Functional Size Measurement methods are intended to mensurate the size of package by quantifying the Functional User Requirements of the package. The IFPUG FPA and COSMIC-FFP are the chief methods of FSM methods. IFPUG FPA, International Function Point

Users ‘ Group Function Point Analysis is used to mensurate package merchandise size in footings of map point.

In fact, a FSM method measures the logical external position of the package from the users ‘ position by measuring the sum of functionality to be delivered. The chief aims of FPA are ; 1. To mensurate functionality the user petitions, 2. To mensurate functionality the user receive and 3. To mensurate package development and care independently of engineering used for execution. [ 1 ] [ 2 ]

2. IFPUG FPA PROCESS

In IFPUG Function Point Analysis [ 3 ] , the functional size is calculated by quantifying the figure of the five types of constituents that exist, viz. : External Inputs, External Outputs, External Inquiries, Internal Logical Files and External Interface Files. Furthermore, IFPUG FPA ‘s position on functional size is that a package system consists of logical informations files and maps.

For one thing, logical informations files contain Internal Logical Files and External Interface Files indicated severally by ‘ILF ‘ and ‘EIF ‘ ; for another, maps contain External Inputs, External Outputs and External Inquiries indicated severally by ‘EI ‘ , ‘EO ‘ and ‘EQ ‘ .

These constituents are weighed ( harmonizing to their complexity-low, mean or high ) , and their weights are summed. This value is so adjusted utilizing 14 general system features to bring forth a functional size step.

The sum and complexness of the informations ( types ) ‘handled ‘

by a logical information file transactional map determines the sum of functionality that this piece of package delivers, hence its functional size.

The boundary separates the package system being measured from its environment. Within this environment are the users of the system, which may include other systems. Besides systems that are used by the system within the range of measuring are identified.

3. CASE PROJECT

3.1 Premise

To finish information about demand specification, we assumed a high degree design for the information base of the system.

As it is shown in Table 1, we have 15 field in the information base, two of which are assumed as map key ( Primary Key ) and one of them as a secondary key.

Table 1. Datas Type

No

Name

Data Type

1

Company_Name ( PK )

varchar

2

Contact_Name ( PK )

varchar

3

Job_Title

varchar

4

Data_Initil_Contact

day of the month

5

Address

varchar

6

City

varchar

7

State

varchar

8

Zipcode

varchar

9

Phone_Number

varchar

10

Fax_Number

varchar

11

Date_Phone_Contact ( SK )

day of the month

12

Date_Packet_Sent

day of the month

13

Notes

varchar

14

Error_Name

varchar

15

Error_Message

varchar

PK = Primary Key

SK = Secondary Key

After doing premises about our informations type, we have defined the application boundary from the user position. As it is illustrated in Figure 1, the user ( End User ) is outside the system.

After finding the boundary, informations files maintained within the application and the associated care maps ( create, update, delete ) are counted as internal logical files, with external informations files counted for those entities administered and maintained outside the application boundary. [ 4 ]

Figure 1. Specifying the application boundary.

3.2 Calculation

In this portion, we calculate unadjusted map point ( UFP ) based on the phases of computation harmonizing to IFPUG FPA method. As illustrated in Table 2 and Table 3, foremost we have counted the sum of EI ( External Input ) and EI ( External Inquiry ) and after the computation of ILF ( Internal Logical Files ) , we have calculated UFP. It should be mentioned that we have no EO ( External Output ) in the demands specification so, we have non any computation for that.

3.2.1 External Input signal:

Table 2. External Input signal

EI

DET

FTR

Complexity

create_company_contact

11+2 ( messages )

1

Low

update_company_contact

10+2 ( messages )

1

Low

delete_company_contact

13+2 ( messages )

1

Low

packet_sent

3+2 ( messages )

1

Low

phone_contact_completed

4+2 ( messages )

1

Low

EI ( entire ) = EI ( low ) * 3 + EI ( norm ) *4 + EI ( high ) *6

= ( 5*3 ) + ( 0*4 ) + ( 0*6 ) = 15

3.2.3 External End product:

There is no computation.

3.2.4 External Inquiry:

Table 3. External Inquiry

Equivalent

DET

FTR

Complexity

view_company_details

10

1

Low

view_packet_sent_details

3

1

Low

view_phone_contact_details

4

1

Low

view_error_info

4

1

Low

retrieve_company_info

13

1

Low

EQ ( entire ) = EQ ( low ) *3 + EQ ( norm ) *4 + EQ ( high ) *6 = ( 5*3 ) + ( 0*4 ) + ( 0*6 ) = 15

3.2.5 Internal Logical Files:

4 RET ‘s ; 16 DET ‘s & A ; gt ; & A ; gt ; complexness is low

ILF ( entire ) = ILF ( low ) * 7 + ILF ( norm ) * 10 + ILF ( high ) * 15

= ( 1*7 ) + ( 0*10 ) + ( 0*15 )

7

Unadjusted map point count:

Unadjusted Function point count ( UFP ) =

EI ( entire ) + EO ( entire ) + ILF ( entire ) + EIF ( entire ) + EQ ( entire )

15+15+ 7

37

Adjusted map point count:

Calculate adjusted map point count as below ;

General System Characteristics

DI ( Degree of Influence )

Data Communication

0

Distributed processing

0

Performance

0

Heavily used Configuration

0

Transaction Ratess

0

Online Data Entry

0

Design for End User Efficiency

0

On-line Update

0

Complex Processing

0

Useable in other applications

0

Installation Ease

0

Operational Ease

0

Multiple Sites

0

Facilitate Change

0

It should be mentioned that we assumed DI is 0 harmonizing to graduated table of grades as shown ; 0.Not Present, 1.Incidental influence, 2.Moderate influence, 3.Averageinfluence, 4.Significant influence, 5.Strong Influence Through

FPC = UFPC* ( ( TDI*.01 ) +0.65 ) = 37* ( ( 0*0.01 ) +0.65 ) ) = 24.05

4. Decision

IFPUG FPA techniques show the functional demand in footings of Base Functional Component ( BFC ) . It can about measure the size of package at the early phase of package development lifecycle in order to finish the system good. And this method measures package merely from the positions of terminal users so, it is applicable to size concern applications package e.g. MIS ( Management Information Software ) and has been used extensively in productiveness and appraisal.