From: Leyne, S. <sl...@at...> - 2001-05-14 04:25:31
|
All, First, please allow me to apologize for not reading the postings sent over the last couple of days prior to sending my "plan for discussion" posting. I wasn't used to much activity in this list and didn't even think to check. While I am impressed with the discussions that have taken place, I think we need to establish the goals which need to be address by the testing processes. I see the goals as: 1) Users running the testing programs should be insulated from the actual implementation/coding of the programs. They should be able to download a ZIP/TAR with contains an executable, run it, review the results and perhaps create new scripts. 2) The execution of the testing program should involve a minimal installation footprint; the db client is expected, installing a C++ compiler should not be. 3) All of the testing programs (including any script editors) should portable, to run on any platform which the engine runs on. 4) Any choice of development tools (Delphi, C++, Python, Java or MS C# <big grin>) should carefully consider the overall expertise of the project members. Other goals? Next, in order to decide how to proceed, we need to understand what the scope of the TCS suite functionality. I, personally, don't understand why the current suite required such a elaborate shell/scripting environment and how that fit's in to the script which are executed. Perhaps someone could write up a explanation for all the member of the list -- so that we all understand who the piece are currently constructed. Any volunteers? Finally, I would suggest that before we go writing any code that we need to explore the options available to us. The options which have been mentioned so far include: - modifying the current TCS suite - PostgreSQL testing suite - NIST suite - XP test framework - Open Source Database Benchmark (http://freshmeat.net/projects/osdb/) - CppUnit Any other suggestions? Sean |
From: David J. <dav...@ea...> - 2001-05-14 05:20:49
|
Hi, Well, yes, I already started talking about it. I have nearly completed a java scripting/testing solution based on xml script/test files. It can include the results of db access in the xml file, and compare the current results with a stored reference. Being written in java, it will be easy to extend to test parallel db access. Obviously it is best adapted to testing via jdbc drivers, but I think it might be worthwile investigating how hard it would be to write adapters to use odbc drivers, IBO, and possibly generating dynamic and static sql c or c++ programs. I think having a single cross platform execution engine would be rather desirable. I don't know how to do this except in java. I don't think reliance on isql is appropriate. Translating the TCS tests to any other format is going to be a large amount of work. Its easy enough to dump say each test into an xml file, but extracting the sql and expected results into a more reasonable format will be time consuming. The NIST tests look only slightly easier to move to a different system than TCS. Would a provisional dtd for what I am working on and sample document be helpful? Both are subject to change by me before I show the code, but should give an idea of what I'm after. thanks David Jencks On 2001.05.14 00:25:27 -0400 "Leyne, Sean" wrote: > All, > > First, please allow me to apologize for not reading the postings sent > over the last couple of days prior to sending my "plan for discussion" > posting. I wasn't used to much activity in this list and didn't even > think to check. > > While I am impressed with the discussions that have taken place, I think > we need to establish the goals which need to be address by the testing > processes. > > I see the goals as: > > 1) Users running the testing programs should be insulated from the > actual implementation/coding of the programs. They should be able to > download a ZIP/TAR with contains an executable, run it, review the > results and perhaps create new scripts. > > 2) The execution of the testing program should involve a minimal > installation footprint; the db client is expected, installing a C++ > compiler should not be. > > 3) All of the testing programs (including any script editors) > should portable, to run on any platform which the engine runs on. > > 4) Any choice of development tools (Delphi, C++, Python, Java or > MS > C# <big grin>) should carefully consider the overall expertise of the > project members. > > Other goals? > > > Next, in order to decide how to proceed, we need to understand what the > scope of the TCS suite functionality. I, personally, don't understand > why the current suite required such a elaborate shell/scripting > environment and how that fit's in to the script which are executed. > Perhaps someone could write up a explanation for all the member of the > list -- so that we all understand who the piece are currently > constructed. Any volunteers? > > > Finally, I would suggest that before we go writing any code that we need > to explore the options available to us. The options which have been > mentioned so far include: > > - modifying the current TCS suite > - PostgreSQL testing suite > - NIST suite > - XP test framework > - Open Source Database Benchmark (http://freshmeat.net/projects/osdb/) > - CppUnit > > Any other suggestions? > > > Sean > > _______________________________________________ > Firebird-test mailing list > Fir...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-test > |
From: Jason C. (JAC2) <ja...@ja...> - 2001-05-14 12:02:49
|
""Leyne, Sean"" <sl...@at...> wrote in message news:D3AC71AF0C0BD411877E0000E20DEAD0180428@MDA_NT... > All, > > First, please allow me to apologize for not reading the postings sent > over the last couple of days prior to sending my "plan for discussion" > posting. I wasn't used to much activity in this list and didn't even > think to check. > > While I am impressed with the discussions that have taken place, I think > we need to establish the goals which need to be address by the testing > processes. > > I see the goals as: > > 1) Users running the testing programs should be insulated from the > actual implementation/coding of the programs. They should be able to > download a ZIP/TAR with contains an executable, run it, review the > results and perhaps create new scripts. > Fully Agree. They should possibly have release notes / change log just for interest after the tests. > 2) The execution of the testing program should involve a minimal > installation footprint; the db client is expected, installing a C++ > compiler should not be. I don't mind if we have to install a C++ compiler as long as there are idiot proof instructions. > 3) All of the testing programs (including any script editors) > should portable, to run on any platform which the engine runs on. This may hamper development, I could work on some bits in Delphi for Win32, but that would under the "must be under all OS'" be a no-no. > 4) Any choice of development tools (Delphi, C++, Python, Java or MS > C# <big grin>) should carefully consider the overall expertise of the > project members. 3 damages 4. Suddenly we've lost Delphi + MS anything. JAC. |
From: Ann W. H. <aha...@ib...> - 2001-05-14 14:39:20
|
At 12:25 AM 5/14/2001 -0400, Leyne, Sean wrote: >Any other suggestions? MySQL has some tests that they use to prove that no one is more SQL than mySQL. We should probably have a look at them. Regards, Ann |
From: Frank Schlottmann-G. <sch...@t-...> - 2001-05-14 17:38:18
|
Ann W. Harrison wrote: > At 12:25 AM 5/14/2001 -0400, Leyne, Sean wrote: > > > >Any other suggestions? > > MySQL has some tests that they use to prove that no one > is more SQL than mySQL. We should probably have a look at > them. I remember that I tried it. It's no fun. Segfaulting all the way. This is a job for someone with a deeper knowledge of c and SQL than me. (or more time to get there) BTW they don't supply a default interbase testbed (Honi soit qui mal y pense) :-) Frank -- "Fascinating creatures, phoenixes. They can carry immensely heavy loads, their tears have healing powers and they make highly faithful pets." - J.K. Rowling http://firebird.sourceforge.net |