Apache::TestSmoke man page on MacOSX

Man page or keyword search:  
man Server   23457 pages
apropos Keyword Search (all sections)
Output format
MacOSX logo
[printable version]

Apache::TestSmoke(3)  User Contributed Perl Documentation Apache::TestSmoke(3)

       Apache::TestSmoke - Special Tests Sequence Failure Finder

	 # get the usage and the default values
	 % t/SMOKE -help

	 # repeat all tests 5 times and save the report into
	 # the file 'myreport'
	 % t/SMOKE -times=5 -report=myreport

	 # run all tests default number of iterations, and repeat tests
	 # default number of times
	 % t/SMOKE

	 # same as above but work only the specified tests
	 % t/SMOKE foo/bar foo/tar

	 # run once a sequence of tests in a non-random mode
	 # e.g. when trying to reduce a known long sequence that fails
	 % t/SMOKE -order=rotate -times=1 foo/bar foo/tar

	 # show me each currently running test
	 # it's not the same as running the tests in the verbose mode
	 % t/SMOKE -verbose

	 # run t/TEST, but show any problems after *each* tests is run
	 # useful for bug reports (it actually runs t/TEST -start, then
	 # t/TEST -run for each test separately and finally t/TEST -stop
	 % t/SMOKE -bug_mode

	 # now read the created report file

   The Problem
       When we try to test a stateless machine (i.e. all tests are
       independent), running all tests once ensures that all tested things
       properly work. However when a state machine is tested (i.e. where a run
       of one test may influence another test) it's not enough to run all the
       tests once to know that the tested features actually work. It's quite
       possible that if the same tests are run in a different order and/or
       repeated a few times, some tests may fail.  This usually happens when
       some tests don't restore the system under test to its pristine state at
       the end of the run, which may influence other tests which rely on the
       fact that they start on pristine state, when in fact it's not true
       anymore. In fact it's possible that a single test may fail when run
       twice or three times in a sequence.

   The Solution
       To reduce the possibility of such dependency errors, it's helpful to
       run random testing repeated many times with many different srand seeds.
       Of course if no failures get spotted that doesn't mean that there are
       no tests inter-dependencies, which may cause a failure in production.
       But random testing definitely helps to spot many problems and can give
       better test coverage.

   Resolving Sequence Problems
       When this kind of testing is used and a failure is detected there are
       two problems:

       1.  First is to be able to reproduce the problem so if we think we
	   fixed it, we could verify the fix. This one is easy, just remember
	   the sequence of tests run till the failed test and rerun the same
	   sequence once again after the problem has been fixed.

       2.  Second is to be able to understand the cause of the problem. If
	   during the random test the failure has happened after running 400
	   tests, how can we possibly know which previously running tests has
	   caused to the failure of the test 401. Chances are that most of the
	   tests were clean and don't have inter-dependency problem. Therefore
	   it'd be very helpful if we could reduce the long sequence to a
	   minimum. Preferably 1 or 2 tests. That's when we can try to
	   understand the cause of the detected problem.

       This utility attempts to solve both problems, and at the end of each
       iteration print a minimal sequence of tests causing to a failure. This
       doesn't always succeed, but works in many cases.

       This utility:

       1.  Runs the tests randomly until the first failure is detected. Or
	   non-randomly if the option -order is set to repeat or rotate.

       2.  Then it tries to reduce that sequence of tests to a minimum, and
	   this sequence still causes to the same failure.

       3.  (XXX: todo): then it reruns the minimal sequence in the verbose
	   mode and saves the output.

       4.  It reports all the successful reductions as it goes to STDOUT and
	   report file of the format: smoke-report-<date>.txt.

	   In addition the systems build parameters are logged into the report
	   file, so the detected problems could be reproduced.

       5.  Goto 1 and run again using a new random seed, which potentially
	   should detect different failures.

Reduction Algorithm
       Currently for each reduction path, the following reduction algorithms
       get applied:

       1.  Binary search: first try the upper half then the lower.

       2.  Random window: randomize the left item, then the right item and
	   return the items between these two points.

       t/SMOKE.PL is driving this module, if you don't have it, create it:


	 use strict;
	 use warnings FATAL => 'all';

	 use FindBin;
	 use lib "$FindBin::Bin/../Apache-Test/lib";
	 use lib "$FindBin::Bin/../lib";

	 use Apache::TestSmoke ();


       usually Makefile.PL converts it into t/SMOKE while adjusting the perl
       path, but you create t/SMOKE in first place as well.

       Stas Bekman

perl v5.16.2			  2011-02-07		  Apache::TestSmoke(3)

List of man pages available for MacOSX

Copyright (c) for man pages and the logo by the respective OS vendor.

For those who want to learn more, the polarhome community provides shell access and support.

[legal] [privacy] [GNU] [policy] [cookies] [netiquette] [sponsors] [FAQ]
Polarhome, production since 1999.
Member of Polarhome portal.
Based on Fawad Halim's script.
Vote for polarhome
Free Shell Accounts :: the biggest list on the net