Skip to main content

just enough design

So in recent weeks the number of test steps in our Selenium-based framework has quadrupled, from about 1000 to about 4000. The time it takes to run these tests is starting to cause significant pain.

So I set out to spike a little harness that would run sets of tests concurrently. (Note: it is *so* nice to have fork() available, after years of working in Windows environments.)

Trying to achieve the Simplest Test Harness That Could Possibly Work, I started out running all of the tests in the same test environment. Unfortunately, some of the tests change the state of the test environment, which causes other tests running concurrently to fail.

I started separating the state-changing tests (which may not be run concurrently) from the other tests (which may be run safely).

My colleague objected to this. Strongly. And he's right. He framed his argument in terms of old-school "software engineering" principles, but the argument is sound in terms of agile mantras like "make it work; make it good; make it fast". Segregating magic tests from non-magic tests will eventually cause failure. Or madness. Or both.

My next spike, I'm going to clone the test environment and run sets of tests in their own test environments. I think that's the *next*-simplest thing that could work, and it will get us a long way down the road-- until we have to design some more.

Comments

I presume that you're bringing your AUT's machine to its knees, not the machine upon which the tests are running? Otherwise, you could farm out the browser work to other machines, separating by sequential tests, if any.

Popular posts from this blog

Reviewing "Context Driven Approach to Automation in Testing"

I recently had occasion to read the "Context Driven Approach to Automation in Testing". As a professional software tester with extensive experience in test automation at the user interface (both UI and API) for the last decade or more for organizations such as Thoughtworks, Wikipedia, Salesforce, and others, I found it a nostalgic mixture of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt), propaganda, ignorance and obfuscation. 

It was weirdly nostalgic for me: take away the obfuscatory modern propaganda terminology and it could be an artifact directly out of the test automation landscape circa 1998 when vendors, in the absence of any competition, foisted broken tools like WinRunner and SilkTest on gullible customers, when Open Source was exotic, when the World Wide Web was novel. Times have changed since 1998, but the CDT approach to test automation has not changed with it. I'd like to point out the deficiencies in this document as a warning to people who might be tempted to take it se…

Watir is What You Use Instead When Local Conditions Make Automated Browser Testing Otherwise Difficult.

I spent last weekend in Toronto talking to Titus Fortner, Jeff "Cheezy" Morgan, Bret Pettichord, and a number of other experts involved with the Watir project. There are a few things you should know:

The primary audience and target user group for Watir is people who use programming languages other than Ruby, and also people who do little or no programming at all. Let's say that again:

The most important audience for Watir is not Ruby programmers 
Let's talk about "local conditions":

it may be that the language in which you work does not support Selenium
I have been involved with Watir since the very beginning, but I started using modern Watir with the Wikimedia Foundation to test Wikipedia software. The main language of Wikipedia is PHP, in which Selenium is not fully supported, and in which automated testing in general is difficult. Watir/Ruby was a great choice to do browser testing.  At the time we started the project, there were no selenium bindings for …

Open letter to the Association for Software Testing

To the Association for Software Testing:

Considering the discussion in the software testing community with regard to my blog post "Test is a Ghetto", I ask the Board of the AST  to release a statement regarding the relationship of the AST with Keith Klain and Per Scholas, particularly in regard to the lawsuit for fraud filed by Doran Jones (PDF download link) .

The AST has a Code of Ethics  and I also ask the AST Board to release a public statement on whether the AST would consider creating an Ethics Committee similar to, or as a part of the recently created Committee on Standards and Professional Practices.

The yearly election for the Board of the AST happens in just a few weeks, and I hope that the candidates for the Board and the voting members of the Association for Software Testing will consider these requests with the gravity they deserve.