slide1 l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
© 2006, iTKO, Inc. | All rights reserved. PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
© 2006, iTKO, Inc. | All rights reserved.

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 33

© 2006, iTKO, Inc. | All rights reserved. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 132 Views
  • Uploaded on

Achieving 99.99% Quality in SOA Applications – The “Headless” Dilemma John Michelsen StickyMinds Webinar November 7, 2006. © 2006, iTKO, Inc. | All rights reserved. Agenda. SOA development and QA trends Strategy/best practices - the Three C’s “Headless” Testing Fundamentals

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about '© 2006, iTKO, Inc. | All rights reserved.' - ismet


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

Achieving 99.99% Qualityin SOA Applications –The “Headless” Dilemma

John Michelsen

StickyMinds WebinarNovember 7, 2006

© 2006, iTKO, Inc. | All rights reserved.

agenda
Agenda

SOA development and QA trends

Strategy/best practices - the Three C’s

“Headless” Testing Fundamentals

LISA Intro, and LISA WS-Testing Offer

who are we
Who are we?
  • 2006 - LISA 3 & 3.5
  • 2004 – LISA 2.0

A History of Quality Leadership

  • 2003 – LISA 1.0 Released to Market
  • 2001 – LISA under development – (4) Patents Pending
  • 1999 – iTKO Incorporates (Privately Held)

2004 .

1999 .

2001.

2003 .

2005.

2006.

  • Entered the market to deliver an SOA testing solution, LISA
  • Current version 3.5 (2006)
  • Key value propositions:
    • Increase Test Coverage
    • Lower Cost per Test
    • Faster Discovery & Resolution

Everyone should own quality™.

the promise of soa
The Promise of SOA
  • Reduce integration cost
    • Through loosely-coupled forms of integration and industry standards
  • Increase asset reuse
    • Build new business workflows from existing Services to form composite applications
  • Increase business agility
    • Better control business process definition and management to meet customer needs
  • Reduce business risk
    • Governance, compliance, and risk reduction through increased business visibility and agility
before soa
…before SOA

Standard

enterprise apps

BrowserUIs

Client

UIs

Server

(database)

You had a standard delivery platform.

And a standard infrastructure.

soa promises a composite workflow
SOA promises a composite workflow

Division 1

Transaction service

Transactionprovider

PartnerReseller

PartnerReseller

Your extendedenterprise

Order management

Business rules

BI tools

SOA was supposed to simplify extending workflows.

Core app

Division 2

Customer

buyer

Data

warehouse

Outsourced

supplier

Customer buyer

but heterogeneous technology is complex
But heterogeneous technology is complex

Standards and components are still evolving

Composite apps have multiple owners

It’s Continuously Changing

Your Company

Channel Partner

Division 1

Transaction service

FinancialsMainframe

Legacy App

Legacy Data

.NET OrderingService

SOAP objects

ContentDatabase

Legacy App

Messagingservice

Web interface

Your AppWorkflow

Customer company

BI tools

Outsourced firm

BusinessRules

ESB

Division2

Data

warehouse

File System

CRM Web App

RMI objects

Web Services

why a new strategy
Why A New Strategy?
  • Few changes at the database level, but multiplies issues downstream
  • For every middle tier change, there are hundreds of front-end impacts possible at the UI layer
  • Limitless front end options
    • Any client, multiple customers
    • Mix of technologies – XML/RPC, Swing, AWT, JS, DOM, now AJAX
    • Services consume business logic

Database/mainframe

= 1 change

Middle-tierlevel

= 100x

UI level

=1000x

best practices three c s of soa testing
Best Practices: “Three C’s” of SOA Testing

Complete Testing

  • Every heterogeneous layer of architecture
  • Test UI verify in system of record
  • Reuse functional test for performance testing

Collaborative Testing

  • Test early before UIs are created
  • Not just dev, business analysts and QA should verify processes

Continuously Test

  • Regress on existing functionality
  • Add testing of new services to existing testing workflows

Complete >

single component all technologies

Collaborative >

Dev/QA test silos everyone tests, every phase

Continuous >

Phased tests constant testing

complete soa testing across every layer
Complete: SOA Testing across every layer

ASP.NET

Web UI

SOAP/XML

.NET WS

Custom API

J2EE

RMI

MQ

Database

Legacy App

File System

Swing

Presentation layer

CORBA

BPM

Process and services layer

ESB

Integration layer

Data / Applications

typical trading system example
Typical Trading System Example

Database

CORBA App

RMI

Ordering

Swing App

App Server

EJB, WS,POJO

1

BusinessProcess

AppA

BusinessProcess AppB

ESB

Processing

Web App

9

AdditionalApps Now

& Future

AdditionalApps Now

& Future

AdditionalApps Now

& Future

AdditionalApps Now

& Future

DB

Data is correlated

in here.

collaborative soa requires agile
Collaborative: SOA Requires Agile

Business Analysts outline a business process and ‘not implemented’ test cases

Developers unit test and jump-start QA

Complete Test Coverage

Lower Cost per Test

Faster Discovery & Resolution

QA expands dev tests and create functional and load tests

Support rapidly debug issues and communicates appropriately

Production test their implementation and report issues to support

collaborative testing in an soa environment
Collaborative Testing in an SOA environment

Order Acquisition

Check Credit

Check Inv

QA/BA

Place Order

BPM Validation

Orchestration Tests

Place Order

Service 2

Continuous SOA Test Platform

Service 1

Service 3

QA

QE

Service Validation

Service 3

Dev/QE

Component Tests

continuous soa is never done
Continuous: SOA is never done

Database

Create UI

Serviceretired

Create UI

New service

Servicechanged

Create UI

New service

Database

New service

  • Project-based development had a “test phase”

Deploy

App

Database

Createcomponents

Unit test

Integration

Create UI

AcceptanceTest

  • SOA development is constantly evolving
continuous minimize unintended consequences
Continuous: Minimize Unintended Consequences

APP 2

APP 1

Registry

MDM

Transactions

?

?

?

ESB

?

?

InternalService

LegacyApp

PartnerService

Database

NEW

?

?

?

continuous minimize unintended consequences17
Continuous: Minimize Unintended Consequences

APP 2

Continuous

Testing

APP 1

A data service is currently failing due to a change in the internal service

Registry

MDM

Transactions

ESB

InternalService

LegacyApp

PartnerService

Database

continuous soa at 5 9 s
Continuous: SOA at 5-9’s

?????%functionalintegrity

100%

SOA-aware Dev/QA Process

Comprehensive Testing Tools

Continuous Testing Service

BusinessApplications

Integrity

100%

99.999%application

availability

Application

Infrastructure

App Servers

Transaction Monitors

Clustered Services

Scalability

100%

99.999%system

uptime

Physical

Infrastructure

Availability

Fault Tolerant HW

Diesel Power

Redundant Bandwidth

Business Investment

Availability to the business is the product of all three

continuous levels build deploy
Continuous Levels: Build & Deploy

Production

Production

Deployment Level

Staging

Pre-production

test bed

Continuous SOA Test Platform

test bed

QA/QE

Build

Level

Dev build

Dev build

Development

Component/Service Teams

product

component

product

component

requirements are king on line music scenario
Requirements are King -- On-line Music Scenario
  • Use Case: (UC1) Customer with existing account does a search for ‘Rush’, selects the Grace Under Pressure tour DVD and uses the 1-click purchase feature to buy.
  • Business: (BR1) We need a flexible mechanism to change these criteria at our whim. After discussion: for now partners get 20% of net proceeds on their product sold on the first $100,000 / mo, 10% thereafter.
  • PSR: (PSR1) Search can’t take any longer than 3 seconds for a user on a typical broadband connection.
  • Policy: Punt for now. This is security, interop standards, corp dev standards, etc.
  • Functional: (FR1) Search must include results from CDs, DVDs, Books, and Memorabilia, with CDs on the top (UC1).
  • Technical: (TR1) Create a search service that aggregates CD, DVD, Book, and Mem data (FR2). (TR2) Search service execution must be under 2 seconds (PSR1).
service level guidelines
Service Level Guidelines
  • UC & BR: Validation mechanism
  • PSR: Load/performance test at the service level
  • FR: Likely 80% of your requirements can be nailed right here
  • TR: Dev test at the component level

Service Validation

Service 3

Dev/QE

Component Tests

UC=Use Case, BR=Business Requirements, FR=Functional Requirements, TR=Technical Requirements

orchestration level testing guidelines
Orchestration Level Testing Guidelines
  • UC & BR: Not usually
  • PSR: Often the best way to prove PSR
  • FR: Invoke a behavior, validate outcomes
  • TR: Simulate unstable/unavailable services

Orchestration Tests

Place Order

Service 2

Service 1

Service 3

QA

QE

UC=Use Case, BR=Business Requirements, FR=Functional Requirements, TR=Technical Requirements

composite bpm level testing guidelines
Composite/BPM Level Testing Guidelines

Order Acquisition

Check Credit

Check Inv

QA/BA

Place Order

  • UC: Primary focus, performs a cause that we validate at the service/component level
  • BR: Many times same as UC, sometimes not relevant
  • PSR: A few PSR scenarios proved at this level, but continuous testing is the key here
  • FR & TR: Hopefully very few

BPM Validation

UC=Use Case, BR=Business Requirements, FR=Functional Requirements, TR=Technical Requirements

typical soa test map dramatically simplified
Typical SOA Test Map -- Dramatically Simplified

Content

Books

Mem

DVD

CD

Billing

AP

Media Repo

UC1: Search & Buy

UC1

Presentation

Layer

Content

Mgmnt

Commission

Rules Svc

Order

Mgmnt

Search

CRM

Facade

Offers &

Specials

UC1

Media Delivery

UC1

Batch Feeds

CRM System

typical soa test map dramatically simplified26
Typical SOA Test Map -- Dramatically Simplified

Content

Books

Mem

DVD

CD

Billing

AP

Media Repo

BR1: Commissions

Presentation

Layer

Content

Mgmnt

Commission

Rules Svc

Order

Mgmnt

BR1*

Search

CRM

Facade

Offers &

Specials

BR1

Media Delivery

Batch Feeds

CRM System

typical soa test map dramatically simplified27
Typical SOA Test Map -- Dramatically Simplified

Content

Books

Mem

DVD

CD

Billing

AP

Media Repo

PSR1: 3 sec search

PSR1

Presentation

Layer

Content

Mgmnt

Commission

Rules Svc

Order

Mgmnt

Search

TR2*

CRM

Facade

Offers &

Specials

Media Delivery

Batch Feeds

CRM System

typical soa test map dramatically simplified28
Typical SOA Test Map -- Dramatically Simplified

Content

Books

Mem

DVD

CD

Billing

AP

Media Repo

FR1: Search is aggregate, CDs top results

Presentation

Layer

Content

Mgmnt

Commission

Rules Svc

Order

Mgmnt

Search

FR1

CRM

Facade

Offers &

Specials

Media Delivery

Batch Feeds

CRM System

typical soa test map dramatically simplified29
Typical SOA Test Map -- Dramatically Simplified

Content

Books

Mem

DVD

CD

Billing

AP

Media Repo

TR1: Create search on 4 repos

TR2: 2 sec search

Presentation

Layer

Content

Mgmnt

Commission

Rules Svc

Order

Mgmnt

Search

TR1 & 2

CRM

Facade

Offers &

Specials

TR1

Media Delivery

Batch Feeds

CRM System

the three dimensions of quality maturity
The Three Dimensions of Quality maturity

Complete >

single component all technologies

Collaborative >

Dev/QA test silos everyone tests, every phase

Continuous >

Phased tests constant testing

lisa meets soa testing challenges
LISA meets SOA Testing Challenges
  • LISA is Complete - Test heterogeneous SOA
    • LISA can test every tier of an application, regardless of location
    • LISA can test every service technology with one tool, one test
    • LISA’s framework approach creates bridges to legacy services that means ‘you can get there from here’
  • LISA is Collaborative – Everyone owns quality
    • LISA shines at testing all components before UI even exists, as well as integrating with the team’s ALM lifecycle and process
    • Unit, regression, system, load, and monitoring in one tool
    • Leverages diverse skill sets in Dev, QA/QE, and BA roles
  • LISA is Continuous – Enables Agile SOA
    • Tests constantly evolving, interdependent systems during and after deployment
    • Traps for the “what-if” unintended system-wide consequences of making changes or corrections to components.
lisa ws testing 5 000 off for next 50k users
LISA WS-Testing $5,000 Off for next 50k users
  • LISA WS-Testing Edition is THE tool for Web Services testing
  • All our web services goodies are in there:
    • WSDL-based, point and click
    • WS-I Interop testing
    • Functional testing and service simulation
    • UI and Command Line execution
thank you for your interest
Thank you for your interest!
  • iTKO Web Site Resources
    • URL: http://www.itko.com or http://www.ws-testing.com
    • White papers
    • Support FAQs, Tech Notes, and Forums (once registered)
    • Download WS-Testing or start a larger evaluation
  • More from me
    • See above
    • Blog: http://itko.blogspot.com
    • Email: Start with info@itko.com; I’m john@itko.com

?

?

?