Extending UML testing profile towards non-functional test modeling

The research community has broadly recognized the importance of the validation of non-functional properties including performance and dependability requirements. However, the results of a systematic survey we carried out evidenced the lack of a standard notation for designing non-functional test cases. For some time, the greatest attention of Model-Based Testing (MBT) research has focused on functional aspects. The only exception is represented by the UML Testing Profile (UML-TP) that is a lightweight extension of UML to support the design of testing artifacts, but it only provides limited support for non-functional testing. In this paper we provide a first attempt to extend UML-TP for improving the design of non-functional tests. The proposed extension deals with some important concepts of non-functional testing such as the workload and the global verdicts. As a proof of concept we show how the extended UML-TP can be used for modeling non-functional test cases of an application example.

[1]  Wasif Afzal,et al.  A systematic review of search-based testing for non-functional system properties , 2009, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[2]  Jerome A. Rolia,et al.  A Synthetic Workload Generation Technique for Stress Testing Session-Based Systems , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[3]  Flávio Moreira de Oliveira,et al.  Performance Testing from UML Models with Resource Descriptions , 2007 .

[4]  E. Harder,et al.  Apache , 1965 .

[5]  Rajesh Subramanyan,et al.  A survey on model-based testing approaches: a systematic review , 2007, WEASELTech '07.

[6]  Ramón Puigjaner,et al.  Performance Model Interchange Format (PMIF 2): A comprehensive approach to Queueing Network Model interoperability , 2010, Perform. Evaluation.

[7]  Fredrik Abbors,et al.  Model-based performance testing in the cloud using the mbpet tool , 2013, ICPE '13.

[8]  John C. Grundy,et al.  Experiences integrating and scaling a performance test bed generator with an open source CASE tool , 2004, Proceedings. 19th International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, 2004..

[9]  B. A. Pozin,et al.  Models in performance testing , 2011, Programming and Computer Software.

[10]  Paola Inverardi,et al.  Model-based performance prediction in software development: a survey , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[11]  Barbara Kitchenham,et al.  Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews , 2004 .

[12]  Martin Gogolla.  Unified Modeling Language , 2009, Encyclopedia of Database Systems.

[13]  Phil McMinn,et al.  Search‐based software test data generation: a survey , 2004, Softw. Test. Verification Reliab..

[14]  Avelino Francisco Zorzo,et al.  Generation of Scripts for Performance Testing Based on UML Models , 2011, International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering.

[15]  Phil McMinn,et al.  Search-based software test data generation: a survey: Research Articles , 2004 .

[16]  Ina Schieferdecker,et al.  Model-Driven Testing: Using the UML Testing Profile , 2007 .

[17]  Liming Zhu,et al.  MDABench: Customized benchmark generation using MDA , 2007, J. Syst. Softw..

[18]  Tony Field,et al.  Performance engineering with the UML profile for schedulability, performance and time: a case study , 2004, The IEEE Computer Society's 12th Annual International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunications Systems, 2004. (MASCOTS 2004). Proceedings..