Page frame name:
FRAME_PORTAL_PORTFOLIO_VIEW
This view is designed to deliver the information about a set of applications to check their overall quality status, the trends of their overall quality, their latest status regarding each one of the Health Factors and the evolution of violations to Quality Rule-based metrics whose "critical contribution" option has been set.
This view requires access to at least one Application.
Note that this view is now deprecated. You should instead use the CAST Application Analytics Dashboard - CAST AAD.
Layout
Left hand panel
Please see the section Left hand panel in Using the CAST Engineering Dashboard for more information about this.
Note that in CAST AIP 8.0.x and above, the value for the statistic "Complex objects -w/ violations" is always displayed as 0 in the FRAME_PORTAL_PORTFOLIO_VIEW (the view described in this page of documentation). The value is correct in all other CAST Engineering Dashboard views where it is displayed.
Main window panels
Four main panels are available:
| Current Overall Status | Mapping of applications according to their TQI (Total Quality Index) on the horizontal axis, their Technical Debt per kLOC (please see the section Left hand panel in Using the CAST Engineering Dashboard for more information about Technical Debt) on the vertical axis, and their functional weight as the bubble size. Hyperlinks within the list of Applications lead to the Assessment - Application Level (for the Application) and to the Investigation - Quality Model Drilldown for the kLOC. This panel is designed to help identify abnormal situations (e.g.: mission-critical applications with poor TQI). |
| Portfolio History | Displays the evolution (over successive snapshots) of the TQI (Total Quality Index) of applications as lines, against the volume (counted as kLOCs) of all Applications. It helps detect trends in overall quality and can also help detect the impact of a large addition/deletion of code on quality. |
| Bottom two panels | Solely relying on high level indicators to control the health of applications is not enough. Software development is also a question of details and a single violation of a critical performance rule can have severe impacts when occurring in production. An aggregated model can only offer what it is meant for: an effective summary of the quality. But due to the very volume of information they summarize, they fail to visualize the elementary evolutions that can jeopardize the application behavior. Therefore, besides the aggregated quality model, there is a need for a solution to monitor a few number of critical rules and be sure that no (or little) violations to these rules occurs. Hence the following two panels:
|