A software product line is a family of software products that share a common set of mandatory features and whose individual products are differentiated by their variable (optional or alternative) features. Family-based analysis of software product lines takes as input a single model of a complete product line and analyzes all its products at the same time. As the number of products in a software product line may be large, this is generally preferable to analyzing each product on its own. Family-based analysis, however, requires that standard algorithms be adapted to accomodate variability.

Multi-Objective Combinatorial Optimization (MOCO) is fundamental to the development and optimization of software systems. We propose five novel parallel algorithms for solving MOCO problems exactly and efficiently. Our algorithms rely on off-the-shelf solvers to search for exact Pareto-optimal solutions, and they parallelize the search via collaborative communication, divide-and-conquer, or both. We demonstrate the feasibility and performance of our algorithms by experiments on three case studies of software-system designs. A key finding is that one algorithm, which we call FS-GIA, achieves substantial (even super-linear) speedups that scale well up to 64 cores. Furthermore, we analyze the performance bottlenecks and opportunities of our parallel algorithms, which facilitates further research on exact, parallel MOCO.

Software product lines (SPLs) allow stakeholders to manage product variants in a systematical way and derive variants by selecting features. Finding a desirable variant is often difficult, due to the huge configuration space and usually conflicting objectives (e.g., lower cost and higher performance). This scenario can be characterized as a multi-objective optimization problem applied to SPLs. We address the problem using an exact and an approximate algorithm and compare their accuracy, time consumption, scalability, parameter setting requirements on five case studies with increasing complexity. Our empirical results show that (1) it is feasible to use exact techniques for small SPL multi-objective optimization problems, and (2) approximate methods can be used for large problems but require substantial effort to find the best parameter setting for acceptable approximation which can be ameliorated with known good parameter ranges. Finally, we discuss the tradeoff between accuracy and time consumption when using exact and approximate techniques for SPL multi-objective optimization and guide stakeholders to choose one or the other in practice.