analysis of workflows : verification, validation, and performance analysis

19
1 Analysis of workflows: Verification, validation, and performance analysis. Wil van der Aalst Eindhoven University of Technology Faculty of Technology Management Department of Information and Technology P.O. Box 513 5600 MB Eindhoven The Netherlands [email protected]

Upload: eliot

Post on 07-Jan-2016

44 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Eindhoven University of Technology Faculty of Technology Management Department of Information and Technology P.O. Box 513 5600 MB Eindhoven The Netherlands [email protected]. Analysis of workflows : Verification, validation, and performance analysis. Wil van der Aalst. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

1

Analysis of workflows: Verification, validation, and performance analysis.

Wil van der Aalst

Eindhoven University of TechnologyFaculty of Technology ManagementDepartment of Information and TechnologyP.O. Box 513 5600 MB EindhovenThe [email protected]

Page 2: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

2

Queuing models

Basic characteristics:

• average number of arrivals per time unit: (mean arrival rate)

• average number that can be handled by one server per time unit: (mean service rate)

• number of servers: c

arrivals waiting service

c

Page 3: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

3

Queuing models (2)

Basic relationships:

• average time between arrivals: 1/• average service time: 1/• occupation rate: c*)

• average number being served: r

c

W,Lq

S,LW (S) = average time in queue (system)Lq (L) = average number in queue (system)

• L = Lq + r

• S = W + 1/• Lq = * W

• L = * S (Little’s formula)

Page 4: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

4

M/M/1 queue

1

• Lq = (• L = • W = • S =

Assumptions:

• time between arrivals and service time follow a negative expontential distribution

• 1 server (c = 1)

• FIFO

Also formulas for M/Er/1, M/G/1, M/M/c, ... !

Page 5: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

5

Exercise

Calculate:

• occupation rates,

• average waiting time,

• average throughput time,

• average number in system.

task1b

task1a

c3

c1

c216 difficultcases per hour

c23

c22

1 resource, averageservice time of 8 minutes

1 resource, averageservice time of 2.66 minutes

task2

1 resource, averageservice time of 2minutes

18 easy casesper hour

difficult cases

easy cases

Increase the occupation rate until 90%:

• average waiting time,

• average throughput time,

• average number in system.

Page 6: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

6

Simulation

• Random walk through the reachability graph

• Computer experiment

– pseudo random numbers

– random generator

• Validation

• Statistical aspects

– start run

– subruns

• Animation

• Flexible

• No proof!

Page 7: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

7

Workflow Management Systems: Functions, architecture, and products.

Wil van der Aalst

Eindhoven University of TechnologyFaculty of Technology ManagementDepartment of Information and TechnologyP.O. Box 513 5600 MB EindhovenThe [email protected]

Page 8: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

8

Focus on "classical" workflow management systems, but ...

Four types of "workflow-like" systems:

1. Information systems with hard-coded workflows (process& organization specific).

2. Custom-made information systems with generic workflow support (organization specific).

3. Generic software with embedded workflow functionality (e.g., the workflow components of ERP, CRM, PDM, etc. systems).

4. Generic software focusing on workflow functionality (e.g., Staffware, MQSeries Workflow, FLOWer, COSA, Oracle BPEL, Filenet, etc.).

Page 9: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

9

Basic idea

• Separation of control and execution.

workflowmanagement

system

application

control (process logistics)

execution(task oriented)

Page 10: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

10

WfMC Reference model

Process Definition Tools

Administration & Monitoring

Tools

Interface 1

Interface 4Interface 5

Workflow Enactment Service

Workflow API and Interchange formats

Other WorkflowEnactment Service(s)

WorkflowClient

Applications

Interface 3Interface 2

WorkflowEngine(s)

WorkflowEngine(s)

InvokedApplications

Page 11: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

11

Data inside a WFS

procesdefinition

tool

resourceclassification

tool

analysis

tool

procesdefinitions

resourceclassifications

analysisdata

workflow

engine(s)

registration

generator

operationalcontroldata

historicaldata

internaldata

Logisticalcontroldata

otherworkflowsystems

customizedin-basket

standardin-basket

automaticalapplications

interactiveapplications

applicationdata

operational

tool

triggers

control

tool/report

Page 12: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

12

Interfaces

ProcessDefinition Tools

Administration& Monitoring

Tools

Interface 1

Interface 4Interface 5 Workflow Enactment Service Other WorkflowEnactment Service(s)

WorkflowClient

Applications

Interface 3Interface 2

WorkflowEngine(s)

WorkflowEngine(s)

InvokedApplications

Published in Handbook

Demo’s

Weak!

Page 13: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

13

Potential problem

workflowmanagement

system

application

In-basket application

server

client

database

Interface 3

workflowengine

DBMS

in-basket(worklist)

applications

server client

Page 14: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

14

The ACID-properties, known from transaction processing, should hold.

• Atomicity(atomic, "everything or nothing", rollback if necessary)

• Consistency(a completed task results in a proper state of the system)

• Isolation(tasks do not affected each other, even if they are executed in parallel)

• Durability(the result of a completed task may not get lost; commit tasks)

Page 15: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

15

Users of a WFS

workflowmanagement

systeem

administrator

process analist

workflowdesigner

end-user

manager

applicationdesigner/

programmer

databasedesigner/

programmer

applications

Page 16: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

16

Examples of systems

• COSA (demo)

• Staffware

• FLOWer

• …

Commercial Workflow Systems

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Exotica I - III

FlowMark MQSeries Workflow

jFlow

Staffware

Pavone

Onestone Domino Workflow

BEA PI

CARNOT

ViewStar

Digital Proc.Flo. AltaVista Proc.Flow

ActionWorkflow

SNI WorkParty

AdminFlow ChangengineWorkManager

OpenPM FlowJ et

Verve Versata

Action Coordinator

ActionWorks MetroDaVinci

FileNet WorkFlo Visual WorkFlo

FileNet Ensemble

Panagon WorkFlo

Xerox InConcert TIB/InConcert

Plexus FloWare BancTec FloWare

NCR ProcessIT

Netscape PM

MS2 Accelerate

Teamware Flow

Fujitsu iFlow

Beyond BeyondMail

DST AWD

IABG ProMInanD

DEC LinkWorks

COSA BaaN Ley COSA

Fujitsu Regatta

Pegasus

LEU

Banyan BeyondMail

Olivetti X_Workflow

Oracle WorkflowDigital Objectflow

ImagePlus FMS/FAF

VisualInfo

DST AWD

Continuum

Recognition Int.

WANGSIGMAEastman

WANG WorkfloweiStream

Lucent Mosaix

BlueCrossBlueShield

J CALS

iPlanet

Page 17: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

17

Staffware• Leading workflow management system (typically 25 percent of the

global “pure” workflow market).

• Staffware PLC is headquartered in Maidenhead UK and has offices in 19 countries.

• Focus on performance and reliability rather than functionality (e.g., infinite scalability, fault tolerance, etc.)

• In the remainder, we present a small case study that is used to:

– introduce the design tool and modeling language of Staffware,

– show the management/administrator tools of Staffware,

– demonstrate the end-user’s view of Staffware, and

– show the need for analysis.

Page 18: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

18

WfMC reference model

Process Definition Tools

Administration & Monitoring

Tools

Interface 1

Interface 4Interface 5

Workflow Enactment Service

Workflow API and Interchange formats

Other WorkflowEnactment Service(s)

WorkflowClient

Applications

Interface 3Interface 2

WorkflowEngine(s)

WorkflowEngine(s)

InvokedApplications

Page 19: Analysis of workflows :  Verification, validation, and performance analysis

19

A small case study: Double Check (DC)

• Processing of insurance claims involving registration, two checks, and a payment of rejection

• Five tasks:

– register (register insurance claim)

– checkA (check insurance policy)

– checkB (check damage reported)

– pay (pay for the damage)

– reject (inform customer about rejection)

• Registration is followed by two checks which can be handled in parallel.

• Each of the checks results in “OK” or “not OK”.

• If both are OK, pay otherwise reject.

• Three roles: register (for task register), checks (for both checks), and pay/reject (for final tasks).

register

checkA

checkB

pay

reject