Testing , Monitoring, and Controlling CORBA-based Applications

Sudipto Ghosh

Priya Govindarajan

Aditya P. Mathur

Baskar Sridharan

Software Engineering Research Center

Purdue University

@ Tivoli, Rome

Thursday July 15, 1999

Needs of a tester

Test Adequacy:

Goodness of system test.

Parts of the system that need additional testing.

Needs of a tester

System behavior:

Visualization of system state transition in the presence of a given input sequence.

Visualization of system state transition in the presence of injected faults.

Needs of a tester

System performance:

Measurement of instantaneous and average load distribution (Hardware and Software).

Measurement of instantaneous and average response time.

Needs of a tester

System control:

Temporary or permanent shut down of selected services.

Injection of an arbitrary stream of requests directed at selected servers.

How TDS meets a tester’s needs?

Test adequacy:

By measuring interface-based coverage:

Method coverage

Exception coverage

iMutation Coverage

Monitoring: Sample Questions

State related:

What is the current state of component C?

Performance related:

What is the average round-trip time of a message sent to component C ?

Access related:

Did client C’ access component C during the past 24 hours ?

Control: Sample Commands

Component related:

Deny a set of services to some or all clients of component C upon the occurrence of event E

start component C

replicate component C

send message m to component C

Proposed Test Adequacy Criteria

Proposed iMutant Operators

Slide 12

Slide 13

"How do the proposed test..."

How do the proposed test adequacy criteria compare with the traditional criteria?

"How do the two criteria..."

How do the two criteria compare?

Slide 16

Monitoring: Strategy

Control: Strategy

States

Local:

S : an arbitrary state. S could be:

Component C processing request R

Component C is inactive

Component C is active

Events

Local:

E : an arbitrary event. E could be:

Component C assumes state S

E after time T (T: local time)

E during interval [T1, T2]

E1 or E2

E1, E2 (sequence)

How TDS meets a tester’s needs?

System test:

By allowing the tester to combine features for (V2.0)

test adequacy measurement

system performance measurement

system behavior monitoring

system control

Slide 22

Goal

To Monitor and Control object B1.

B1 implements interface Bank

Construct event E: “Arrival of request createAccount() to object B1”

Monitor E

Specify control operation: “Ignore all incoming requests on object B1”

Slide 24

Slide 25

Slide 26

Slide 27

Slide 28

Slide 29

Slide 30

Slide 31

Summary

TDS 1.1 demonstrated in May 99.

Experiments with a system from Tivoli begun in May 99.

Implementation of the Monitoring and Control component begun in June 99.

Implementation of the Architecture-Extraction component begins in August 99..

Slide 33

Slide 34

Slide 35

Slide 36



	Sudipto Ghosh
	Priya Govindarajan
	Aditya P. Mathur
	Baskar Sridharan
	Software Engineering Research Center
	Purdue University

	@ Tivoli, Rome
	Thursday July 15, 1999



	Test Adequacy:

	Goodness of system test.
	Parts of the system that need additional testing.



	System behavior:

	Visualization of system state transition in the presence of a given input sequence.
	Visualization of system state transition in the presence of injected faults.



	System performance:

	Measurement of instantaneous and average load distribution (Hardware and Software).
	Measurement of instantaneous and average response time.



	System control:

	Temporary or permanent shut down of selected services.
	Injection of an arbitrary stream of requests directed at selected servers.



	Test adequacy:

	By measuring interface-based coverage:
		Method coverage
		Exception coverage
		iMutation Coverage


	State related:
		What is the current state of component C?
	Performance related:
		What is the average round-trip time of a message sent to component C ?
	Access related:
		Did client C’ access component C during the past 24 hours ?


	Component related:
		Deny a set of services to some or all clients of component C upon the occurrence of event E
		start component C
		replicate component C
		send message m to component C


	How do the proposed test adequacy criteria compare with the traditional criteria?


	Local:

	S : an arbitrary state. S could be:

	Component C processing request R
	Component C is inactive
	Component C is active


	Local:

	E : an arbitrary event. E could be:
		Component C assumes state S
		E after time T (T: local time)
		E during interval [T1, T2]
		E1 or E2
		E1, E2 (sequence)



	System test:

	By allowing the tester to combine features for (V2.0)
		test adequacy measurement
		system performance measurement
		system behavior monitoring
		system control


	To Monitor and Control object B1.
		B1 implements interface Bank
		Construct event E: “Arrival of request createAccount() to object B1”
		Monitor E
		Specify control operation: “Ignore all incoming requests on object B1”



	TDS 1.1 demonstrated in May 99.
	Experiments with a system from Tivoli begun in May 99.
	Implementation of the Monitoring and Control component begun in June 99.
	Implementation of the Architecture-Extraction component begins in August 99..