rmi registry browser

rmi registry browser

Why is SOA testing of an animal so different from earlier forms of the browser, client / server and mainframe testing? Many of the benefits of SOA becomes challenges of testing SOA applications.

1. SOA is distributed by definition

The services are based on heterogeneous technologies. We can not wait to test an application that was developed by a unified group, as a single project, sitting on a single application server and delivered by a standard browser interface. The possibility of linking different types of components to form a flow of business allows free thought in the perspective of an architect, and paranoia from the perspective of an examiner.

In SOA, application logic is in the midst of being active in a number of technologies, residing outside the department or outside the company

Think of the service components of today as "applications" without a head (most with no user interface) that can rely on other services or be consumed by other services to compensate for any number of processes in an SOA. You can rigorously prove many of these components, as developed in isolation, but what happens when they interact in time for deployment? It becomes much more difficult to expect to find the source of a problem when you can not get a first look at the reasons why two or more disparate technologies do not create a coherent application.

The post-World SOA offers a wide range of options for how to mount or use of technologies in multiple business workflows, both within and outside of your core team. In an SOA, more connection = an exponential increase in potential points of failure.

2. Need to ensure service and high levels of exception handling excellent

Quality has become a governor in the company's success in delivering SOA applications. Ensuring quality in a single application development has been quite difficult creating discipline around quality control. With an SOA, the stress points of application "can be anywhere, and change as individual services are added or modified workflow.

There is a gap in quality between unit and acceptance testing. Find the causes of problems through the intermediate levels of SOA is difficult. Proof of a front of the user interface becomes finally irrelevant when it provides no information on what actually happens at the end. And developers hope to find missing requirements by testing more unit-level computer code does not understand – you can find some errors in the component code level, but not a requirement to demonstrate why businesses are not met.

Services "containers" for example SOAP / WSDL around an object existing RMI, the promise of better interoperability by providing a common set of controls, enabling existing systems and components that are assembled as steps in a workflow SOA. However, these containers can not affect every aspect of the parent compound, making them very opaque to the test. If you want to automate test unit ( "white box" testing) and acceptance testing or system ( "black box" testing) as above, we lack the area where they produce the most possible errors: the space of interaction between components unpredictable.

3. New Prioritize design efforts against the reuse of components

Companies do not implement an SOA strategy to test the latest technologies. They do it to obtain new business capabilities. The complexity in software is driven by the natural process of competition, forcing changes new business rules and business logic systems. According to the 2005 Aberdeen, "It is not surprising that the main factor for the implementation of SOA, that 50% of respondents cited is the development of new capabilities. "

Schedule and budget, thus limiting the quality creating serious limitations on the scope of features that can be tested using conventional means. In addition, the company should prioritize the functionality that extends the scope of application, if the project can not fall together in the prescribed order.

SOA is not a "switch" to change a single technology

In selecting an SOA approach, there are components simply not penalty money and effort to put the SOA world – for example, a data stream that provides a relatively unchanging piece of information to flow production company. If the answer to some of the technologies is the lowest priority "if it is not broke, do not fix it" or "does is not simply change "is likely to find support and evidence of some relics at any SOA.

We know that for SOA testing, it is necessary to go beyond the simple test a user interface or browser screen. Web Services (WSDL / SOAP) are an important component of the architecture Many SOA, but only tests of web services is not likely to prove technology that makes the entire application stack. What transactions do layer of messaging (JMS)? The right input is reflected in the database? In fact, in perfect condition for many SOA business logic completely out of the house of Web services – for example, a Swing interface to talk to EJB-related messaging applications.

Are you ready for test? SOA offers tremendous benefits to the request, but to ensure the quality, you face:

• continued work in course,
• composed of heterogeneous elements,
• developed by several teams or pairs,
• and eaten or delivered to multiple parties.

How you can always check when you try to hit a moving target, with manual testing fragile? The only way to deal with the uncertainty of the project is through SOA test automation highly reusable who can speak with Each layer of intermediate level – if your computer has been built according to their overall strategy or not.