Notice: this Wiki will be going read only early in 2024 and edits will no longer be possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.
Difference between revisions of "Index based model compare match engine"
| (8 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Student: Stefan Leopold | Student: Stefan Leopold | ||
| − | This project is part of the [[Google Summer of Code 2010]] | + | This project is part of the [[Google Summer of Code 2010]]. |
| + | |||
| + | Also refer to the corresponding [http://code.google.com/a/eclipselabs.org/p/model-compare-match-engine-playground/ EclipseLabs project] for further details and the codebase. | ||
== Abstract == | == Abstract == | ||
| Line 9: | Line 11: | ||
Model elements matching is the most critical phase during model comparison regarding performance and memory consumption. Further improvement of the current EMF Compare GenericMatchEngine and the adoption and integration of new ideas and concepts in this part of the EMF Compare framework can largely help to get better scalability. | Model elements matching is the most critical phase during model comparison regarding performance and memory consumption. Further improvement of the current EMF Compare GenericMatchEngine and the adoption and integration of new ideas and concepts in this part of the EMF Compare framework can largely help to get better scalability. | ||
| − | == | + | == Details == |
Providing out-of-the-box solutions is essential in today's business, especially if they can be adapted and - if required - customized easily. EMF Compare already provides such experience for usecases of different size and of different complexity. Live model editing with comparison support further raises the expectations - and requirements with regard to performance and scalability. | Providing out-of-the-box solutions is essential in today's business, especially if they can be adapted and - if required - customized easily. EMF Compare already provides such experience for usecases of different size and of different complexity. Live model editing with comparison support further raises the expectations - and requirements with regard to performance and scalability. | ||
| − | + | So an in-depth analysis of the current implementation combined with the adoption of new ideas and/or other existing concepts may be a first step for better integration of EMF Compare with live model editing, even with huge model graphs. | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | So an in-depth analysis of the current implementation combined with the adoption of new ideas and/or other existing concepts | + | |
== Deliverables == | == Deliverables == | ||
| Line 28: | Line 25: | ||
{| style="text-align: center" class="wikitable FCK__ShowTableBorders" | {| style="text-align: center" class="wikitable FCK__ShowTableBorders" | ||
|- style="background: #efefef" | |- style="background: #efefef" | ||
| − | ! | + | ! Week |
| − | + | ||
! Step | ! Step | ||
! Details | ! Details | ||
|- style="background: lightgrey" | |- style="background: lightgrey" | ||
| − | ! | + | ! 1-4 |
| − | + | ||
| research | | research | ||
| align="left"| identifying performance problems and analysing bottlenecks, preparing test data, suggesting improvements | | align="left"| identifying performance problems and analysing bottlenecks, preparing test data, suggesting improvements | ||
|- style="background: lightgrey" | |- style="background: lightgrey" | ||
| − | ! | + | ! 5-8 |
| − | + | ||
| implementation | | implementation | ||
| align="left"| coding of prototypes and patches with accepted improvements | | align="left"| coding of prototypes and patches with accepted improvements | ||
|- style="background: lightgrey" | |- style="background: lightgrey" | ||
| − | ! | + | ! 9-12 |
| − | + | ||
| integration | | integration | ||
| align="left"| committing work, providing benchmark report with performance impacts | | align="left"| committing work, providing benchmark report with performance impacts | ||
|} | |} | ||
| − | == | + | == Links == |
| − | [1] [http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/EMF_Compare EMF Compare]<br> | + | [1] [http://code.google.com/a/eclipselabs.org/p/model-compare-match-engine-playground/ EclipseLabs project]<br> |
| − | [ | + | [2] [http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/EMF_Compare EMF Compare]<br> |
| − | [ | + | [3] [http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/ EMF]<br> |
| + | [4] [http://www.eclipse.org/forums/index.php?t=thread&frm_id=108 EMF Forum]<br> | ||
[[Category:SOC]] | [[Category:SOC]] | ||
Latest revision as of 04:02, 4 July 2010
Mentor: Cédric Brun
Student: Stefan Leopold
This project is part of the Google Summer of Code 2010.
Also refer to the corresponding EclipseLabs project for further details and the codebase.
Contents
Abstract
Model elements matching is the most critical phase during model comparison regarding performance and memory consumption. Further improvement of the current EMF Compare GenericMatchEngine and the adoption and integration of new ideas and concepts in this part of the EMF Compare framework can largely help to get better scalability.
Details
Providing out-of-the-box solutions is essential in today's business, especially if they can be adapted and - if required - customized easily. EMF Compare already provides such experience for usecases of different size and of different complexity. Live model editing with comparison support further raises the expectations - and requirements with regard to performance and scalability.
So an in-depth analysis of the current implementation combined with the adoption of new ideas and/or other existing concepts may be a first step for better integration of EMF Compare with live model editing, even with huge model graphs.
Deliverables
The main objective of this project is to measurably improve the performance of the EMF Compare model matching algorithm. This improvement will be documented by benchmarks performed on provided "Real-World" data.
Timeline
| Week | Step | Details |
|---|---|---|
| 1-4 | research | identifying performance problems and analysing bottlenecks, preparing test data, suggesting improvements |
| 5-8 | implementation | coding of prototypes and patches with accepted improvements |
| 9-12 | integration | committing work, providing benchmark report with performance impacts |
Links
[1] EclipseLabs project
[2] EMF Compare
[3] EMF
[4] EMF Forum