Posts Tagged ‘Testing’
November 8th, 2009 | 
Author: 
Google Tech Talk
October 22, 2009
ABSTRACT
Automated Performance Test Data Collection and Reporting. Presented by David Burns and David Henderson, smartFOCUS DIGITAL, at the 4th Annual Google Test Automation Conference, October 21st, 22nd, 2009, Zurich, CH
Web applications are growing in size and complexity with every new release. The addition of slightly more JavaScript and HTML can lead to the site becoming sluggish without an obvious cause. Fortunately more organizations are taking note of the correlation between site speed and profitability. Without suitable tools, developers are left stabbing in the dark to resolve performance issues until the application feels faster. Luckily there are many tools available, such as YSlow, that can help you through the process of measuring the performance of your application. However gathering this data manually can be time consuming, laborious and prone to human inconsistencies. To illustrate the need for better performance information, we will outline the state of performance testing within the development cycle as carried out by many development teams around the world. We will then discuss the requirements for the system that has been created and implemented as a result of our research and development. The data gathering infrastructure, the tools used to create it and the scope of the data that is collected will be shown with solutions to problems encountered along the way. Performance statistics of a page, kept in a database, provide little useful information in isolation. When put into context with data from other pages and previous builds, the performance statistics suddenly become invaluable. To display this data in a digestible and comparable setting, a reporting portal will be demonstrated and its place within the development lifecycle explained. The final component of the system is the integration with the Tester’s Heads-Up Display (T.H.U.D.). This is a plugin that aids rapid diagnosis and reporting of bugs by overlaying performance data on a specific page, as well as providing access to source control and bug tracking systems. This presentation will show how ‘Automating Performance Test Data Collection and Reporting’ has improved the awareness of web performance issues within our company. It has provided the evidence required to instigate changes and measure their impact. An average 75% reduction in primed page size has been achieved as a direct result of the system’s introduction.
Bios: David Burns and David Henderson are both members of the development team at smartFOCUS DIGITAL, working on their SaaS solution.
David Burns is the Lead Test Engineer, working on the web accessible parts of the system. He is the test automation champion for smartFOCUS and heads up the Test Design Authority within the group trying to find best practices in testing of smartFOCUS applications. David is an active blogger at http://www.theautomatedtester.co.uk.
David Henderson graduated from the University of Southampton with a first class Masters in Engineering in 2007. He is a developer working on the front end development mainly dealing with JavaScript and C#. David is currently tinkering with the Android platform in his spare time, looking to write the next killer app.
Both have an unhealthy obsession with measuring and improving the speed and weight of the user experience.
Duration : 0:52:25
http://www.softwaretestingvideos.com/blog/
“Visit for FREE complete video training”
Get Software Testing Jobs just watching these Videos
As testers, we all agree to the fact that the basic aim of the Tester is to decipher bugs. Whenever a build appears for testing, the primary objective is to find out as many bugs as possible from every corner of the application. To accomplish this task as perfection, we perform testing from various perspectives. We strain the application before us through various kinds of strainers like boundary value analysis, validation checks, verification checks, GUI, interoperability, integration tests, functional — business concepts checking, backend testing (like using SQL commands into db or injections), security tests, and many more. This makes us to drill deep into the application as well as the business.
Duration : 0:7:50
http://www.softwaretestingvideos.com/blog/
“Visit for FREE complete video training”
Get Software Testing Jobs just watching these Videos
System Testing is conducted on a complete, integrated system to evaluate the system’s complain with its specified requirements. It should require no knowledge of the inner design of the code or logic. It is performed on the entire system.
Steps for Effective System Testing:
1)Test Coverage
2)Defect Tracking
3)Test Execution
4)Build Process Automation
5)Test Automation
6)Documentation
Duration : 0:6:18
http://www.softwaretestingvideos.com/blog/
“Visit for FREE complete video training”
Get Software Testing Jobs just watching these Videos
Integration Testing is the phase of software testing in which individual software modules are combined and tested as a group. The purpose of this testing is to verify functional, performance and reliability of the product.
Steps for Effective Integration Testing:
1)Software Configuration Management
2)Automate Build Process where necessary
3)Document
4)Defect Tracking
Duration : 0:5:45
11 practical rules for writing professional grade bug reports. We teach these rules at Portnov Computer School (www.portnov.com) to career change students preparing to the Software Testing Career.
Here is the summary of BUG REPORTING RULES:
1. Do not assume developer knows less than you do about the application
2. Do not cite the rules – they know the rules, just talk about the problem itself
3. Report a bug immediately, do not postpone
4. Each “problem” has a story (each decision is a compromise) research before reporting
5. Do not assume all the companies have same approach to writing bug reports
6. Use technical terms, not “people off the street” language
7. Rule of WWW – What happened, Where it happened, under Which circumstances
8. Write one bug report for each fix to be verified
9. Bug report is not about perfect English
10. Bug reports are as concise as possible
11. Bug report should be as complete as possible
Duration : 0:6:12
http://www.softwaretestingvideos.com/blog/
“Visit for FREE complete video training”
Get Software Testing Jobs just watching these Videos
If a piece of Software is modified for any reason testing needs to be done to ensure that it works as specified and that it has not negatively impacted any functionality that it offered previously. This is known as Regression Testing.
Steps for Effective Regression Testing:
1)Test Automation
2)Selective Testing
3)Defect Tracking
Duration : 0:4:34
http://www.softwaretestingvideos.com/blog/
“Visit for FREE Complete Video Training”
Get Software testing Jobs just watching these Videos.Bug life cycle helps you understand the whole process involved in defect reporting.Testers are hired to find bugs & you need to know what happens when a bug in a software application is found.
In software development process, the bug has a life cycle. The bug should go through the life cycle to be closed. A specific life cycle ensures that the process is standardized. The bug attains different states in the life cycle. The life cycle of the bug can be shown diagrammatically as follows:
The different states of a bug can be summarized as follows:
1. New
2. Open
3. Assign
4. Test
5. Verified
6. Deferred
7. Reopened
8. Duplicate
9. Rejected and
10. Closed
Description of Various Stages:
1. New: When the bug is posted for the first time, its state will be “NEW”. This means that the bug is not yet approved.
2. Open: After a tester has posted a bug, the lead of the tester approves that the bug is genuine and he changes the state as “OPEN”.
3. Assign: Once the lead changes the state as “OPEN”, he assigns the bug to corresponding developer or developer team. The state of the bug now is changed to “ASSIGN”.
4. Test: Once the developer fixes the bug, he has to assign the bug to the testing team for next round of testing. Before he releases the software with bug fixed, he changes the state of bug to “TEST”. It specifies that the bug has been fixed and is released to testing team.
5. Deferred: The bug, changed to deferred state means the bug is expected to be fixed in next releases. The reasons for changing the bug to this state have many factors. Some of them are priority of the bug may be low, lack of time for the release or the bug may not have major effect on the software.
6. Rejected: If the developer feels that the bug is not genuine, he rejects the bug. Then the state of the bug is changed to “REJECTED”.
7. Duplicate: If the bug is repeated twice or the two bugs mention the same concept of the bug, then one bug status is changed to “DUPLICATE”.
8. Verified: Once the bug is fixed and the status is changed to “TEST”, the tester tests the bug. If the bug is not present in the software, he approves that the bug is fixed and changes the status to “VERIFIED”.
9. Reopened: If the bug still exists even after the bug is fixed by the developer, the tester changes the status to “REOPENED”. The bug traverses the life cycle once again.
10. Closed: Once the bug is fixed, it is tested by the tester. If the tester feels that the bug no longer exists in the software, he changes the status of the bug to “CLOSED”. This state means that the bug is fixed, tested and approved.
While defect prevention is much more effective and efficient in reducing the number of defects, most organization conducts defect discovery and removal. Discovering and removing defects is an expensive and inefficient process. It is much more efficient for an organization to conduct activities that prevent defects.
Guidelines on deciding the Severity of Bug:
Indicate the impact each defect has on testing efforts or users and administrators of the application under test. This information is used by developers and management as the basis for assigning priority of work on defects.
A sample guideline for assignment of Priority Levels during the product test phase includes:
1. Critical / Show Stopper — An item that prevents further testing of the product or function under test can be classified as Critical Bug. No workaround is possible for such bugs. Examples of this include a missing menu option or security permission required to access a function under test.
2. Major / High — A defect that does not function as expected/designed or cause other functionality to fail to meet requirements can be classified as Major Bug. The workaround can be provided for such bugs. Examples of this include inaccurate calculations; the wrong field being updated, etc.
3. Average / Medium — The defects which do not conform to standards and conventions can be classified as Medium Bugs. Easy workarounds exists to achieve functionality objectives. Examples include matching visual and text links which lead to different end points.
4. Minor / Low — Cosmetic defects which does not affect the functionality of the system can be classified as Minor Bugs.
Duration : 0:2:41
This video will explain how to enter defects in defect tracking tool
Duration : 0:4:40
Posted in bug tracking tool | 
Tags: Assurance, bug, Defect, Quality, software, Testing, tool, tracking | 
No Comments »