!! Test Strategy !!
Sunday, 3 April 2011
!! Smoke and Sanity Testing !!
1. Testing for sanity
2. Smoke Testing
It seems that the smoke test of the word comes from the industrial test equipment. The smoke testing procedure is considered a safety test by a curtain of smoke into parts of the sewerage and drainage to detect sources of unwanted leaks and sources of sewer odors.
Proving for sanity is a surface test, but is performed whenever a cursory analysis is sufficient to prove the coating works consorting to specifications. This level of analysis is a subset of regress testing. Normally includes a set of fundamental tests of basic GUI functionality to demonstrate connectivity to the database, application servers, printers, etc.
However, in the field of trial software smoke test is a very important element. I often look for the two words have been used interchangeably. I will focus on the aspect of smoke test in this article.
Smoke Testing is applicable when adding new components and are integrated with existing code. Ensures that the building is not broken. The product in its current state is smoke tested daily. Merely ensures that the building is not broken and is ready to test further. Once an engineer certifies the smoke test is successful, the test team can take action to test deeper.
Typical features of Smoke Testing:
- It exercises the entire system end to end.
- It is not exhaustive, but should be capable of exposing major problems.
- It ensures that the core functionality is the accumulation of work and is stable enough for further testing thoroughly.
- Reduction of Risk of Integration: From smoke testing is carried out integration problems are discovered at a much earlier stage than later in the cycle.
- Find big problems: A good test designed smoke can increase the probability of finding a big problem when software is built early in the cycle. So catch bugs earlier in the cycle.
- You can save time and money - If a major problem is detected at the stage when the software is ready built, it can save time and enormous costs if the mistake was discovered at the end of the cycle.