Tom Roden: Building a lean mean BDD

advertisement
SQS – the world’s
world‘s leading specialist in software quality
Please copy a slide with a suitable picture from the file
„Title Slides_EN.pptx“ (change to presentation mode to download)
and paste it here. If necessary, apply the correct formatting
by right-clicking and choosing “Layout  Title Slide“.
Building a lean, mean, BDD automation
machine
Tom Roden
SQS
September 2013
Safia - building an executable documentation system
Born out of
necessity
Results
Then did it
again…
• Large hedge fund COTS implementation
• Crippling regression test burden
• 6-8 month cycle  daily release
• 80 times defect reduction
• and again
• Same patterns automation platform
The problem quantified – Real data from the field
Time taken for Release Regression testing
120
700
601 600
100
100
545
78
67.5
60
311
400
393
371
300
40
217
40
284
200
151
106
20
64
0
28
0
February
23
100
15
25
12
5
0
April
August November February
April
May
June
0
3
July
0
August
Month
Man Days Effort for Regression Test
# Test Suites
# Automated Suites
# Test Suites
Man Days Effort
500
479
80
The confidence problem!
Defects
Project Team
New Work
Sprint 1
Sprint 2
Sprint 3
Sprint 4
Sprint 5
Sprint 6
UAT
Sprint “n”
What it felt like…
Build integrity in, become acceptance driven…
Backlog
Ready User Story
Specify tests /
examples
Automate
acceptance
tests
Develop
Demo / Showcase
Customer
Verification
Session Based
Testing
Stakeholder(s) & BA
Developers
Testers
Pretty Fast ROI but other effects too…
Time taken for Release Regression testing
120
700
601 600
100
100
545
78
67.5
60
311
400
393
371
300
284
40
217
40
200
151
23
20
64
28
0
0
February
106
100
15
25
12
5
0
April
August November February
April
May
June
0
3
July
0
August
Month
Man Days Effort for Regression Test
# Test Suites
# Automated Suites
# Test Suites
Man Days Effort
500
479
80
Enabling increasingly faster release cycles
Project Team
Sprint 1
Sprint 2
Release 1
Sprint 3
Sprint 4
Sprint 5
Release 2
Sprint 6
Sprint 7
Release 3
Release 4
Sprint n
R
R
R
R
Knowledge and experience to design a framework
A set of design patterns
• binding tests to investment apps
Inject knowledge
• from business specialists
Vanilla acceptance tests
• easy to customise
Living documentation
• tests as specifications
Illogical Architecture Diagram
FitNesse fixtures
Maps SAFIA terminology to
system terminology
Safia fixtures
e.g. Calypso, Beauchamps,
Summit
Maps investment house
terminology to SAFIA
terminology e.g.
House
System
Adaptor
Adaptor
API
Trade Capture = Trade Entry
SAFIA automates at the
server level via the API
Trading system
Creating automated tests using Safia
Archetypal function
Any instrument
e.g. Create a trade
e.g. Equity, FX, Future
Check a position
Test Archetype
Instrument Template
“Test Function”
IRS template
Create a trade
Apply Template &
Archetype
Test
Create a valid IRS trade
But it was easy, right……?
Real data from the field
The path to faster release
Time taken for Release Regression testing
120
700
601 600
100
100
545
78
67.5
60
311
400
393
371
300
284
40
217
40
200
151
23
20
64
28
0
0
February
106
100
15
25
12
5
0
April
August November February
April
May
June
0
3
July
0
August
Month
Man Days Effort for Regression Test
# Test Suites
# Automated Suites
# Test Suites
Man Days Effort
500
479
80
What did we learn?
Iterate, Iterate, Iterate
Start simple
Flexible
Sooner
rather than
later
Iterate
Maintenance
Record
Knowledge
Significant effects
Improvements in release speed and quality
Time Period
# Releases
Regression
Effort
# Live
Defects
# Severity 1 / 2
Defects
Period 1
8 months
1
40 man days
152
42
Period 2
6 months
2
67.5 - 100 man
days
59
11
Period 3
6 months
9
78 – 23 man
days
61
4
Period 4
6 months
14
15 – 0 man
days
9
1
Period 5
6 months
28
0 man days
2
0
Significant effects
Increased productivity by ~350%
Graph showing per Sprint Delivered Story Points by 3 Sprint Moving Average
80
70
Story Points
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Sprint
Actual Delivered Story Points
3 Sprint Moving Average Velocity
11
12
Benefits beyond the obvious
Increased
collaboration
Reduced Cost
of Ownership
Reliable system
documentation
Benefits
Teaching &
coaching aid
Anyone can
interact with it
~1/3 of the total cost of ownership = system understanding
How we wrote the tests
Tests as specs, the principles of test design
Self-documenting
Based on testable
statements
About business
intentions
What makes a
good acceptance
test?
Anyone can
understand it
A specification
not a script
Concise and
granular
Test Metrics and Measurements
Efficiency
• Test (feature / suite / pack) run time / coverage
• The time spent manually ‘assisting’ execution
• Amount of waste in (testing) processes
Effectiveness
• Cost of defects found in live
• % defects to throughput (# defects / velocity)
• # of defects due to regression issues (as opposed to new functionality) found in live
• Test Coverage
• Test technical debt
Reliability
• No of runs passed/failed
• Proportion of tests that fail due to non-genuine errors (intermittency)
Test Metrics and Measurements
Updatability
• Time / Cost to locate a test
• Time taken to CRUD a test
• For a given change:
• How long to assess how many tests need updating
• How many tests actually need updating
• How long does updating them take
Readability / Document-ability
• How long to understand (all of) the intentions of a test
• How long does it take to locate and analyse the reason for a test failure
• How many tests are not approved for acceptance decisions
• Time spent on release go/no go meetings with stakeholders
To conclude
Source - http://drfunkhowsersprescriptionpad.wordpress.com
Tom Roden
Head of Agile Services
www.sqs.com
SQS Group Limited
7–11 Moorgate
London, EC2R 6AF
United Kingdom
Phone: +44 20 7448 4620
Fax: +44 20 7448 4651
[email protected]
Thank you for listening.
sqs.com
m +44 7917 601706
t +44 20 7448 4620
e [email protected]
Pillars of Effective Testing
Confidence
Courage
Safety
Credible
Rapid
& Regular
Feedback
Track
Clear
Test
Intentions
Record
Flexible
Results
Test Automation Frameworks
Testability,
Environment,
Visible
Data & Dependency Management
Build & Configuration Management
High
Test
Coverage
Taxonomy of Testing
Business Facing
Acceptance Tests
Technical Tests
Technology Team
Facing
Definition Of Done - Checklist
High Level Definition of Done
"Functionality that has been accepted as of suitable quality to be shipped to production"
(but doesn't necessarily have to be shipped).
Definition of Done Checklist
1. Covered Functional, Performance & DR Criteria
2. Unit Tests
3. FitNesse Acceptance Tests
4. Acceptance Environment
5. Configuration Version Control
NOT Included in Definition of Done but part of Sprint Completion
Sprint Review / Demo to Product Owner & Business
Download
Related flashcards

Management

42 cards

Management

61 cards

Canadian Hockey League

15 cards

Create Flashcards