DOCSLIB.ORG

Automated Acceptance Testing Tools for Web Applications Using Test-Driven Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Automated Acceptance Testing Tools for Web Applications Using Test-Driven Development Marian JURECZKO1, Michal MLYNARSKI2 Technical University of Wroclaw (1), University of Paderborn (2) Automated acceptance testing tools for web applications using Test-Driven Development Abstract. In the last years the software engineering community pays a strong interest in agile development methods. Those methods place software testing for example the Test-Driven Development method as an important task of the development process. Agile projects rely on good test automation tools. In this paper we evaluate five test automation tools for their usage in acceptance testing for web applications using Test-Driven Development. Streszczenie. Rozdział prezentuje analizę porównawczą wybranych narzędzi umożliwiających tworzenie zautomatyzowanych testów akceptacyjnych, czyli Fitnesse, Proven!, jfcUnit oraz Selenium. Badana jest możliwość stosowania tych narzędzi do testowania aplikacji internetowych wytwarzanych w procesie opierającym się o podejście programowania przez testy. Aplikacje internetowe są bardzo specyficzną grupą aplikacji. Do ich uruchomienia potrzeba serwera aplikacji. W związku z tym nie każda aplikacja nadaje się do przeprowadzania na nich testów akceptacyjnych. Dodatkowe komplikacje pojawiają się, jeżeli wymagać, aby testy powstały przed napisaniem kodu źródłowego, co ma miejsce w przypadku programowaniu przez testy. (Zautomatyzowane testy akceptacyjne dla aplikacji internetowych w programowaniu sterowanym testami) Keywords: test-driven development, test automation tools, acceptance testing, web application testing. Słowa kluczowe: programowanie przez testy, automatyzacja testow, testy akceptacyjne, testowanie aplikacji webowych. Introduction As shown in Fig. we first choose a tool and create test Nowadays software engineering pays more attention to cases with the test automation tool. Then we implement the so-called agile methods. Those methods place automated code according to the test case definition. After step 1) we tests as one of the important tasks in software engineering. answer the questions defined for all subgoals as described One of the famous agile methods is test-driven earlier. To give a better understanding of our evaluation development (TDD), where code is implemented according process we first describe the TDD-like activities of step 1) to prior created test cases. The industrial practice shows, and then briefly introduce our goals, questions and value that test automation is not a trivial task. Especially in TDD ranges for step 2). the popular test automation tools using the Capture&Replay method, where the interaction between the user and system under test (SUT) is recorded, cannot be applied because the system is not implemented at the time of test case design. Different application types need different test automation methods. For example the tests of web applications are hard to automate because of the complex architecture and several technologies used within it. Speaking of acceptance tests, a web application has to be tested in a customer-like environment. This means, that the application has to be deployed on an application server. In order to conduct acceptance tests in a test-driven development project, the test automation tool issue has to be clarified. The goal of this article is to evaluate five test automation tools for their usage in acceptance tests conducted with TDD. We use a GQM-like method, where tools are evaluated according to predefined goals. For each tool, we first create a test case and then implement code for a small user story example based on the Spring framework. This article begins with the description of the evaluation process. Then we introduce our running example, selected tools and we evaluate each tool according to the evaluation Fig. 1. Tool Evaluation Process process. At the end we summarize the evaluation and Test-Driven Development as described in [2] and the select the most appropriate test automation tool. movement of Extreme Programming [3-4] gains high Evaluation process attention in the software engineering community. Different as in typical iterative development models, the test activities As mentioned in the introduction we define a clear start before and not after the code is implemented. As test evaluation process for the tool comparison. For this purpose cases are used as the specification of the system, the first we first adjust the Goal Question Metric (GQM) introduced activity in the development process is test case design. in [1]. We define the main goal and several subgoals. For Next, code needed to pass the created test case is being each subgoal we define questions which have to be implemented. If needed a refactoring of the created code answered. Each question has to be answered within a can be conducted in the last step. predefined value range. Different as in GQM we do not use According to [14] TDD can be used on two test levels. The concrete metrics but predefined answer values of the first one is unit testing, where test cases are mostly created questions for each subgoal. with tools from the xUnit family. The second and important The overall evaluation process is divided into three parts: 1) for this article test level is acceptance testing. Based on tool usage 2) question answering and 3) tool comparison. 198 PRZEGLĄD ELEKTROTECHNICZNY (Electrical Review), ISSN 0033-2097, R. 86 NR 9/2010 agile models like [5-6] we define the following activities executing steps 1) and 2) for all selected tools, we compare needed to conduct TDD-like acceptance tests: them according to the values defined for each answer. 1. Select and understand a User Story for the implemented system. Running example 2. Create new automated test cases and add to existing For our evaluation, we choose the wide-known web test suites. application framework Spring. The framework authors 3. Execute test cases. According to the red-green bar provide documentation, where a very basic inventory patterns [2], these test cases should fail. As the functionality management system can be implemented with it [13]. For needed to fulfil the selected User Story has not been this article we use the Change Price user story. It can be implemented, the test cases cannot pass. described as follows: 4. Implement the User Story functionality needed to pass A user is able to change the price of a selected product by the created test cases. providing the percent change value. If the price could be 5. If some alternative scenarios of the User Story can be changed, a message with the new price should be shown. If identified, then activities 2-4 should be reexecuted. the user provides negative or null values, then an error In Fig. 1 we summarize those activities with Create test message should be shown. case and Implement code. Knowing how the first step of our Knowing what use case has to be implemented we briefly evaluation process is done, we now show what questions introduce the tools chosen for our evaluation process. have to be answered in order to evaluate a test automation Evaluated tools tool. There are several test automation tools on the market. The As mentioned earlier, our main goal is to evaluate test evaluation of all available tools is not the scope of this work. automation tools for their usage in TDD-like acceptance We have chosen five tools, which can be categorized in testing. Based on the literature [2,3,5,6] and our open-source and proprietary. From the fist category we observations, we define the following subgoals G1-G10, selected the following tools: their appropriate questions Q and answers A: JFCUnit [7] is a JUnit extension for testing graphical user G1. Test first interfaces. Through an XML-based engine it is possible to Q: Can the automation tool be used before or after the capture and replay the needed test cases. Additionally test code is implemented? cases can also be implemented within XML or Java. A: easy, difficult, not possible JFCUnit is restricted to testing GUIs based on Java Swing. G2. SUT type Selenium [8] can be used as a browser plug-in for Q: Can the automation tool be applied for web Capture&Replay. The Selenium API supports the manual applications? implementation of test cases in several programming A: web application, non web application languages. Further, it supports the transformation of G3. Test environment recorded test cases into predefined languages. This way Q: Can the created test cases be executed in a client- the integration with for example JUnit is possible. like environment? FitNesse [11] is a test automation tool based upon the Fit A: client-like, development-like test framework as described in [12]. It offers all features G4. Development integration known from Fit and enhances it with self-editable wiki pages Q: Can the automation tool be integrated in the for test case specifications. Typically test cases created development environment? with FitNesse use directly the application business logic A: possible, not possible omitting the GUI. The test cases are specified with tables G5. Test implementation representing all user action steps. Through several Q: How test cases for GUI tests are created? extensions called fixtures, it is possible to use the GUI or A: coding, Capture&Replay even the underlying database in test case specifications. G6. GUI usage AutoIt [9] is a BASIC-like scripting language designed for Q: Does the automation tool use id´s or position automating the Windows GUI. It uses a combination of coordinates of GUI elements? simulated keystrokes, mouse movement and A: id-based, position-based window/control manipulation. Unfortunately AutoIt supports G7. Database interaction neither web applications nor Java Swing programs but on Q: Can the automation tool interact with the database? the other hand it is very popular and the application of A: possible, possible through integration with other tools, AutoIt in the context of test-driven development may be not possible very interesting. G8. Error checking For our evaluation we also selected one proprietary tool Q: Can the automation tool access and check error called Proven! [10].
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Test Driven .NET Development with Fitnesse
    Test Driven .NET Development with FitNesse second edition Gojko Adzic Test Driven .NET Development with FitNesse: second edition Gojko Adzic Copy-editor: Marjory Bisset Cover picture: Brian Samodra Published 2009 Copyright © 2008-2009 Neuri Limited Many of the designations used by manufacturers and sellers to distinguish their products are claimed as trademarks. Where these designations appear in this book, and the publisher was aware of a trademark claim, the designations have been printed with initial capital letters or in all capitals. The author has taken care in the preparation of this book, but makes no expressed or implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions. No liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of the use of the information or programs contained herein. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by copyright, and permission must be obtained from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or likewise. For information regarding permissions, write to: Neuri Limited 25 Southampton Buildings London WC2A 1AL United Kingdom You can also contact us by e-mail: [email protected] Register your book online Visit http://gojko.net/fitnesse and register your book online to get free PDF updates and notifications about corrections or future editions of this book. ISBN: 978-0-9556836-2-6 REVISION:2009-12-08 Preface to the second edition ........................................................... vii What's new in this version? ..................................................... vii Training and consultancy ................................................................ ix Acknowledgements ........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Stateof the Software Supply Chain
    2019 State of the Software Supply Chain The 5th annual report on global open source software development presented by in partnership with supported by Table of Contents Introduction................................................................................. 3 CHAPTER 4: Exemplary Dev Teams .................................26 4.1 The Enterprise Continues to Accelerate ...........................27 Infographic .................................................................................. 4 4.2 Analysis of 12,000 Large Enterprises ................................27 CHAPTER 1: Global Supply of Open Source .................5 4.3 Component Releases Make Up 85% of a Modern Application......................................... 28 1.1 Supply of Open Source is Massive ...........................................6 4.4 Characteristics of Exemplary 1.2 Supply of Open Source is Expanding Rapidly ..................7 Development Teams ................................................................... 29 1.3 Suppliers, Components and Releases ..................................7 4.5 Rewards for Exemplary Development Teams ..............34 CHAPTER 2: Global Demand for Open Source ..........8 CHAPTER 5: The Changing Landscape .......................35 2.1 Accelerating Demand for 5.1 Deming Emphasizes Building Quality In ...........................36 Open Source Libraries .....................................................................9 5.2 Tracing Vulnerable Component Release 2.2 Automated Pipelines and Downloads Across Software Supply Chains
    [Show full text]
  • Acceptance Testing How Cslim and Fitnesse Can Help You Test Your Embedded System
    Acceptance Testing How CSlim and FitNesse Can Help You Test Your Embedded System Doug Bradbury Software Craftsman, 8th Light Tutorial Environment git clone git://github.com/dougbradbury/c_learning.git cd c_learning ./bootstrap.sh or with a live CD: cp -R cslim_agile_package c_clearning cd c_learning git pull ./bootstrap.sh Overview Talk w/ exercises: Acceptance Tests Tutorial: Writing Acceptance tests Tutorial: Fitnesse Tutorial: CSlim Talk: Embedded Systems Integration Bonus Topics Introductions Who are you? Where do you work? What experience do you have with ... embedded systems? acceptance testing? FitNesse and Slim? Objectives As a result of this course you will be able to: Understand the purposes of acceptance testing; Use acceptance tests to define and negotiate scope on embedded systems projects; Integrate a CSlim Server into your embedded systems; Objectives (cont) As a result of this course you will be able to: Add CSlim fixtures to your embedded system; Write Fitnesse tests to drive the execution of CSlim fixtures; Write and maintain suites of tests in a responsible manner. Points on a star How many points does this star have? Star Point Specification Points on a star are counted by the number of exterior points. Points on a star How many points does this star have? By Example 3 5 9 Points on a star Now, how many points does this star have? Robo-draw Pick a partner ... Acceptance Testing Collaboratively producing examples of what a piece of software is supposed to do Unit Tests help you build the code right. Acceptance Tests
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring Test Data Uniformity in Acceptance Tests for the Fitnesse and Gherkin Notations
    Journal of Computer Science Original Research Paper Measuring Test Data Uniformity in Acceptance Tests for the FitNesse and Gherkin Notations Douglas Hiura Longo, Patrícia Vilain and Lucas Pereira da Silva Department of Informatics and Statistics, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil Article history Abstract: This paper presents two metrics designed to measure the data Received: 23-11-2020 uniformity of acceptance tests in FitNesse and Gherkin notations. The Revised: 24-02-2021 objective is to measure the data uniformity of acceptance tests in order Accepted: 25-02-2021 to identify projects with lots of random and meaningless data. Random data in acceptance tests hinder communication between stakeholders Corresponding Author: Douglas Hiura Longo and increase the volume of glue code. The main contribution of this Department of Informatics and paper is the implementation of the proposed metrics. This paper also Statistics, Federal University of evaluates the uniformity of test data from several FitNesse and Gherkin Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, projects found on GitHub, as a means to verify if the metrics are Brazil applicable. First, the metrics were applied to 18 FitNesse project Email: [email protected] repositories and 18 Gherkin project repositories. The measurements taken from these repositories were used to present cases of irregular and uniform test data. Then, we have compared the notations from FitNesse and Gherkin in terms of projects and features. In terms of projects, no significant difference was observed, that is, FitNesse projects have a level of uniformity similar to Gherkin projects. However, in terms of features and test documents, there was a significant difference.
    [Show full text]
  • Agile Testing Practices
    Agile Testing Practices Megan S. Sumrell Director of Transformation Services Valtech Introductions About us… Now about you… Your name Your company Your role Your experience with Agile or Scrum? Personal Expectations Agenda Introductions Agile Overview Traditional QA Teams Traditional Automation Approaches Role of an Agile Tester Testing Activities Refine Acceptance Criteria TDD Manual / Exploratory Testing Defect Management Documentation Performance Testing Regression Testing Agenda Continued Test Automation on Agile Teams Testing on a Greenfield Project Testing on a Legacy Application Estimation Sessions Sprint Planning Meetings Retrospectives Infrastructure Skills and Titles Closing Agile Overview Agile Manifesto "We are uncovering better ways of developing software by doing it and helping others do it. Through this work we have come to value: Individuals and interactions over processes and tools Working software over comprehensive documentation Customer collaboration over contract negotiation Responding to change over following a plan That is, while there is value in the items on the right, we value the items on the left more." Scrum Terms and Definitions User Story: high level requirements Product Backlog: list of prioritized user stories Sprint : one cycle or iteration (usually 2 or 4 weeks in length) Daily Stand-up: 15 minute meeting every day to review status Scrum Master: owns the Scrum process and removes impediments Product Owner: focused on ROI and owns priorities on the backlog Pigs and Chickens Traditional QA Teams How are you organized? When do you get involved in the project? What does your “test phase” look like? What testing challenges do you have? Traditional Test Automation Automation Challenges Cost of tools Hard to learn Can’t find time Maintenance UI dependent Only a few people can run them Traditional Test Pyramid UNIT TESTS Business Rules GUI TESTS Will these strategies work in an Agile environment? Food for Thought…….
    [Show full text]
  • Architecting TIBCO Streambase Applications Unit 4 Functional Testing
    Architecting TIBCO StreamBase Applications Unit 4 Functional Testing © Copyright 2000-2014 TIBCO Software Inc. StreamBase Functional Testing Overview • Test Methodology and Tooling • Test Development Tasks • Types of Tests • Tool Overview • Functional Test Areas © Copyright 2000-2014 TIBCO Software Inc. 2 StreamBase Test Methodology and Tooling 3 © Copyright 2000-2013 TIBCO Software Inc. Test Methodology and Tooling Partial list taken from Project Methodology Unit: We Can Help. • by validating/ creating recipes for the application of SB specifics to the general rules • by establishing delivery team discipline around particularly important good practices that often fall by the wayside • by promoting systematic use of lifecycle tool support and integrating into customer SDLC practices and infrastructure © Copyright 2000-2014 TIBCO Software Inc. 4 StreamBase Functional Testing: Tasks 5 © Copyright 2000-2013 TIBCO Software Inc. Functional Testing Tasks • Test Development Tasks – Test Plan – Test Case Specification – Test Development – Test Data Generation • Functional Testing Infrastructure and DevOps Setup and Integration • CI Server Integration and SLAs • Regression Suite Initiation and Frequency, Results Review and Notification © Copyright 2000-2014 TIBCO Software Inc. 6 StreamBase Types of Tests 7 © Copyright 2000-2013 TIBCO Software Inc. Types of Application Testing • Functional Requirements Testing • System Integration Testing • Performance Testing and Tuning • Throughput Metrics • Latency Metric • This is a science; see performance unit © Copyright 2000-2014 TIBCO Software Inc. 8 More Types of Testing – Failover/Failback Testing • Application Server Failure • Inbound Messaging Server(s) Failover/Failure • Outbound Messaging Server(s) Failover/Failure • Persistence (RDBMS) Server Failover/Failure • Network Failure • Storage/Cache Failure – Disaster Recovery Testing – Stress Testing/Burn-in © Copyright 2000-2014 TIBCO Software Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Agile Methods: Testing Challenges, Solutions & Tool Support
    Agile Methods: Testing Challenges, Solutions & Tool Support Attique Ur Rehman Ali Nawaz Muhammad Abbas Department of Computer and Department of Computer and Department of Computer and Software Engineering, CEME, Software Engineering, CEME, Software Engineering, CEME, National University of Sciences and National University of Sciences and National University of Sciences and Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan [email protected] [email protected]. [email protected] e.edu.pk edu.pk ABSTRACT methodology is rapid and we therefore opt this methodology for rapid development of software so taking out time for Agile development is conventional these days and with the comprehensive testing is difficult. Research has shown that agile passage of time software developers are rapidly moving from methodology does not provides you this time for testing. We this Waterfall to Agile development. Agile methods focus on study will identify the major challenges which may arise during delivering executable code quickly by increasing the agile testing and they can relate to the management of testing or responsiveness of software companies while decreasing can relate to the implementation of testing. The challenges can development overhead and consider people as the strongest pillar come at the organizational level between teams or can they can of software development. As agile development overshadows occur for the specific product. We also propose the solution for Waterfall methodologies for software development, it comes up those challenges in light of the tools. with some distinct challenges related to testing of such software. Our study is going to discuss the challenges this approach has In this paper we have done a research about the challenges that stirred up.
    [Show full text]
  • Benchmarking Web-Testing - Selenium Versus Watir and the Choice of Programming Language and Browser
    Benchmarking Web-testing - Selenium versus Watir and the Choice of Programming Language and Browser Miikka Kuutila, M3S, ITEE, University of Oulu, Finland Mika Mäntylä, M3S, ITEE, University of Oulu, Finland Päivi Raulamo-Jurvanen, M3S, ITEE, University of Oulu, Finland Email: [email protected], Postal address: P.O.Box 8000 FI-90014 University of Oulu Abstract Context: Selenium is claimed to be the most popular software test automation tool. Past academic works have mainly neglected testing tools in favour of more methodological topics. Objective: We investigated the performance of web-testing tools, to provide empirical evidence supporting choices in software test tool selection and configuration. Method: We used 4*5 factorial design to study 20 different configurations for testing a web-store. We studied 5 programming language bindings (C#, Java, Python, and Ruby for Selenium, while Watir supports Ruby only) and 4 Google Chrome, Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox and Opera. Performance was measured with execution time, memory usage, length of the test scripts and stability of the tests. Results: Considering all measures the best configuration was Selenium with Python language binding for Google Chrome. Selenium with Python bindings was the best option for all browsers. The effect size of the difference between the slowest and fastest configuration was very high (Cohen’s d=41.5, 91% increase in execution time). Overall Internet Explorer was the fastest browser while having the worst results in the stability. Conclusions: We recommend benchmarking tools before adopting them. Weighting of factors, e.g. how much test stability is one willing to sacrifice for faster performance, affects the decision.
    [Show full text]
  • Making Test Automation Work in Agile Projects
    Making Test Automation Work in Agile Projects Agile Testing Days 2010 Lisa Crispin With Material from Janet Gregory 1 Introduction - Me . Programming background . Test automation from mid-90s . Agile from 2000 . Many new automation possibilities! 2 Copyright 2010: Lisa Crispin Introduction - You . Main role on team? . Programming, automation experience? . Using agile approach? . Current level of automation? (Test, CI,deployment, IDEs, SCCS...) 3 Copyright 2010: Lisa Crispin Takeaways Foundation for successful test automation . “Whole Team” approach . When to automate . Apply agile principles, practices . Good test design principles . Identifying, overcoming barriers . Choosing, implementing tools . First steps We won’t do any hands-on automation, but will work through some examples together 4 Copyright 2010: Lisa Crispin Why Automate? . Free up time for most important work . Repeatable . Safety net . Quick feedback . Help drive coding . Tests provide documentation 5 Copyright 2010: Lisa Crispin Barriers to Test Automation What’s holding you back? 6 Copyright 2010: Lisa Crispin Pain and Fear . Programmers don’t feel manual test pain . Testers treated as safety net . Fear . Programmers lack testing skills . Testers lack programming skills 7 Copyright 2010: Lisa Crispin Initial Investment . Hump of pain . Legacy code, changing code . Tools, infrastructure, time Effort Effort Time Copyright 2010: Lisa Crispin It’s Worth It . ROI – explain to management . “Present value” of automated tests . Acknowledge hump of pain 9 Copyright 2010: Lisa Crispin Economics of Test Design . Poor test practices/design = poor ROI . Tests had to understand, maintain . Good test practices/design = good ROI . Simple, well-designed, refactored tests 10 Copyright 2010: Lisa Crispin Exercise – What’s holding YOU back? .
    [Show full text]
  • Anthony Escalona (206) 406-4145; [email protected]; Middle Village, NY, 11379
    Anthony Escalona (206) 406-4145; [email protected]; Middle Village, NY, 11379. Technical Skills: Quality: Test tools development, Git, Jenkins, Travis, CI/CD, Selenium, Specflow, Cucumber, xUnit Languages: Templating, .Net, Bash, Python, Java, Javascript, Ruby, LaTeX Cloud: AWS: CFT, EC2, S3, SWF, EMR, Service Catalog Azure: AzureRM(Compute), AzureAutomation, Webhooks VMWare: Automation Stack, vRA / vRO (vRealize Automation / Orchestration) ServiceNow: CMP Catalog Development Deployment : CloudFormation,CodePipeline, Azure DevOps, Chef, Ansible, 12-factor Data: SSIS, Pentaho (PRD, PDI), Talend Open Studio Experience: City of New York - DOIIT NY, NY Cloud Engineer, reporting to Director of Cloud Services March 2016 – Present • Designed and Implemented continuous delivery pipelines using Azure (AZ) DevOps • Developed solution for Cloud Deployment Pipeline and Release Definition supporting approval gates and notifications • Plan and develop strategies for departments CI/CD build systems • Designed and Developed Azure Resource Manager (ARM) templates for all Notify NYC resources with supported unit tests to provision, deploy, and operate web and function services • Developed and Integrated components with Identity Management (IAM) roles, IAM Security Group (SG), Hybrid and Relay Connection Managers, Azure Monitoring and Alarms, SQL Failover, SQL DB Import\Export, ScienceLogic\Remedy ticketing, Key Vault (KV), and SSL • Developed disposability with complete setup and teardown of Notify NYC infrastructure Key Results: • Reduce deployment
    [Show full text]
  • Automated Testing and Continuous Integration for the Deutsche Bank Index Quant Team
    Automated Testing and Continuous Integration for the Deutsche Bank Index Quant Team A Major Qualifying Project Submitted to the faculty of WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science By Jeccica Doherty [email protected] Tanvir Singh Madan [email protected] Xing Wei [email protected] Date of Submission: January 7, 2009 Abstract The goal of this project was to reduce risks from the applications of the Index Quant team at Deutsche Bank. Because their Index Calculator project is frequently updated, it is important to continuously build the project and check for regression errors. Our task was to deploy and use various existing tools to create both a continuous build system and an automated testing system for this project. By using these tools, we created a comprehensive build system to automatically run the build and the regression tests whenever a change is made to the project code. Acknowledgements We would like to extend sincere thanks to our sponsors for giving us the opportunity to work in their company. This project could not have been completed without Jason Oh, Jenny Sappington, Nikhil Merchant, and Michel Nematnejad, who have spent a lot of their time assisting us with the project. Also, we would like to thank our advisors, Professor Donald Brown, and Professor Daniel Dougherty, who have provided us with constant support and valuable advices throughout the project. Lastly, we would like to thank the people who made this project possible in the first place. They rescued us from jumping on and off from various MQP’s! Our sincere thanks to Professor Art Gerstenfeld and Teddy Cho for this project opportunity.
    [Show full text]
  • Enabling ETL Test Automation in Solution Delivery Teams
    Enabling ETL Test Automation in Solution Delivery Teams Subu Iyer [email protected] Abstract Most companies today deal with lots of data. Typically, this data is in several databases and across multiple applications. Companies also have to work with data from vendors and clients. To integrate data from multiple sources, Extract Transform and Load (ETL) systems are used. These ETL projects are handled by Solution Delivery teams where each project has its own specific requirements and constraints. This makes it very hard for teams to build automated tests and processes around the ETL solutions that would help them consistently deliver high quality solutions on time and on budget. These and a set of outdated tools and practices make testing ETL jobs a time consuming and labor intensive manual process. The lack of automated testing also makes it very difficult to build and deliver incremental changes and this hurts productivity. This paper describes how our team, the Quality Engineering and Specialized Testing (QuEST) team, is driving a change in the way teams build and test ETL jobs at Cambia Health Solutions. We are doing so by engaging with the Solution Delivery teams, setting up automated tests and providing teams hands-on training so they can continue writing automated tests. This paper will also talk about the benefits of building and growing the test framework organically in an incremental fashion. We’ll see how our team was able to overcome initial challenges and improve our ETL testing. Biography Subu Iyer has been working in Software Quality Assurance for 10+ years. Subu believes in building quality upfront and setting up processes that help us deliver quality products.
    [Show full text]