2:EJBArchive3 T T T a1:Package d2:EJBArchive3 T b2:EJBArchive2 a1:Package T b2:EJBArchive2 a1:Package b3:DeployDesc T c1:EJBArchive2d2:EJBArchive3 T a1:Packaged2:EJBArchive3 T

16
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 RULE COMPOSITION PROCEDURE Negative Application Conditions 16 If the NAC of r 1 corresponds to its RHS, then add a NAC to r 3 that corresponds to its RHS If the NAC of r 2 corresponds to its RHS, then it is taken into account when applying r 2 on E Considering other arbitrary NACs is not trivial, as they can be – Overlapping with the LHS – Completely independent from the LHS In either case, need knowledge of other rules involved

17
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 SOLVING THE UML EJB2 EJB3 MIGRATION CASE 17 UML meta-model EJB 3 meta-model EJB 2 meta-model T3 T1 T2

18
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 UML EJB2 EJB3 COMPOSITION UML Class Diagram TO EJB a1:Package b2:EJBArchive2 a1:Package b3:DeployDesc T a1:Package b2:EJBArchive2 b3:DeployDesc isPersistent = true a4:Class a1:Package b2:EJBArchive2 b3:DeployDesc a4:Class name = a4.name b5:EntityBean name = a4.name b6:Interface b7:EntityEntry T T T a1:Package b2:EJBArchive2 b3:DeployDesc isPersistent = false a4:Class a1:Package b2:EJBArchive2 b3:DeployDesc a4:Class name = a4.name b5:SessionBean name = a4.name b6:Interface b7:SessionEntry isStateful = false T T T R1:R1: R2:R2: R3:R3: b2:EJBArchive2 a1:Package b3:DeployDesc T a1:Package b2:EJBArchive2 b3:DeployDesc a4:Class name = a4.name b5:EntityBean name = a4.name b6:Interface b7:EntityEntry T T a1:Package b2:EJBArchive2 b3:DeployDesc a4:Class name = a4.name b5:SessionBean name = a4.name b6:Interface b7:SessionEntry isStateful = false T T

19
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 UML EJB2 EJB3 COMPOSITION EJB 2.0 TO EJB R1:R1: R2:R2: R3:R3: c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 c4:EntityBean c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 c4:EntityBean d6:EntityBean d7:Interface name = c4.name c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 c3:SessionBean c5:SessionEntry c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 c3:SessionBean c5:SessionEntry d6:SessionBean d7:Interface d8:Stateless isStateful = false name = c3.name T T T T T T T c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 c3:SessionBean c5:SessionEntry c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 c3:SessionBean c5:SessionEntry d6:SessionBean d7:Interface d8:Stateful isStateful = true name = c3.name T T T c1:EJBArchive2d2:EJBArchive3 T c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 c4:EntityBean d6:EntityBean d7:Interface name = c4.name T T c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 c3:SessionBean c5:SessionEntry d6:SessionBean d7:Interface d8:Stateless name = c3.name T T c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 c3:SessionBean c5:SessionEntry d6:SessionBean d7:Interface d8:Stateful name = c3.name T T R4:R4:

20
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 UML EJB2 EJB3 COMPOSITION Composability Matrix 20 T 2 T 1 T 2 :R 1 T 2 :R 2 T 2 :R 3 T 2 :R 4 T 1 :R 1 YESNO T 1 :R 2 YES NO T 1 :R 3 YESNOYESNO

21
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 UML EJB2 EJB3 COMPOSITION T 3 :R 1 = T 2 :R 1 T 1 :R 1 21 a1:Package d2:EJBArchive3 a1:Package T d2:EJBArchive3 a1:Package T = b2:EJBArchive2 a1:Package b3:DeployDesc T b2:EJBArchive2 a1:Package b3:DeployDesc T c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 T c1:EJBArchive2d2:EJBArchive3 T

22
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 c4:EntityBean c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 c4:EntityBean d6:EntityBean d7:Interface name = c4.name T T T c1:EJBArchive2 d2:EJBArchive3 c4:EntityBean d6:EntityBean d7:Interface name = c4.name T T UML EJB2 EJB3 COMPOSITION T 3 :R 2 = T 2 :R 2 T 1 :R 2 22 =

23
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 UML EJB2 EJB3 COMPOSITION T 3 :R 3 = T 2 :R 3 T 1 :R 3 23 =

24
Towards Transformation Rule Composition MPM’10 CONCLUSION Composition procedure – Given two transformation rules – Produces the composite of the two rules (transitive closure) Composition detection Implemented in – ATL: compiled to graph transformation rules – EMF Tiger: detect composable rules Output the composite rule How to deal with more complex transformation? – Arbitrary NACs – Arbitrary attribute constraints – Workflow structure (priority, layer, explicit control flow,...) 24

Similar presentations

© 2016 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

Ads by Google