Ever since I wrote up some thoughts on Performance Driven Development (http://ratlperfland.com/performance-driven-development/), I have been treating it like a real thing. It’s reassuring to see it climb towards the top in Google search results, but that may be the result of folks in my organization trying to figure out what I’m talking about.
I can’t lay claim to being the first to string together “performance,” “driven” and “development,” even if I did have a specific intent. Those three words have been grouped together before, sometimes even in the way that I intended. Most prior authors would seem to coalesce around the idea that PDD is about developers creating performant products. However, there are two subtle but distinct camps: 1) Those who think that PDD is achieved through late-phase tooling and testing (in my opinion, this is noble, sometimes meaningful work, but antiquated and inefficient); and 2) Those who envision redefining a whole organization’s development goals by positioning performance design at the center of what they do. Yes, forget features and function: No one will use it if it isn’t fast, and you can’t fix slowness unless you’ve already built-in the ability to measure.
In an article published in 2009, Rajinder Gandotra nicely expresses the latter point, anticipating my definition of PDD: “The need is to move to the next paradigm of software engineering that can be called as ‘performance driven development.’
Performance focus through a performance engineering governance office is suggested which would help govern performance right from the business requirements gathering stage till go-live stage in production.” (SETLabs Briefings, Vol 7, No. 1, 2009, pp. 75-59. Ironically, the easily accessible pdf is neither dated or useful as a citation: http://www.infosys.com/IT-services/application-services/Documents/performance-driven-development.pdf.)
A performance engineering governance office might not imply actually producing instrumented code, but it does suggest end-to-end performance requirements. Given I’m thinking of PDD as part of TDD and BDD, the idea of an office suggests the performance governance is occurring in parallel or from the outside, not within and integral as we might try to do with Agile.
An unsigned article (I gave up looking for an author) http://cargocultsoftwaredevelopment.blogspot.com/2012/05/stuff-that-works-performance-driven.html from May 7, 2012, relates PDD to BDD and TDD as I have done, and proposes iteratively revealing a product’s internal KPIs so that they are exposed and visible, and that the organization can make conscious decisions about what needs improvement or investigation. Sign me up. This goes back to the point that developers will tend to investigate outliers or strange patterns if they are concretely measured or made visible. There’s also a blog post out there (http://trelford.com/blog/post/PDD.aspx, dated the same day) with a nice Max Headroom graphic that summarizes the anonymous author’s points, including create and update a dashboard which exposes KPIs. There is a lot of similarity in what I have been proposing in this post. A whole organization thinking about performance can be pretty powerful, and if a team creates KPI dashboards, that could be the way to ensure that software performance remains foremost.
(Speaking of outliers, what’s the chance that these two items showing the same date are not somehow related?)
Others who have invoked Performance Driven Development seem content to think about applying it in isolation, as a way to improve an individual’s process which in turn would lead (idealistically) to product improvements as a whole. For example, Michael J. A. Smith (http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/events/2007summerschool/michaelsmith.pdf) uses “Performance-Driven Development” as a title to describe a process of improving code through models and simplification. Honestly, this single page pdf is more like a poster illustrating an idea rather than a specific design pattern for creating software where performance considerations are foremost. I admit that I may be missing its point entirely.
And there’s a tool out there, http://www.cubrid.org/wiki_ngrinder/entry/peformance-driven-development-by-ngrinder, whose descriptive materials take the phrase “Performance Driven Development” out for a walk. I am not clear on what ngrinder actually does or how it works.
I can’t lay claim to Performance Driven Development as an original thought. I maintain it is a very compelling way to tackle performance in software. Stay tuned for specific examples that have worked for our organization.