(Disclaimer: I'm quite new to Tosca but not to testing in general)
DESCRIPTION
I'm automating a very dynamic page in Tosca, with content that is added (or not) as you progress through a form.
I do not have a testsheet at hand and do not have time to create one so I cannot use a template and the 'conditions' (I'm using TC-Parameters and they do not seem to apply to the 'Condition' column).
I wanted to use libraries as much as possible because most of the steps are the same, and there are a LOT of possible outcomes (I have more than 100 TCs to automate) so I'm trying to have my steps as 'generic' as possible, so that if the interface is changed in the future I'll be ale to maintain most of it 'centrally'.
PROBLEM
I've added four 'ifs' in strategic points. The problem is that an unsuccessful 'if' seems to hang for 10s, no matter what I use inside: 'verify' takes 10s & 'waiton' also takes 10s (although for the latter I modified the settings to 5s so I don't understand why).
I'm actually not interested in 'verify' waiting at all. I know that the content has either to be there or not at the precise moment where I have my condition. I'd be happy with a 1s delay, that'd be more than enough time for the app to display the content.
The TCs duration varies between 1m and 1m40s (4*10s if my 4 'if' are negative). It'd be great if I could speed it up, especially because most of the 'ifs' will NOT trigger. Any ideas?
You could try checking some settings regarding how long Tosca waits for Verify/Waiton:
Settings > Engine > Waiton > Maximum Wait Duration
Settings > TBox > Synchronization > Synchronization Time out
However, I've also found using buffered values to be more efficient time-wise for some of my testing scenarios.
I solved it by adding TCPs and buffering them, in order to check them as conditions (not sure why Tosca requires the intermediate buffering step but that does the trick). Now I can configure whether my tests should expect a given follow-up item or not. It's a lot of extra configs but at least my tests are nicely modular.
Related
I'm trying to make a tetris game in ocaml and i need to have a piece move through the graphics screen at a certain speed.
I think that the best way to do it is to make a recursive function that draws the piece at the top of the screen, waits half a second or so, clears that piece from the screen and redraws it 50 pixels lower. I just don't know how to make the programm wait. I think that you can do it using the Unix module but idk how..
Let's assume you want to take a fairly simple approach, i.e., an approach that works without multi-threading.
Presumably when your game is running it spends virtually all its time waiting for input from the user, i.e., waiting for the user to press a key. Most likely, in fact, you're using a blocking read to do this. Since the user can take any amount of time before typing anything (up to minutes or years), this is incompatible with keeping the graphical part of the game up to date.
A very simple solution then is to have a timeout on the read operation. Instead of waiting indefinitely for the user to press a key, you can wait at most (say) 10 milliseconds.
To do this, you can use the Unix.select function. The simplest way to do this is to switch over to using a Unix file descriptor for your input rather than an OCaml channel. If you can't figure out how to make this work, you might come back to StackOverflow with a more specific question.
My JSR352 batch job needs to read from a database, and then depending on the result flows to one of two pathways, each of which involves some more if/else scenarios. I wonder what the pros and cons between writing a single step with a large batchlet and several steps consisting of smaller batchlets would be. This job does not involves chunk steps with chunk size larger than 1, as it needs to persists the read result immediately in case there is any before proceeding to other logic. The job will be run using Control-M, I wonder if using multiple smaller steps provides more control points.
From that description, I'd suggest these
Benefits of more, fine-grained steps
1. Restart
After a job failure, the default behavior on restart is to begin executing at the step where the previous job execution failed. So breaking the job up into more steps allows you to avoid writing the logic to resume where you left off and avoid re-processing, and may save execution time in the process.
2. Reuse
By encapsulating a discrete function as its own batchlet, you can potentially compose other steps in other jobs (or even later in this job) implemented with this same batchlet.
3. Extract logic into XML
By moving the transition logic into the transition elements, and extracting the conditional flow (e.g. <next on="RC1" to="step3"/>, etc.)
into the job definition XML (JSL), you can introduce changes at a standard control point, without having to go into the Java source and find the right place.
Final Thoughts
You'll have to decide if those benefits are worth it for your case.
One more thought
I wouldn't automatically rule out the chunk step just because you are using a 1-item chunk, if you can still find benefits from the checkpointing or even possibly the skip/retry. (But that's probably a separate question.)
I'm relatively new to JavaFX and have written a small applet which launches a number of (typically between 3 and 10) sub-processes. Each process has a dedicated tab displaying current status and a large TextArea where the process output is appended to. For simplicity all tabs are generated on startup.
javafx.application.Platform.runLater(() -> logTextArea.appendText(line)))
The applet works fine when workloads on sub-processes are low-moderate (not many logs), but starts to freeze when sub-processes are heavily used and generate a decent amount of logging output (a good few hundreds of lines per second in total).
I looked into binding the TextArea to the output, but my understanding is it effectively calls the Platform.runLater() method so there will still be hundreds of calls to JavaFX application thread per second.
Batching logging outputs isn't an ideal solution either because I'd like to keep the displayed log as real-time as possible.
The only solution which I think might solve the problem seems to be dynamic loading of individual tabs. This would definitely prevent unnecessary calls to update logging textareas that aren't currently visible, but before I go ahead to make the changes, I'd like to get some helpful advice from you here. Thanks!
Thanks for all your suggestions. Finally got around to implementing a fix today.
The issue was fixed by using a buffer coupled with a secondary check for time lapse (maximum 20 lines or 100 ms).
In addition, I also implemented rolling output to limit the total process output to 1,000 lines.
Thanks again for your invaluable contribution!
I am developing an java-asterisk application that is calling subscribers to deliver messages. At some moments during the call, I need to monitor whether the subscriber is talking or is silent. I need to monitor that for a fairly long time (1-3 seconds) but don't want to interrupt the flow of the outgoing message.
The way I am doing it now is as below
streamFile(*file A*);
exec("WaitForSilence","300,1,1");
waitStatus=getVariable("WAITSTATUS");
streamFile(*file B*);
This works fine but it is only a 300ms detect and a 1s timeout, so from the subscriber point of view the silence between file A and file B is almost unnoticeable. But if I want to listen for longer (say 3 seconds for example) then the subscriber's experience will be ruined.
What I would need is a function similar to "WaitForSilence" but that:
runs in parallel to the script;
delivers its outcome in a variable channel with a name that I define (as there might be several calls to the function, and I need to get all the results)
I've been looking for more than aweek now and couldn't find a way to do that. Any ideas?
Code you provided will do wait, after that will do playback.
There are no way do that simple in one application.
Posible ways:
1) create c/c++ application(asterisk guru skill required) for that.
2) create enother channel, mix it with ChanSpy and in that channel do silence detect. Complexity - expert in asterisk.
Both are not so short(more then 2-3 screens of code), so can't be described in this site.
You can also try use Background application, but i am afraid it will not work too.
In Microsoft Project (MSP), is it possible to have two parallel/concurrent activities with the same resource assigned to both? For example:
The worker resource "matt" is assigned to both activities, hence the overallocation error showing in the info column (red human icon).
Why do I require such a structure you may ask? In reality, one task would continually be temporarily interrupted to do the other one, and vice versa. But in MSP, it would be counter-productive to do so. Hence, my simplified approach - parallel activities.
So how should I fix this issue?
Ignore it?
Allocate 50% of the resource to each (and fix up finish dates which are automatically extended by MSP?)
Or is there a better solution?
if they indeed overlap then the best way to put this in your project is to allocate 50% on each task. But why fix up finish date, the program will recalculate the new duration of the task based on the new work, while the allocation is lowered to 50% then the duration should double ... Or you can declare the task as duration driven if that is the case, for such tasks duration will stay as set though allocation is changed
I do not think there is a better solution. So solution number 2 that is adjusting assignment units is the best in your case.