SPONSORS:






User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    CPH, Denmark
    Posts
    9
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    10 iterations = 10X the amount of testing to be done

    Delivering an application in 10 iterations = 10X the amount of testing to be done.

    Is this correct?
    How do you prevent this?



    ------------------

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Pune, Maharashtra, India
    Posts
    1,037
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: 10 iterations = 10X the amount of testing to be done

    Iterative development means iterative test execution as well. Test case development times (ideally) should drop across iterations.

    While 10x may not equate to 10 times the volume of test engineering effort needed, it is certainly an indication that you may need to decide on a sound regression strategy.

    An automated suite could perhaps be part of a greater regression suite which would address :
    1. Test data creation
    2. Test case execution
    3. Result reporting

    In any case keep tabs (metrics)on how much testware gets reused across iterations.

    -Suresh

    [This message has been edited by punekar (edited 01-30-2003).]
    Suresh Nageswaran, CQA, CSTE
    Lead Consultant
    Kanbay Inc.
    Pune, India.
    sureshnageswaran@yahoo.com

  3. #3
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Bucharest, ROMANIA
    Posts
    1,366
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: 10 iterations = 10X the amount of testing to be done

    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by marcktest:
    Delivering an application in 10 iterations = 10X the amount of testing to be done.

    Is this correct?
    How do you prevent this?

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I'd say: NO. Deffinitely not ten times.
    Why?
    - First, development being incremental, initial product to be tested, it's smaller than the final product.
    - Functionalities developed and already tested in a previous phase, shouldn't be tested in the same manner as first time. Will be only part of regresion testing
    - Regresion testing will (should) reuse as much test cases as possible from previous iterations, so time is shorter.

    Maybe somebody else could respond to THIS question:

    - if a product , developed under waterfall methodology will require X days for testing activities, how many days will require same product developed using Incremental methodology, in 10 steps ?

    The answer "IT DEPENDS" is not acceptable, even if it's true. Maybe somebody could have some estimations:

    I'd say 3X days, but it's only a (partially educated) guess, but I'm an optimist.

    ------------------
    Nobody's perfect.
    ... Not even me.
    Don't worry, be Happy!

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,898
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: 10 iterations = 10X the amount of testing to be done

    Ten interations will take 5.5 times longer to test.

    For example:

    You have a hundred tests to run. Each test takes 1/2 hour to perform.

    The total, if tested all at one time, is 50 hours.

    The total, if performed in 10 iterations, assuming there will be an equal amount of new functionality introduced each time is:

    Iteration 1 - 10 tests X .5 hour = 5 hours
    Iteration 2 - 20 tests X .5 hour = 10 hours
    Iteration 3 - 30 tests X .5 hour = 15 hours
    Iteration 4 - 40 tests X .5 hour = 20 hours
    Iteration 5 - 50 tests X .5 hour = 25 hours
    Iteration 6 - 60 tests X .5 hour = 30 hours
    Iteration 7 - 70 tests X .5 hour = 35 hours
    Iteration 8 - 80 tests X .5 hour = 40 hours
    Iteration 9 - 90 tests X .5 hour = 45 hours
    Iteration 10- 100 tests X .5 hour = 50 hours

    The total hours equals 275 hours, which is 5.5 times longer than 50 hours.

    It's a major challenge for a testing organization and few companies plan in advance for the additional time required to test. Many go to the interative model in the first place because they feel it saves the organization time.

    I've worked on close to 200 testing efforts now. I've worked on projects that used every type of methodology available. My experience has been that the more interations involved in the project, the worse the documentation, the more hectic (maybe I should have been politically correct and said "dynamic") the entire process, and the worse the overall quality of the produced system. It usually starts out well, but breaks down somewhere in the middle.

    If you have any influence in the process, my advice is to try to get the number of interations down. You may not be able to stop the train, but maybe you can slow it down...

    - Linda

    ------------------

  5. #5
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Bucharest, ROMANIA
    Posts
    1,366
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: 10 iterations = 10X the amount of testing to be done

    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ljeanwilkin:
    Ten interations will take 5.5 times longer to test.

    For example:

    You have a hundred tests to run. Each test takes 1/2 hour to perform.

    The total, if tested all at one time, is 50 hours.

    The total, if performed in 10 iterations, assuming there will be an equal amount of new functionality introduced each time is:

    Iteration 1 - 10 tests X .5 hour = 5 hours
    Iteration 2 - 20 tests X .5 hour = 10 hours
    Iteration 3 - 30 tests X .5 hour = 15 hours
    Iteration 4 - 40 tests X .5 hour = 20 hours
    Iteration 5 - 50 tests X .5 hour = 25 hours
    Iteration 6 - 60 tests X .5 hour = 30 hours
    Iteration 7 - 70 tests X .5 hour = 35 hours
    Iteration 8 - 80 tests X .5 hour = 40 hours
    Iteration 9 - 90 tests X .5 hour = 45 hours
    Iteration 10- 100 tests X .5 hour = 50 hours

    The total hours equals 275 hours, which is 5.5 times longer than 50 hours.
    - Linda

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    That's an estimation for running tests.


    My question (and the original ?) was about total testing effort, and especially test scripts/cases design.

    ------------------
    Nobody's perfect.
    ... Not even me.
    Don't worry, be Happy!

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,898
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: 10 iterations = 10X the amount of testing to be done

    Actually, the original question said the "amount of testing". I assumed it meant "testing" - the physical activity of sitting down and executing test cases.

    The amount of time spent writing test cases, assuming documentation exists for an interative development effort, which sometimes it doesn't, wouldn't vary. If there are 100 test cases and you assume (for example) it will take 2 hours per case to document, it is a 200 hour activity. Regardless of when it takes place.

    Am I missing your point in some way? Are you talking about the additional time required to update test cases that have been changed through the iterative development process?

    Sorry if my response was unclear or you found it incomplete....

    - Linda



    ------------------

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    3,333
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: 10 iterations = 10X the amount of testing to be done

    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by marcktest:
    Delivering an application in 10 iterations = 10X the amount of testing to be done.
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
    <LI>What's in the iteration? (ie; bug fixes, orwhat % of the app is re-done etc.)
    <LI>How critical is the app or the items in the iteration?
    <LI>What kind of regression plan was in your original test plan?
    <LI>How many iterations were planned for?
    <LI>How many more iterations do you expect?
    <LI>How much time and money do you have to do this?

    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><HR>
    Is this correct?
    How do you prevent this?
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Why would you want to prevent regression testing?

    If resources (time, money, etc) are the reason, then the questions that I asked above would help keep this from being the "Never Ending" test cycle.
    Planning.


    ------------------
    -- Jean

    You know your medical benefits are being reduced when the ER changes to "Drive-thru Only" service.
    Jean James
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    I deliver what I promise, and I only promise what I can deliver.
    ------------------------------------------------------------

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: 10 iterations = 10X the amount of testing to be done

    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ljeanwilkin:

    It's a major challenge for a testing organization and few companies plan in advance for the additional time required to test. Many go to the interative model in the first place because they feel it saves the organization time.

    I've worked on close to 200 testing efforts now. I've worked on projects that used every type of methodology available. My experience has been that the more interations involved in the project, the worse the documentation, the more hectic (maybe I should have been politically correct and said "dynamic") the entire process, and the worse the overall quality of the produced system. It usually starts out well, but breaks down somewhere in the middle.

    If you have any influence in the process, my advice is to try to get the number of interations down. You may not be able to stop the train, but maybe you can slow it down...

    - Linda

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    If iterations are worse than waterfall, then someone is implamenting iterations incorrectly. I think iterations are in themselves not the answer so much as light weight development methods. Many people in our industry are so used to doing the waterfall, that when they are told to change to iterations they try doing many waterfalls. Doing that many waterfalls is impossible in the alloted time, so it breaks down in the middle.

    ------------------

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.36 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 9.38%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise v2.6.4 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.2.8 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBNominate (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Username Changing provided by Username Change (Free) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
BetaSoft Inc.
Digital Point modules: Sphinx-based search
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:27 AM.

Copyright BetaSoft Inc.