... | ... | @@ -53,9 +53,12 @@ For each experimental unit, the table reports the ph employed to carry out the e |
|
|
|
|
|
| **Tasks** | **Experimental unit 1 (ph)** | **Experimental unit 2 (ph)** |
|
|
|
| :--------: | :--------: | :--------: |
|
|
|
| Coordination logic | 0,3 | 20 |
|
|
|
| Prosumer services | 0,2 | 4 |
|
|
|
| Adaptation logic | 8 | 40 |
|
|
|
| **Total** | **8,5** | **64 (55,5 saved)** |
|
|
|
| Coordination logic | 6 | 18 |
|
|
|
| Prosumer services | 2 | 6 |
|
|
|
| Adaptation logic | 8 | 16 |
|
|
|
| **Total** | **16** | **40 (24 saved)** |
|
|
|
|
|
|
For each experimental unit, the table reports the ph employed to carry out the experimental tasks together with the total amounts of ph. The general-purpose enterprise-oriented approach took more than two times longer than the **CHOReVOLUTION** approach. In this phase a sub-choreography has been modified by adding a choreography task, whereas the other choreographies and sub-choreographies remained the same. This allowed all the three experimental units to leverage on code reuse. It is worth to note that time saving obtained in this phase is due to the high support to automation provided by the **CHOReVOLUTION** approach with respect to the other approach that require a manual implementation although reusing some code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|