Overhead Comparison of Instrumentation Frameworks

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11320%2F24%3A10493046" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11320/24:10493046 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://doi.org/10.1145/3629527.3652269" target="_blank" >https://doi.org/10.1145/3629527.3652269</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3629527.3652269" target="_blank" >10.1145/3629527.3652269</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Overhead Comparison of Instrumentation Frameworks

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) tools are used in the industry to gain insights, identify bottlenecks, and alert to issues related to software performance. The available APM tools generally differ in terms of functionality and licensing, but also in monitoring overhead, which should be minimized due to use in production deployments. One notable source of monitoring overhead is the instrumentation technology, which adds code to the system under test to obtain monitoring data. Because there are many ways how to instrument applications, we study the overhead of five different instrumentation technologies (AspectJ, ByteBuddy, DiSL, Javassist, and pure source code instrumentation) in the context of the Kieker open-source monitoring framework, using the MooBench benchmark as the system under test. Our experiments reveal that ByteBuddy, DiSL, Javassist, and source instrumentation achieve low monitoring overhead, and are therefore most suitable for achieving generally low overhead in the monitoring of production systems. However, the lowest overhead may be achieved by different technologies, depending on the configuration and the execution environment (e.g., the JVM implementation or the processor architecture). The overhead may also change due to modifications of the instrumentation technology. Consequently, if having the lowest possible overhead is crucial, it is best to analyze the overhead in concrete scenarios, with specific fractions of monitored methods and in the execution environment that accurately reflects the deployment environment. To this end, our extensions of the Kieker framework and the MooBench benchmark enable repeated assessment of monitoring overhead in different scenarios.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Overhead Comparison of Instrumentation Frameworks

Popis výsledku anglicky

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) tools are used in the industry to gain insights, identify bottlenecks, and alert to issues related to software performance. The available APM tools generally differ in terms of functionality and licensing, but also in monitoring overhead, which should be minimized due to use in production deployments. One notable source of monitoring overhead is the instrumentation technology, which adds code to the system under test to obtain monitoring data. Because there are many ways how to instrument applications, we study the overhead of five different instrumentation technologies (AspectJ, ByteBuddy, DiSL, Javassist, and pure source code instrumentation) in the context of the Kieker open-source monitoring framework, using the MooBench benchmark as the system under test. Our experiments reveal that ByteBuddy, DiSL, Javassist, and source instrumentation achieve low monitoring overhead, and are therefore most suitable for achieving generally low overhead in the monitoring of production systems. However, the lowest overhead may be achieved by different technologies, depending on the configuration and the execution environment (e.g., the JVM implementation or the processor architecture). The overhead may also change due to modifications of the instrumentation technology. Consequently, if having the lowest possible overhead is crucial, it is best to analyze the overhead in concrete scenarios, with specific fractions of monitored methods and in the execution environment that accurately reflects the deployment environment. To this end, our extensions of the Kieker framework and the MooBench benchmark enable repeated assessment of monitoring overhead in different scenarios.

Druh

D - Stať ve sborníku

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

10201 - Computer sciences, information science, bioinformathics (hardware development to be 2.2, social aspect to be 5.8)

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2024

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název statě ve sborníku

Companion of the 2024 ACM/SPEC International Conference on Performance Engineering

ISBN

979-8-4007-0445-1

ISSN

—

e-ISSN

—

Počet stran výsledku

8

Strana od-do

249-256

Název nakladatele

ACM

Místo vydání

New York, NY, USA

Místo konání akce

London

Datum konání akce

5. 5. 2024

Typ akce podle státní příslušnosti

WRD - Celosvětová akce

Kód UT WoS článku

001227617500050