How Configuration Choices Shape Environmental Impact of Static Analysis Tools
Quantifying Energy Usage of Different Static Analysis Tool Configurations used in Continuous Integration
S.A. van der Linden (TU Delft - Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science)
X. Liu – Mentor (TU Delft - Software Engineering)
C.E. Brandt – Mentor (TU Delft - Software Engineering)
B.P. Ahrens – Graduation committee member (TU Delft - Programming Languages)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
Continuous Integration, CI, pipelines are widely used to ensure code quality through automated builds, tests, and static analysis. While prior work has examined the overall energy consumption of CI workflows, the energy consumption of individual phases remains unexplored. This study investigates the energy consumption of static analysis using SpotBugs across 10 open-source Java projects. SpotBugs was selected based on a systematic literature review, its widespread usage, and its configurable effort levels. Energy measurements were conducted for the four SpotBugs effort levels on both Gradle and Maven projects. The results show that energy consumption differs significantly between efforts, with the biggest differences between Min and Less, and Less and More. Performance analysis shows that increased effort improves bug detection in projects, but comes with a higher energy consumption. The most efficient effort is Min, which found the most warnings with regards to energy consumption.