Search Results

Search found 24383 results on 976 pages for 'configuration testing'.

Page 195/976 | < Previous Page | 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202  | Next Page >

  • How to test my GAE site for performance

    - by Sergey Basharov
    I am building a GAE site that uses AJAX/JSON for almost all its tasks including building the UI elements, all interactions and client-server requests. What is a good way to test it for highloads so that I could have some statistics about how much resources 1000 average users per some period of time would take. I think I can create some Python functions for this purpose. What can you advise? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How can I unit test an Android Activity that acts on Accelerometer?

    - by Corey Sunwold
    I am starting with an Activity based off of this ShakeActivity and I want to write some unit tests for it. I have written some small unit tests for Android activities before but I'm not sure where to start here. I want to feed the accelerometer some different values and test how the activity responds to it. For now I'm keeping it simple and just updating a private int counter variable and a TextView when a "shake" event happens. So my question largely boils down to this: How can I send fake data to the accelerometer from a unit test?

    Read the article

  • using a Singleton to pass credentials in a multi-tenant application a code smell?

    - by Hans Gruber
    Currently working on a multi-tenant application that employs Shared DB/Shared Schema approach. IOW, we enforce tenant data segregation by defining a TenantID column on all tables. By convention, all SQL reads/writes must include a Where TenantID = '?' clause. Not an ideal solution, but hindsight is 20/20. Anyway, since virtually every page/workflow in our app must display tenant specific data, I made the (poor) decision at the project's outset to employ a Singleton to encapsulate the current user credentials (i.e. TenantID and UserID). My thinking at the time was that I didn't want to add a TenantID parameter to each and every method signature in my Data layer. Here's what the basic pseudo-code looks like: public class UserIdentity { public UserIdentity(int tenantID, int userID) { TenantID = tenantID; UserID = userID; } public int TenantID { get; private set; } public int UserID { get; private set; } } public class AuthenticationModule : IHttpModule { public void Init(HttpApplication context) { context.AuthenticateRequest += new EventHandler(context_AuthenticateRequest); } private void context_AuthenticateRequest(object sender, EventArgs e) { var userIdentity = _authenticationService.AuthenticateUser(sender); if (userIdentity == null) { //authentication failed, so redirect to login page, etc } else { //put the userIdentity into the HttpContext object so that //its only valid for the lifetime of a single request HttpContext.Current.Items["UserIdentity"] = userIdentity; } } } public static class CurrentUser { public static UserIdentity Instance { get { return HttpContext.Current.Items["UserIdentity"]; } } } public class WidgetRepository: IWidgetRepository{ public IEnumerable<Widget> ListWidgets(){ var tenantId = CurrentUser.Instance.TenantID; //call sproc with tenantId parameter } } As you can see, there are several code smells here. This is a singleton, so it's already not unit test friendly. On top of that you have a very tight-coupling between CurrentUser and the HttpContext object. By extension, this also means that I have a reference to System.Web in my Data layer (shudder). I want to pay down some technical debt this sprint by getting rid of this singleton for the reasons mentioned above. I have a few thoughts on what an better implementation might be, but if anyone has any guidance or lessons learned they could share, I would be much obliged.

    Read the article

  • Why does this asp.net mvc unit test fail?

    - by Brian McCord
    I have this unit test: [TestMethod] public void Delete_Post_Passes_With_State_4() { //Arrange ViewResult result = stateController.Delete( 4 ) as ViewResult; var model = (State)result.ViewData.Model; //Act RedirectToRouteResult redirectResult = stateController.Delete( model ) as RedirectToRouteResult; var newresult = stateController.Delete( 4 ) as ViewResult; var newmodel = (State)newresult.ViewData.Model; //Assert Assert.AreEqual( redirectResult.RouteValues["action"], "Index" ); Assert.IsNull( newmodel ); } Here are the two controller actions that handle deleting: // // GET: /State/Delete/5 public ActionResult Delete(int id) { var x = _stateService.GetById( id ); return View(x); } // // POST: /State/Delete/5 [HttpPost] public ActionResult Delete(State model) { try { if( model == null ) { return View( model ); } _stateService.Delete( model ); return RedirectToAction("Index"); } catch { return View( model ); } } What I can't figure out is why this test fails. I have verified that the record actually gets deleted from the list. If I set a break point in the Delete method on the line: var x = _stateService.GetById( id ); The GetById does indeed return a null just as it should, but when it gets back to the newresult variable in the test, the ViewData.Model is the deleted model. What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Automating site interaction

    - by Leocer
    I'm working with a CMS and need to import data to it using typical html forms. The data itself is in csv files with one page per row. Such is the CMS that importing directly to db isn't possible due to the complexity of the design. It's pretty important that i "fake" usual user interaction because the CMS does a lot of background work that's crucial for the import. Basically, for each row in the csv file, I need to copy a csv column to a html textfield, or select a checkbox, or click a certain button. One major issue is mapping the data in the csv to actions in the CMS. So if one column contains the string 'foobar' is really means "set the firstName dropdown widget to 'foobar'". Is there a tool to automate this? I´ve been looking at AutoHotKey, Selendium, Web-Harvester and many other tools but I'm not convinced they are the correct tools. The main problem is being able to interact with the html pages in a easy way.

    Read the article

  • How do I set up a test duplicate of a Django and Postgresql based web application?

    - by cojadate
    Not sure if this is an excessively broad and newbie-ish question for Stack Overflow but here goes: I paid someone else to build a web application for me and now I want to tweak certain aspects of it myself. I learn best by trial and error – changing stuff and seeing what happens. Obviously that's not a great way to treat a live site, so I need to duplicate the site on some kind of test server which I can play with without fear of the consequences. Unfortunately the closest I've come to programming has been creating ActionScript-based websites. I've never touched a database. So I really don't know where to start with setting up a test server. I would really appreciate any advice about where to start. I am completely ignorant and lost here. The web application is built in python/django using a Postgresql database. I use Mac OS X 10.6 if that makes any difference.

    Read the article

  • What is a good programming language for testers who are not great programmers?

    - by Brian T Hannan
    We would like to create some simple automated tests that will be created and maintained by testers. Right now we have a tester who can code in any language, but in the future we might want any tester with a limited knowledge of programming to be able to add or modify the tests. What is a good programming language for testers who are not great programmers, or programmers at all? Someone suggested LUA, but I looked into LUA and it might be more complicated that another language would be. Preferably, the language will be interpreted and not be compiled. Let me know what you think.

    Read the article

  • Code promotion: Enforcing the rules

    - by jbarker7
    So here is our problem: We have a small team of developers with their own ways of doing things-- I am trying to formalize a process in which we are required to promote our code in the following order: Local sandbox Dev UAT Staging Live Developers develop/test as they go on their own sandbox, Dev is its own box that we would use for continuous integration, UAT is another site in IIS on the dev box, which uses our dev database. We then promote to staging, which is a site in IIS on the Live box and using live data (just like the live, hence staging). Then, finally, we promote to live. Here are a few of my questions: 1.) Does this seem to be best practice? If not, what needs to be done differently? 2.) How do I enforce the rules to the developers? Often developers skip steps in order to save time... this should not be tolerated and would be great if it could be physically enforced. 3.) How do I enforce these rules to the business group? The business group just wants to get features out FAST. Do we promote only on certain days? Thanks! Josh

    Read the article

  • Test assertions for tuples with floats

    - by Space_C0wb0y
    I have a function that returns a tuple that, among others, contains a float value. Usually I use assertAlmostEquals to compare those, but this does not work with tuples. Also, the tuple contains other data-types as well. Currently I am asserting every element of the tuple individually, but that gets too much for a list of such tuples. Is there any good way to write assertions for such cases?

    Read the article

  • Access inner function variables in Javascript

    - by Elazar Leibovich
    In many frameworks, internal function variables are used as private variables, for example Raphael = (function(){ var private = function(a,b) {return a+b;}; var public = function(a) {return private(a,a);} var object = {mult2:public}; return object; })(); here, we cannot access from the global namespace the variable named private, as it is an inner variable of the anonymous function in the first line. Sometimes this function is contains a big Javascript framework, so that it wouldn't pollute the global namespace. I need to unit tests some object Raphael uses internally (in the above example, I wish to run unit tests on the object private). How can I test them?

    Read the article

  • Reflection in unit tests for checking code coverage

    - by Gary
    Here's the scenario. I have VO (Value Objects) or DTO objects that are just containers for data. When I take those and split them apart for saving into a DB that (for lots of reasons) doesn't map to the VO's elegantly, I want to test to see if each field is successfully being created in the database and successfully read back in to rebuild the VO. Is there a way I can test that my tests cover every field in the VO? I had an idea about using reflection to iterate through the fields of the VO's as part of the solution, but maybe you guys have solved the problem before? I want this test to fail when I add fields in the VO, and don't remember to add checks for it in my tests.

    Read the article

  • How to configure a OCUnit test bundle for a framework?

    - by GuidoMB
    I've been developing a Mac OS X framework and I want to use OCUnit in my XCode 3.2.1 project. I've followed several tutorials on how to configure a OCUnit test bundle. The problem is that when I create a test case that uses a function that is defined in one of the framework's sources, I get a building error telling me that the symbol is not found. I made the test bundle dependent of my project's target as the tutorial said, but that doesn't seem to be problem. First I thought that I could solve this problem by dragging the framework's source files into the compile sources section within the Test bundle target, but then all the symbols referenced from that source file started to show up in the build errors, so that seems to not be a good solution/idea. How can I configure my unit test bundle so it builds properly?

    Read the article

  • How to unit-test a Wicket component with AbstractAjaxTimerBehavior?

    - by Juha Syrjälä
    I have a Wicket panel that has AbstractAjaxTimeBehavior, that I'd like to unit test. How can I trigger a ajax event during the unit test that end up calling AbstractAjaxTimeBehavior's .onTimer(AjaxRequestTarget target) method? behavior = new AbstractAjaxTimerBehavior(Duration.seconds(pollingPeriodInSeconds)) { protected void onTimer(AjaxRequestTarget target) { // how to unit test this? } } add(behavior);

    Read the article

  • Log information inside a JUnit Suite

    - by Alex Marinescu
    I'm currently trying to write inside a log file the total number of failed tests from a JUnite Suite. My testsuite is defined as follows: @RunWith(Suite.class) @SuiteClasses({Class1.class, Class2.class etc.}) public class SimpleTestSuite {} I tried to define a rule which would increase the total number of errors when a test fails, but apparently my rule is never called. @Rule public MethodRule logWatchRule = new TestWatchman() { public void failed(Throwable e, FrameworkMethod method) { errors += 1; } public void succeeded(FrameworkMethod method) { } }; Any ideas on what I should to do to achieve this behaviour?

    Read the article

  • Where is the help.py for Android's monkeyrunner

    - by Keyboardsurfer
    Hi, I just can't find the help.py file in order to create the API reference for the monkeyrunner. The command described at the Android references monkeyrunner <format> help.py <outfile> does not work when i call monkeyrunner html help.py /path/to/place/the/doc.html. It's quite obvious that the help.py file is not found and the monkeyrunner also tells me "Can't open specified script file". But a locate on my system doesn't bring me a help.py file that has anything to do with monkeyrunner or Android. So my question is: Where did they hide the help.py file for creating the API reference?

    Read the article

  • Using tarantula to test a Rails app

    - by Benjamin Oakes
    I'm using Tarantula to test a Rails app I'm developing. It works pretty well, but I'm getting some strange 404s. After looking into it, Tarantula is following DELETE requests (destroy actions on controllers) throughout my app when it tests. Since Tarantula gets the index action first (and seems to keep a list of unvisited URLs), it eventually tries to follow a link to a resource which it had deleted... and gets a 404. Tarantula is right that the URL doesn't exist anymore (because it deleted the resource itself). However, it's flagging it as an error -- that's hardly the behavior I would expect. I'm basically just using the Rails scaffolding and this problem is happening. How do I prevent Tarantula doing this? (Or, is there a better way of specifying the links?) Updates: Still searching, but I found a relevant thread here: http://github.com/relevance/tarantula/issues#issue/3 Seems to be coming from relying on JS too much, in a way (see also http://thelucid.com/2010/03/15/rails-can-we-please-have-a-delete-action-by-default/)

    Read the article

  • Passing a paramter/object to a ruby unit/test before running it using TestRunner

    - by Nahir Khan
    I'm building a tool that automates a process then runs some tests on it's own results then goes to do some other stuff. In trying to clean up my code I have created a separate file that just has the test cases class. Now before I can run these tests, I have to pass the class a couple of parameters/objects before they can be run. Now the problem is that I can't seem to find a way to pass a parameter/object to the test class. Right now I am thinking to generate a Yaml file and read it in the test class but it feels "wrong" to use a temporary file for this. If anyone has a nicer solution that would be great! *********Edit******* Example Code of what I am doing right now: #!/usr/bin/ruby require 'test/unit/ui/console/testrunner' require 'yaml' require 'TS_SampleTestSuite' automatingSomething() importantInfo = getImportantInfo() File.open('filename.yml', 'w') do |f| f.puts importantInfo.to_yaml end Test::Unit::UI::Console::TestRunner.run(TS_SampleTestSuite) Now in the example above TS_SampleTestSuite needs importantInfo, so the first "test case" is a method that just reads in the information from the Yaml file filname.yml. I hope that clears up some confusion.

    Read the article

  • Is Assert.Fail() considered bad practice?

    - by Mendelt
    I use Assert.Fail a lot when doing TDD. I'm usually working on one test at a time but when I get ideas for things I want to implement later I quickly write an empty test where the name of the test method indicates what I want to implement as sort of a todo-list. To make sure I don't forget I put an Assert.Fail() in the body. When trying out xUnit.Net I found they hadn't implemented Assert.Fail. Of course you can always Assert.IsTrue(false) but this doesn't communicate my intention as well. I got the impression Assert.Fail wasn't implemented on purpose. Is this considered bad practice? If so why? @Martin Meredith That's not exactly what I do. I do write a test first and then implement code to make it work. Usually I think of several tests at once. Or I think about a test to write when I'm working on something else. That's when I write an empty failing test to remember. By the time I get to writing the test I neatly work test-first. @Jimmeh That looks like a good idea. Ignored tests don't fail but they still show up in a separate list. Have to try that out. @Matt Howells Great Idea. NotImplementedException communicates intention better than assert.Fail() in this case @Mitch Wheat That's what I was looking for. It seems it was left out to prevent it being abused in another way I abuse it.

    Read the article

  • Test param value using EasyMock

    - by fmpdmb
    I'm attempting to write some unit tests using EasyMock and TestNG and have run into a question. Given the following: void execute(Foo f) { Bar b = new Bar() b.setId(123); f.setBar(b); } I'm trying to test that the Id of the Bar gets set accordingly in the following fashion: @Test void test_execute() { Foo f = EasyMock.createMock(Foo.class); execute(f); Bar b = ?; // not sure what to do here f.setBar(b); f.expectLastCall(); } In my test, I can't just call f.getBar() and inspect it's Id because f is a mock object. Any thoughts? Is this where I'd want to look at the EasyMock v2.5 additions andDelegateTo() and andStubDelegateTo()?

    Read the article

  • How do you unit-test a method with complex input-output

    - by Dan
    When you have a simple method, like for example sum(int x, int y), it is easy to write unit tests. You can check that method will sum correctly two sample integers, for example 2 + 3 should return 5, then you will check the same for some "extraordinary" numbers, for example negative values and zero. Each of these should be separate unit test, as a single unit test should contain single assert. What do you do when you have a complex input-output? Take a Xml parser for example. You can have a single method parse(String xml) that receives the String and returns a Dom object. You can write separate tests that will check that certain text node is parsed correctly, that attributes are parsed OK, that child node belongs to parent etc. For all these I can write a simple input, for example <root><child/></root> that will be used to check parent-child relationships between nodes and so on for the rest of expectations. Now, take a look at follwing Xml: <root> <child1 attribute11="attribute 11 value" attribute12="attribute 12 value">Text 1</child1> <child2 attribute21="attribute 21 value" attribute22="attribute 22 value">Text 2</child2> </root> In order to check that method worked correctly, I need to check many complex conditions, like that attribute11 and attribute12 belong to element1, that Text 1 belongs to child1 etc. I do not want to put more than one assert in my unit-test. How can I accomplish that?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202  | Next Page >