nerdexam
iSQI

CTAL-TAE · Question #47

You have been recruited as a TAE by a large travel agency and are now responsible for a mature TAS that is dedicated to functional testing of the company's booking system, which covers flights…

The correct answer is B. a and c. reducing the need for fixed waits and mitigating test failures caused by slow SUT responses (item not visible through the UI, addressing verification challenges (item 5). These enhancements directly improve test stability and observability, aligning with items 4 and 5. Item 6…

Preparing the Test Automation Architecture (TAA)

Question

You have been recruited as a TAE by a large travel agency and are now responsible for a mature TAS that is dedicated to functional testing of the company's booking system, which covers flights, hotels and packaged holidays. This application contains a complex UI and a lot of functionality. It is undergoing constant maintenance and enhancement by an agile team that adds tests to the regression test suite at the end of every iteration. The TAS supports structured scripting and this has been implemented to a high standard, with a well-managed script library and minimal code duplication. The TAA will not support any more advanced scripting techniques. The test automation that has been achieved so far was well received at first but is now the target of increasing criticism. It is perceived as being old- fashioned, poorly documented and in particular: 1. the test script maintenance overhead is becoming excessive because the test analysts frequently want data values to be changed; 2. test analysts are complaining that a new test which is similar to an existing one (except for data values) requires a new high-level script, and that they must ask a technical test analyst to do this for them; 3. the nightly full regression run is taking a long time and there is a risk that, as more tests are added, it will soon take too long to run in the available window; 4. some tests break frequently because of a slow response from the SUT; 5. some transactions are difficult to verify because they rely on variables that cannot be seen through the UI of the SUT; 6. the UI of the TAF is difficult to learn. The SUT architect is planning a major new release and they have offered to include features that will enhance its testability. You already have plans to deal with items 1, 2 and 3 on the list, so now you are considering how you might mitigate items 4, 5 and 6. Which TWO improvements will BEST address items 4, 5 and 6?

Options

  • AAdding an event mechanism to the SUT allows the TAS to react precisely to state changes,
  • Ba and c.
  • CAdding an API to make internal variables observable helps the TAS verify conditions that are
  • Dd and e.
  • EImplement hard-coded waits in scripts that have been affected by slow SUT response.

How the community answered

(45 responses)
  • A
    2% (1)
  • B
    51% (23)
  • C
    16% (7)
  • D
    24% (11)
  • E
    7% (3)

Explanation

reducing the need for fixed waits and mitigating test failures caused by slow SUT responses (item not visible through the UI, addressing verification challenges (item 5). These enhancements directly improve test stability and observability, aligning with items 4 and 5. Item 6 (difficult TAF UI) is a usability issue but less critical compared to stability and verification problems, and can be tackled separately.

Topics

#SUT event mechanism#TAA design#API observability#synchronization

Community Discussion

No community discussion yet for this question.

Full CTAL-TAE Practice