07/05/2019 at 02:09 #11625
This reply has been split off from Data groups in the same functional process since this is a new topic.
I have a similiar measurement for another project, we need to read a data group which name is “Market share updates” it has the following atributes:
• Quota period.
• Worker’s SSN.
• Status of the individual account
• Origin code
• Type of worker
• Affiliation regime
• Activity status
• Balance indicator
• Action indicator
etc. (a lot more)
In the main stage the system get all the information which indicator is equal to “A” some calcultions are needed using the information previosly read, but at the end we only have one result
in another stage if the Action indicator is equal to “B” different calculations are executed with different rules but at the end we only have one result
in another stage if the Action indicator is equal to “C” different calculations are executed with different rules but at the end we only have one result
in another stage if the Action indicator is equal to “D” different calculations are executed with different rules but at the end we only have one result
in another stage if the Action indicator is equal to “E” different calculations are executed with different rules but at the end we only have one result
I mean depending of “Action indicator” the rules changes to get the final amount which for the business means “The final balance”.
If I apply the rules to get the CFPs I only got:
1 Triggering event
1 read and
Nevertheless it will implied a lot of effort because the rules change to get the final amount. As at the end of the day I will translate this CFP in hours this team will have the same hours that another team that will not have a lot of rules and calculations. What do you think? Is this measurement ok?
Thanks in advance for your comments
07/05/2019 at 08:09 #11629
Do the different calculations require any additional Reads?
07/05/2019 at 19:05 #11632
Not, only change the Formula, if indicator is equal to “B” must be different that if the indicator is equal to “C” or if indicator is equal to “D” using differents attributes of the data group that previusly was read.
10/05/2019 at 13:29 #11639
Dear Maricela, the COSMIC method, like all functional size measurement methods, cannot account for data manipulation. The COSMIC method assumes that data manipulation is associated with data movements and that the count of data movements is a good-enough measure of the amount of functionality required for any functional process. Most of the time this assumption is valid for the types of software which the method is designed to measure.
Sometimes you find functional processes which are dominated by data manipulation. Your case where different input data attribute values lead to the need to execute different business rules is a good example where the size measured in CFP may not adequately represent the amount of functionality.
So you have a choice of ways of dealing with the problem, depending on your circumstances.
1. If the system being measured is large, ignore this problem. In a large system, some FP’s will have a lot of data manipulation, some will have little. As Allan Albrecht said ‘the Law of Averages’ will apply. The problem of the ‘true’ contribution of this one FP will be minor in comparison to the total functional size; simlarly the effort to solve the problem of the business rules for this one FP will be minor compared with the overall effort to develop the system.
2. If the FP with the complex rules dominates the software you are trying to measure, or if you are trying to estimate the effort to analyse, develop, test and implement these rules, then separate the task of estimating the effort for the work on the rules from the effort to develop the remainder of the FP, i.e. the 3 CFP for the data movements. This is a perfectly reasonable approach because developing business rules is largely a creative process. It is very diffcult to predict how much effort is needed to develop algorithms. Some experienced people may do it quickly, others take more effort or may fail, etc. Anyone can program E = mc2 in seconds but it took a genius to develop this equation. Measuring Einstein’s productivity for developing this equation is not very useful.
3. You could extend the COSMIC method with your own units of functional size for algorithms of varying complexity (I personally would not recommend this)
All this is discussed in version 4.0.2 of the Measurement Manual, section 4.5.
I hope this helps
13/05/2019 at 18:37 #11640
Yes, thanks you very much Symons
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.