Automation framework evaluation: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
* have pretty simple web UI | * have pretty simple web UI | ||
* test structure pretty complex | * test structure pretty complex | ||
* don't mean work in clusters, need improving configuration | |||
|- | |- | ||
| [http://staf.sourceforge.net/ STAF] | | [http://staf.sourceforge.net/ STAF] | ||
Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
|| | || | ||
* multi-platform: works on Windows, Linux, AIX | * multi-platform: works on Windows, Linux, AIX | ||
* test could be written on many languages | |||
* have interface for for remote work with server | |||
* have security levels | |||
|| | || | ||
* isn't ready for linux kernel-specific functionality | * isn't ready for linux kernel-specific functionality and kernel crashes (maybe special proxies or services are exist) | ||
* don't mean work in clusters, need improving configuration | |||
* don't have test management level | |||
|- | |- | ||
| [http://code.google.com/p/robotframework/ robotframework] || Example || Example | | [http://code.google.com/p/robotframework/ robotframework] || Example || Example | ||
Line 62: | Line 65: | ||
* test result is per-test yaml file and html report could be generated | * test result is per-test yaml file and html report could be generated | ||
* could collect some logs from systems under tests on per-test basis, and this could be simple extended | * could collect some logs from systems under tests on per-test basis, and this could be simple extended | ||
* have good internal unit test coverage | |||
|| | || | ||
* doesn't directly maintain nodes, lustre mounts, cluster status | * doesn't directly maintain nodes, lustre mounts, cluster status | ||
|- | |- | ||
|} | |} |
Revision as of 13:04, 7 January 2013
In order to automatically service and track test requests, as well as deploy testing resources, an upper-level test automation framework would sit "on top of" the Lustre test infrastructure.
Some requirements/desires for the automation framework:
- Aware of multiple clusters
- Able to create virtual clusters as VMs
- Able to automatically start testing based on various triggers, e.g. git commit hooks
- Maintains a prioritizable job queue
- Collect test output status in a database
- Visually represent pass/failure in a clear, concise manner
- Should facilitate easy interpretation of test "trends"; i.e. statistical-based test results
Framework(with link) | Advantages | Disadvantages | |
---|---|---|---|
autotest
It is designed primarily to test the Linux kernel, though it is useful for many other functions such asqualifying new hardware. It used and developed by a number of organizations, including Google, IBM, Red Hat, andmany others. Developed on Python |
in server mode:
|
| |
STAF
The Software Testing Automation Framework (STAF) is an open source, multi-platform, multi-language framework, lead by IBM Core developed on C. You can interact with STAF from many languages (Java, C, C++, Python,Perl, Tcl, Rexx) and from the command line/shell prompt. |
|
| |
robotframework | Example | Example | |
Xperior
Xperior is an open source framework developed on Perl by Xyratex for executing lustre tests from current shell-based testing framework. |
|
|