Search Results

Search found 10342 results on 414 pages for 'biztalk testing'.

Page 11/414 | < Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >

  • EBS 12.1.1 Test Starter Kit now Available for Oracle Application Testing Suite

    - by Steven Chan
    We've discussed automated testing tools for the E-Business Suite several times on this blog, since testing is such a key part of everyone's implementation lifecycle.  An important part of our testing arsenal in E-Business Suite Development is the Oracle Application Testing Suite.  The Oracle Automated Testing Suite (OATS) is built on the foundation of the e-TEST suite of products acquired from Empirix  in 2008.  The testing suite is comprised of:   1. Oracle Load Testing for scalability, performance, and load testing   2. Oracle Functional Testing for automated functional and regression testing   3. Oracle Test Manager for test process management, test execution, and defect trackingOracle Application Testing Suite 9.0 has been supported for use with the E-Business Suite since 2009.  I'm very pleased to let you know that our E-Business Suite Release 12.1.1 Test Starter Kit is now available for Oracle Application Testing Suite 9.1.  You can download it here:Oracle Application Testing Suite Downloads

    Read the article

  • Is there a name for a testing method where you compare a set of very different designs?

    - by DVK
    "A/B testing" is defined as "a method of marketing testing by which a baseline control sample is compared to a variety of single-variable test samples in order to improve response rates". The point here, of course, is to know which small single-variable changes are more optimal, with the goal of finding the local optimum. However, one can also envision a somewhat related but different scenario for testing the response rate of major re-designs: take a baseline control design, take one or more completely different designs, and run test samples on those redesigns to compare response rates. As a practical but contrived example, imagine testing a set of designs for the same website, one being minimalist "googly" design, one being cluttered "Amazony" design, and one being an artsy "designy" design (e.g. maximum use of design elements unlike Google but minimal simultaneously presented information, like Google but unlike Amazon) Is there an official name for such testing? It's definitely not A/B testing, since the main component of it (finding local optimum by testing single-variable small changes that can be attributed to response shift) is not present. This is more about trying to compare a set of local optimums, and compare to see which one works better as a global optimum. It's not a multivriable, A/B/N or any other such testing since you don't really have specific variables that can be attributed, just different designs.

    Read the article

  • Unit test SHA256 wrapper queries

    - by Sam Leach
    I am just beginning to write unit tests. So please bear with me. I have the following SHA256 wrapper. public static string SHA256(string plainText) { StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(); SHA256CryptoServiceProvider provider = new SHA256CryptoServiceProvider(); var hashedBytes = provider.ComputeHash(Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(plainText)); for (int i = 0; i < hashedBytes.Length; i++) { sb.Append(hashedBytes[i].ToString("x2").ToLower()); } return sb.ToString(); } Do I want to be testing it? If so, what do you recommend? My thought process is as follows: What logic is there here. The answer is my for loop and ToString("x2") so from my understanding I want to be testing this part? I can assume Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(plainText) works. Correct assumption? I can assume SHA256CryptoServiceProvider.ComputeHash() works. Correct assumption? I want to be only testing my logic. In this case is limited to the printing of hex encoded hash. Correct? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to unit test models in MVC / MVR app?

    - by BBnyc
    I'm building a node.js web app and am trying to do so for the first time in a test driven fashion. I'm using nodeunit for testing, which I find allows me to write tests quickly and painlessly. In this particular app, the heavy lifting primarily involves translating SQL data into complex Javascript object and serving them to the front-end via json. Likewise, the app also spends a great deal of code validating and translating complex, multidimensional Javascript objects it receives from the front-end into SQL rows. Hence I have used a fat model design for the app -- most of the real code resides in the models, where the data translation happens. What's the best approach to test such models with unit tests? I mean in particular the methods that have create javascript objects from the SQL rows and serve them to the front-end. Right now what I'm doing is making particular requests of my models with the unit tests and checking the returned data for all of the fields that should be there. However I have a suspicion that this is not the most robust kind of testing I could be doing. My current testing design also means I have to package my app code with some dummy data so that my tests can anticipate the kind of data that the app should be returning when tests run.

    Read the article

  • So, BizTalk 2010 Beta is out &hellip; wait, no it&rsquo;s not &hellip; wait

    - by Enrique Lima
    Over the last couple of days we have seen posts and “rumors” of the Beta availability.  There was a link to the bits from the Download Center, but then they were not. Documentation for it is available now at: BizTalk Server 2010 Documentation – Beta Microsoft BizTalk Server 2010 ESB Toolkit Documentation – Beta BizTalk RFID Server 2010 and BizTalk RFID Mobile 2010 Documentation – Beta But what about the bits?!? From the Biztalk Server Team blog: “We will be announcing the public Beta of BizTalk Server 2010 at the Application Infrastructure Virtual Launch tomorrow (Thursday, May 20th, 2010 at 8:30 AM PST) with planned RTM in Q3 of 2010. BizTalk Server 2010 aligns with the latest Microsoft platform releases, including SQL Server 2008 R2, Visual Studio 2010 and SharePoint 2010, and will integrate with Windows Server AppFabric and with .NET 4. At this virtual launch event we will disclose details on new features and capabilities in BizTalk Server 2010 though presentations, whitepapers, videos and recorded demos. Please join us tomorrow for an exciting launch! The BizTalk Team” Keep your eyes and ears at the ready.

    Read the article

  • BizTalk Envelopes explained

    - by Robert Kokuti
    Recently I've been trying to get some order into an ESB-BizTalk pub/sub scenario, and decided to wrap the payload into standardized envelopes. I have used envelopes before in a 'light weight' fashion, and I found that they can be quite useful and powerful if used systematically. Here is what I learned. The Theory In my experience, Envelopes are often underutilised in a BizTalk solution, and quite often their full potential is not well understood. Here I try to simplify the theory behind the Envelopes within BizTalk.   Envelopes can be used to attach additional data to the ‘real’ data (payload). This additional data can contain all routing and processing information, and allows treating the business data as a ‘black box’, possibly compressed and/or encrypted etc. The point here is that the infrastructure does not need to know anything about the business data content, just as a post man does not need to know the letter within the envelope. BizTalk has built-in support for envelopes through the XMLDisassembler and XMLAssembler pipeline components (these are part of the XMLReceive and XMLSend default pipelines). These components, among other things, perform the following: XMLDisassembler Extracts the payload from the envelope into the Message Body Copies data from the envelope into the message context, as specified by the property schema(s) associated by the envelope schema. Typically, once the envelope is through the XMLDisassembler, the payload is submitted into the Messagebox, and the rest of the envelope data are copied into the context of the submitted message. The XMLDisassembler uses the Property Schemas, referenced by the Envelope Schema, to determine the name of the promoted Message Context element.   XMLAssembler Wraps the Message Body inside the specified envelope schema Populates the envelope values from the message context, as specified by the property schema(s) associated by the envelope schema. Notice that there are no requirements to use the receiving envelope schema when sending. The sent message can be wrapped within any suitable envelope, regardless whether the message was originally received within an envelope or not. However, by sharing Property Schemas between Envelopes, it is possible to pass values from the incoming envelope to the outgoing envelope via the Message Context. The Practice Creating the Envelope Add a new Schema to the BizTalk project:   Envelopes are defined as schemas, with the <Schema> Envelope property set to Yes, and the root node’s Body XPath property pointing to the node which contains the payload. Typically, you’d create an envelope structure similar to this: Click on the <Schema> node and set the Envelope property to Yes. Then, click on the Envelope node, and set the Body XPath property pointing to the ‘Body’ node:   The ‘Body’ node is a Child Element, and its Data Structure Type is set to xs:anyType.  This allows the Body node to carry any payload data. The XMLReceive pipeline will submit the data found in the Body node, while the XMLSend pipeline will copy the message into the Body node, before sending to the destination. Promoting Properties Once you defined the envelope, you may want to promote the envelope data (anything other than the Body) as Property Fields, in order to preserve their value in the message context. Anything not promoted will be lost when the XMLDisassembler extracts the payload from the Body. Typically, this means you promote everything in the Header node. Property promotion uses associated Property Schemas. These are special BizTalk schemas which have a flat field structure. Property Schemas define the name of the promoted values in the Message Context, by combining the Property Schema’s Namespace and the individual Field names. It is worth being systematic when it comes to naming your schemas, their namespace and type name. A coherent method will make your life easier when it comes to referencing the schemas during development, and managing subscriptions (filters) in BizTalk Administration. I developed a fairly coherent naming convention which I’ll probably share in another article. Because the property schema must be flat, I recommend creating one for each level in the envelope header hierarchy. Property schemas are very useful in passing data between incoming as outgoing envelopes. As I mentioned earlier, in/out envelopes do not have to be the same, but you can use the same property schema when you promote the outgoing envelope fields as you used for the incoming schema.  As you can reference many property schemas for field promotion, you can pick data from a variety of sources when you define your outgoing envelope. For example, the outgoing envelope can carry some of the incoming envelope’s promoted values, plus some values from the standard BizTalk message context, like the AdapterReceiveCompleteTime property from the BizTalk message-tracking properties. The values you promote for the outgoing envelope will be automatically populated from the Message Context by the XMLAssembler pipeline component. Using the Envelope Receiving Enveloped messages are automatically recognized by the XMLReceive pipeline, or any other custom pipeline which includes the XMLDisassembler component. The Body Path node will become the Message Body, while the rest of the envelope values will be added to the Message context, as defined by the Property Shemas referenced by the Envelope Schema. Sending The Send Port’s filter expression can use the promoted properties from the incoming envelope. If you want to enclose the sent message within an envelope, the Send Port XMLAssembler component must be configured with the fully qualified envelope name:   One way of obtaining the fully qualified envelope name is copy it off from the envelope schema property page: The full envelope schema name is constructed as <Name>, <Assembly> The outgoing envelope is populated by the XMLAssembler pipeline component. The Message Body is copied to the specified envelope’s Body Path node, while the rest of the envelope fields are populated from the Message Context, according to the Property Schemas associated with the Envelope Schema. That’s all for now, happy enveloping!

    Read the article

  • Consuming WCF from BizTalk 2006r1

    - by Rob Bowman
    Hi I need to create an Orchestration in BizTalk 2006r1 that will consume a WCF basicHTTP web service. Does anyone have a pointers on how to do this please? The WCF service has been created by another team but I am able to request that they create an additional endpoint with binding configuration set to make calling from BizTalk SOAP adapter possible. I just created a simple test basicHTTP service that runs fine when tested from a command line client. When I got to BizTalk add web reference I am able to browse to the service but then get a message "Failed to add web reference" and it bombs out! Any help gratefully received. Thanks Rob.

    Read the article

  • What's the best practice to setup testing for ASP.Net MVC? What to use/process/etc?

    - by melaos
    hi there, i'm trying to learn how to properly setup testing for an ASP.Net MVC. and from what i've been reading here and there thus far, the definition of legacy code kind of piques my interests, where it mentions that legacy codes are any codes without unit tests. so i did my project in a hurry not having the time to properly setup unit tests for the app and i'm still learning how to properly do TDD and unit testing at the same time. then i came upon selenium IDE/RC and was using it to test on the browser end. it was during that time too that i came upon the concept of integration testing, so from my understanding it seems that unit testing should be done to define the test and basic assumptions of each function, and if the function is dependent on something else, that something else needs to be mocked so that the tests is always singular and can be run fast. Questions: so am i right to say that the project should have started with unit test with proper mocks using something like rhino mocks. then anything else which requires 3rd party dll, database data access etc to be done via integration testing using selenium? because i have a function which calls a third party dll, i'm not sure whether to write a unit test in nunit to just instantiate the object and pass it some dummy data which breaks the mocking part to test it or just cover that part in my selenium integration testing when i submit my forms and call the dll. and for user acceptance tests, is it safe to say we can just use selenium again? Am i missing something or is there a better way/framework? i'm trying to put in more tests for regression testing, and to ensure that nothing breaks when we put in new features. i also like the idea of TDD because it helps to better define the function, sort of like a meta documentation. thanks!! hope this question isn't too subjective because i need it for my case.

    Read the article

  • What's a good way to do testing a plug-in on multiple Windows and Outlook versions?

    - by Andrei
    Hello, We're building a plug-in for Outlook that should work on multiple Windows versions (XP, Vista, 7) and also with different Outlook versions (2003, 2007, 2010). The testing problem I am facing right now, is that I can't figure out a good/convenient/thorough way to test the application on multiple Windows and Outlook versions. At the moment, I have a VirtualBox which runs many virtual machines, with different Windows versions and Outlook versions. So I would have a virtual machine with Windows 7 testing Outlook 2010, and another one with Windows 7 testing Outlook 2007, Windows Vista with Outlook 2010 and so on, going through some of the possible combinations. It kind of gets the job done, although it is cumbersome and takes a long time to test. Some of the testing included in the application is unit testing, but this is also rather tied in with the machine I test it on (windows 7 with outlook 2010). For example, I was using ManagementObject recently, which worked fine on my system (and thus passed the unit test for that method), however, using that object threw an exception in another person's system, which crashed the application. I work on Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate. The questions: Is there a more elegant way to make the testing process more streamline and more efficient? Any other testing methods you recommend? How would you deal with this problem? Thanks! Looking forward to your replies.

    Read the article

  • Using a service registry that doesn’t suck part I: UDDI is dead

    - by gsusx
    This is the first of a series of posts on which I am hoping to detail some of the most common SOA governance scenarios in the real world, their challenges and the approach we’ve taken to address them in SO-Aware. This series does not intend to be a marketing pitch about SO-Aware. Instead, I would like to use this to foment an honest dialog between SOA governance technologists. For the starting post I decided to focus on the aspect that was once considered the keystone of SOA governance: service discovery...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Tellago && Tellago Studios 2010

    - by gsusx
    With 2011 around the corner we, at Tellago and Tellago Studios , we have been spending a lot of times evaluating our successes and failures (yes those too ;)) of 2010 and delineating some of our goals and strategies for 2011. When I look at 2010 here are some of the things that quickly jump off the page: Growing Tellago by 300% Launching a brand new company: Tellago Studios Expanding our customer base Establishing our business intelligence practice http://tellago.com/what-we-say/events/business-intelligence...(read more)

    Read the article

  • stress testing opencl/Ati GPU on 12.04

    - by lurscher
    What does people normally use to stress test their GPU on ubuntu 12.04? I tried installing Phoronix Benchmark suite ubuntu .deb but it tries to install freeglu3-dev and at the same time complains about $ phoronix-test-suite benchmark pts/opencl The following dependencies are needed and will be installed: freeglut3-dev This process may take several minutes. Reading package lists... Building dependency tree... Reading state information... freeglut3-dev is already the newest version. 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 90 not upgraded. There are dependencies still missing from the system: - OpenGL Utility Kit / GLUT 1: Ignore missing dependencies and proceed with installation. 2: Skip installing the tests with missing dependencies. 3: Re-attempt to install the missing dependencies. 4: Quit the current Phoronix Test Suite process. Missing dependencies action: 4 so even if it is installing freeglu3, it still complains about missing GLUT. You can't win against GLUT it seems So, what does people use for this? i mean, really, because i have tried googling for an hour and it is not paying up Thanks!

    Read the article

  • My Speaking Engagements in the Last Two Months

    - by gsusx
    I’ve been so busy lately with the activities around Moesion that I haven’t had time to blog about a couple of great conferences I had the opportunity to speak at in the last two months. Software Architect Conference, UK ( http://www.software-architect.co.uk/ ) This conference is becoming one of my favorite events of the year. As always Nick Payne and his team did a remarkable job lining up an all-star group of speakers that covered some of the hottest topics in today’s software industry. The first...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Good practices - database programming, unit testing

    - by Piotr Rodak
    Jason Brimhal wrote today on his blog that new book, Defensive Database Programming , written by Alex Kuznetsov ( blog ) is coming to bookstores. Alex writes about various techniques that make your code safer to run. SQL injection is not the only one vulnerability the code may be exposed to. Some other include inconsistent search patterns, unsupported character sets, locale settings, issues that may occur during high concurrency conditions, logic that breaks when certain conditions are not met. The...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Does software testing methodology rely on flawed data?

    - by Konrad Rudolph
    It’s a well-known fact in software engineering that the cost of fixing a bug increases exponentially the later in development that bug is discovered. This is supported by data published in Code Complete and adapted in numerous other publications. However, it turns out that this data never existed. The data cited by Code Complete apparently does not show such a cost / development time correlation, and similar published tables only showed the correlation in some special cases and a flat curve in others (i.e. no increase in cost). Is there any independent data to corroborate or refute this? And if true (i.e. if there simply is no data to support this exponentially higher cost for late discovered bugs), how does this impact software development methodology?

    Read the article

  • Unit testing statically typed functional code

    - by back2dos
    I wanted to ask you people, in which cases it makes sense to unit test statically typed functional code, as written in haskell, scala, ocaml, nemerle, f# or haXe (the last is what I am really interested in, but I wanted to tap into the knowledge of the bigger communities). I ask this because from my understanding: One aspect of unit tests is to have the specs in runnable form. However when employing a declarative style, that directly maps the formalized specs to language semantics, is it even actually possible to express the specs in runnable form in a separate way, that adds value? The more obvious aspect of unit tests is to track down errors that cannot be revealed through static analysis. Given that type safe functional code is a good tool to code extremely close to what your static analyzer understands. However a simple mistake like using x instead of y (both being coordinates) in your code cannot be covered. However such a mistake could also arise while writing the test code, so I am not sure whether its worth the effort. Unit tests do introduce redundancy, which means that when requirements change, the code implementing them and the tests covering this code must both be changed. This overhead of course is about constant, so one could argue, that it doesn't really matter. In fact, in languages like Ruby it really doesn't compared to the benefits, but given how statically typed functional programming covers a lot of the ground unit tests are intended for, it feels like it's a constant overhead one can simply reduce without penalty. From this I'd deduce that unit tests are somewhat obsolete in this programming style. Of course such a claim can only lead to religious wars, so let me boil this down to a simple question: When you use such a programming style, to which extents do you use unit tests and why (what quality is it you hope to gain for your code)? Or the other way round: do you have criteria by which you can qualify a unit of statically typed functional code as covered by the static analyzer and hence needs no unit test coverage?

    Read the article

  • Where should I draw the line between unit tests and integration tests? Should they be separate?

    - by Earlz
    I have a small MVC framework I've been working on. It's code base definitely isn't big, but it's not longer just a couple of classes. I finally decided to take the plunge and start writing tests for it(yes, I know I should've been doing that all along, but it's API was super unstable up until now) Anyway, my plan is to make it extremely easy to test, including integration tests. An example integration test would go something along these lines: Fake HTTP request object - MVC framework - HTTP response object - check the response is correct Because this is all doable without any state or special tools(browser automation etc), I could actually do this with ease with regular unit test frameworks(I use NUnit). Now the big question. Where exactly should I draw the line between unit tests and integration tests? Should I only test one class at a time(as much as possible) with unit tests? Also, should integration tests be placed in the same testing project as my unit testing project?

    Read the article

  • Is paying programmers to "test" for bugs normal? [on hold]

    - by user106277
    I recently hired a programming team to do a port of my iPad app to the iPhone and Android platforms. I also wanted them to implement a bunch of tips on how to play the app, similar like you would find in Candy Crush or Cut the Rope. They want to charge 12 hours @ $35/hr for the "Testing all of the Tips", telling me that normally it would take them more than 25 hours but that they will 'bear the difference'. I have never heard of this, but maybe it's a new practice? I am used to devs doing their own quality control, and then having a testing/acceptance period... Am I missing something? Thanks for any help and advice you can give!

    Read the article

  • Large sparse (stiff) ODE system needed for testing

    - by macydanim
    I hope this is the right place for this question. I have been working on a sparse stiff implicit ODE solver and have finished the code so far. I now tested the solver with the Van der Pol equation, and another stiff problem, which is of dimension 4. But to perform better tests I am searching for a bigger system. I'm thinking of the order N = 100...1000, if possible stiff and sparse. Does anybody have an example I could use? I really don't know where to search.

    Read the article

  • OOP for unit testing : The good, the bad and the ugly

    - by Jeff
    I have recently read Miško Hevery's pdf guide to writing testable code in which its stated that you should limit your classes instanciations in your constructors. I understand that its what you should do because it allow you to easily mock you objects that are send as parameters to your class. But when it comes to writing actual code, i often end up with things like that (exemple is in PHP using Zend Framework but I think it's self explanatory) : class Some_class { private $_data; private $_options; private $_locale; public function __construct($data, $options = null) { $this->_data = $data; if ($options != null) { $this->_options = $options; } $this->_init(); } private function _init() { if(isset($this->_options['locale'])) { $locale = $this->_options['locale']; if ($locale instanceof Zend_Locale) { $this->_locale = $locale; } elseif (Zend_Locale::isLocale($locale)) { $this->_locale = new Zend_Locale($locale); } else { $this->_locale = new Zend_Locale(); } } } } Acording to my understanding of Miško Hevery's guide, i shouldn't instanciate the Zend_Local in my class but push it through the constructor (Which can be done through the options array in my example). I am wondering what would be the best practice to get the most flexibility for unittesing this code and aswell, if I want to move away from Zend Framework. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • mocha testing for the lazies, single key-press for all possible tests

    - by laggingreflex
    I have a batch file that lists all the test files I have and asks me which test I want to perform, like Test. [U]nit, [I]ntegration : i (user input) Integration. [A]ll, [2][U]serInteraction, [3][R]esultGeneration : u 2 User Interaction. Running "mocha integration\2userint.js" ... So essentially I have configured a batch "option" for each test file I have, which I can choose to run individually or all together. But adding and removing tests is a pain. Is there something that does this or anything like this automatically? Like reads all the files and asks me which file(s) I want to test. A GUI with checkboxes would be ultimate! but I'll take anything. I'm working in node.js

    Read the article

  • Android Live Testing

    - by Matthew Dockerty
    I am making a game for android and in it I am using sensors which are not available in the emulator. At the moment I am connecting my device and transferring the apk, then installing to test but that is a pain to do, and I have gotten to the stage where I need to start logging values for debugging. I have gone into the run configs of my app and set it to prompt me to pick a device, but my device is never in the list when it is connected to my PC and I try to run it. How am I supposed to set it up to work properly? Thanks for the help.

    Read the article

  • Who does code coverage testing?

    - by Athiruban
    Recently, I was given an opportunity to increase the code coverage in a project based on Java Swing, MySQL and other technologies. They told me to bring the code coverage to 100%, while it was only 45% at the time I joined. I am just starting, not a professional developer, right from the beginning I felt bad even though I write and understand computer programs well. (The developed code contains a lot of technical stuff like Generics and no documentation about the code is available.) Has anyone experienced the same situation before? Please tell who is the right person to do the job.

    Read the article

  • Automated Website Testing/Sanity/Quality

    - by Jeff
    I am thinking about building a tool that starts from the root of a webpage and traverses the entire website gathering a list of resources such as CSS/HTML/Javascript files and then runs CSS/Javascript Lint + HTML Validator + Broken Link Finder. Before I start building something like this, I was wondering if this exists already? Thanks. I already searched Google quite a bit and couldn't find much.

    Read the article

  • Using Mock for event listeners in unit-testing

    - by phtrivier
    I keep getting to test this kind of code (language irrelevant) : public class Foo() { public Foo(Dependency1 dep1) { this.dep1 = dep1; } public void setUpListeners() { this.dep1.addSomeEventListener(.... some listener code ...); } } Typically, you want to test what when the dependency fires the event, the class under tests reacts appropriately (in some situation, the only purpose of such classes is to wire lots of other components, that can be independently tested. So far, to test this, I always end up doing something like : creating a 'stub' that implements both a addXXXXListener, that simply stores the callback, and a fireXXXX, that simply calls any registered listener. This is a bit tedious since you have to create the mock with the right interface, but that can do use an introspective framework that can 'spy' on a method, and inject the real dependency in tests Is there a cleaner way to do this kind of things ?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >