How Google Tests Software? (Perfect answer)

What do Google software engineers in test do?

  • As a Test Engineer, you navigate Google’s massive codebase, identify weak spots and constantly design better and creative ways to break software and identify potential problems. You’ll have a huge impact on the quality of Google’s growing suite of products and services.

Contents

How does Google do software testing?

To that end, Google employs a four-stage testing process for changes to the search engine, consisting of: Testing by dedicated, internal testers (Google employees) Further testing on a crowdtesting platform. “Dogfooding,” which involves having Google employees use the product in their daily work.

How software are tested?

Testers use test plans, test cases, or test scenarios to test software to ensure the completeness of testing. Manual testing also includes exploratory testing, as testers explore the software to identify errors in it.

Does Google do manual testing?

Unlike roles with similar names at the other companies, Test Engineers at Google aren’t manual testers — you write scripts to automate testing and create tools so developers can test their own code.

Which software testing method is best?

Exploratory testing lets the tester check the software based on their instinct. This testing method is great for finding hidden risks or errors that ordinary scripted testing might miss. Scripted tests are important to ensure that the software is ready.

How many tests does Google run?

Flaky Tests at Google Google has around 4.2 million tests that run on our continuous integration system.

Does Amazon have QA testers?

Quality Assurance Engineers at Amazon test cutting edge applications and products at the user level and code level, both manually and using automated tools.

How do I start testing?

When getting started with software testing, consider these five fundamental concepts.

  1. Test Strategy. Your goal is to be as effective as possible.
  2. Testing Plan. A testing plan is made for your organizational purposes.
  3. Test Cases. Test cases are prepared as you are writing the program itself.
  4. Test Data.
  5. Test Environment.

Why do we test software?

Software testing is the process of evaluating and verifying that a software product or application does what it is supposed to do. The benefits of testing include preventing bugs, reducing development costs and improving performance.

Which MCQ test is first?

Testing which performed first is – Static testing is performed first.

Does Google test software?

Software testing strategy at Google There are no dedicated testing departments, either. Instead, software testing falls under the jurisdiction of the branch known as Engineering Productivity (Eng Prod). That doesn’t mean, however, that there are no testers.

Does Facebook have software testers?

Facebook doesn’t have testers and doesn’t need to produce particularly high-quality software. Priestley says it’s “mostly true” that Facebook does not have a separate group of testers or QA people, and that the social networking giant mainly relies on automated testing.

How is testing done at Facebook?

For testing how content is displayed to the end user, Facebook’s engineers use Watir, both manually (a human going in and clicking buttons) and semi-automatically (a machine simulating a user that clicks all the buttons much faster).

How many software testing methods are there?

8 Software Testing Methods Software testing belongs to two broad categories: static and dynamic analysis. Let’s explore further.

What is alpha and beta testing?

Alpha Testing is a type of software testing performed to identify bugs before releasing the product to real users or to the public. Beta Testing is performed by real users of the software application in a real environment. Beta testing is one of the type of User Acceptance Testing.

What are testing techniques?

Software testing techniques are the ways employed to test the application under test against the functional or non-functional requirements gathered from business. Each testing technique helps to find a specific type of defect.

How Google Tests Software: Whittaker, James, Arbon, Jason, Carollo, Jeff: 8601400402337: Amazon.com: Books

Finalist for the 2012 Jolt Award! Software Testing in the Twenty-First Century Is it necessary for you to get it correctly as well? Then, take a lesson from Google. Famous testing specialist James Whittaker, who was until recently a Google testing leader, and two top Google experts disclose how Google tests software, revealing brand-new best practices that you can employ even if your company isn’t quite the same size as Google. for the time being, anyhow. Techniques for Breakthrough Results That You Can Actually Use Learn how to use 100 percent practical, astonishingly scalable strategies for measuring risk and preparing testing.

exploratory, black box, white box, and acceptability testing are all being implemented.

difficulties with tracking.

“DocsMocks,” interfaces, classes, modules, libraries, binaries, services, and infrastructure are all being tested.

making extensive use of test hooks, presubmit scripts, queues, continuous builds, and other techniques With these strategies, you can change testing from a bottleneck to an accelerator – and so increase the overall productivity of your business!

How Google Tests Software

Finalist for the 2012 Jolt Award! Software Testing in the Twenty-First Century Is it necessary for you to get it correctly as well? Then, take a lesson from Google. Famous testing specialist James Whittaker, who was until recently a Google testing leader, and two top Google experts disclose how Google tests software, revealing brand-new best practices that you can employ even if your company isn’t quite the same size as Google. for the time being, anyhow. Techniques for Breakthrough Results That You Can Actually Use Learn how to use 100 percent practical, astonishingly scalable strategies for measuring risk and preparing testing.

  1. exploratory, black box, white box, and acceptability testing are all being implemented.
  2. difficulties with tracking.
  3. “DocsMocks,” interfaces, classes, modules, libraries, binaries, services, and infrastructure are all being tested.
  4. making extensive use of test hooks, presubmit scripts, queues, continuous builds, and other techniques With these strategies, you can change testing from a bottleneck to an accelerator – and so increase the overall productivity of your business!

What You Can Learn from How Google Tests Software

How do you maintain a high level of quality when your firm has over 2 billion lines of code and over 25,000 engineers? The growth of Google necessitated the development of an enterprise-wide quality assurance strategy that could keep up with the demands of an organization that had a large number of moving pieces to keep track of – from collaborative teams all over the world to a shifting landscape of new features and products – while allowing their team to continue to innovate across the board.

Do you want to learn some lessons from Google’s quality assurance (QA) at scale? As part of our investigation into how other expanding teams might benefit from the way Google tackles software testing, we dug through the archives of the Google Testing Blog.

Think Small and Fast

The fact that Google is a large corporation does not imply that everything they do is as large; for example, when it comes to testing, Google prefers modest, regular releases together with short, simple tests. With this incremental approach, they can keep a tighter grip on changes to the user experience over time and more quickly identify and resolve concerns. As a result, they place a high value on unit and integration testing while using end-to-end testing only in limited circumstances. In general, Googlers are encouraged to seek for ways to accelerate testing cycles and reduce test failures in order to guarantee that the team’s quality assurance process is as efficient as feasible.

Software Testing is a Focus, Not a Team

As Google’s staff grew, software developers who built and tested their own products were unable to keep up. Instead of deploying a more standard testing team, Google began developing specialized engineering jobs to assist in increasing the organization’s overall QA bandwidth. Software Engineers who write test code; Software Engineers in Test who focus on testability and refactor code to make it more testable; Test Engineers who organize overall test strategies and write automation scripts are all examples of engineering roles within the “testing” focus that are used to solve different quality problems.

“At Google, product teams, not testers, are in charge of quality assurance.

The tester’s role is to ensure that the organization has the automated infrastructure and enabling processes in place to support this self-reliance and independence.

Communicate Effectively

Prioritizing communication channels is an important part of making this developer-owned testing strategy operate at a large scale. Engineering staff members who are responsible for testing are not segregated into separate portions of Google’s headquarters, but are instead integrated with the rest of the engineering team. Google also places a strong emphasis on communicating product quality internally in order to enhance ownership and motivate the team to strive for excellence on a daily basis.

“The response we received from our fellow engineers was very encouraging.

According to Marko Ivankovi in a blog post on measuring coverage at Google, “this early surfacing of coverage had a statistically significant impact: our preliminary analysis shows that it raised coverage by 10% (averaged across all commits).”

“Testing on the Toilet”: Foster a Culture of Quality Ownership

Perhaps the most outlandish quality assurance practice at Google is the long-standing habit of hanging posters on the walls of toilet stalls at the company’s headquarters, with a “quiz that varies every few weeks and asks technical questions about checking computer code for defects.” This activity, coined “Testing on the Toilet,” assists the team in keeping software testing best practices at the forefront of their minds while they go about their daily activities.

While this oddity isn’t technically a foundation of Google’s quality assurance strategy, it does convey some key information about the way the company views quality responsibility and best practices in general.

Finding the Software Testing Strategy to Help You Scale

Everyone, whether they are major corporations or tiny startups, must discover a quality method that is compatible with the values and workflow of their respective team members. The ability to identify effective role models for everything from how your team communicates about quality to the tools and platforms they use to get the job done can assist you in rethinking your approach to quality assurance and seeing results sooner. Would you like to learn more about quality assurance innovators? Learn how rapidly expanding teams, like as SolarWinds, are utilizing Rainforest at scale.

How Google Tests Software

Google was started in September 1998 by Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and in the early phases of its development, it followed the same techniques as other software companies, such as traditional software testing. However, as the company grew at a quick pace, they were able to draw certain lessons from old methods and develop innovative new processes for software testing. Consider the following: Given that Google is one of the most successful software companies in the world, let’s examine the lessons they’ve learned and the cutting-edge techniques they employ for software testing, and how we might be able to apply those processes and techniques to improve our own software testing abilities.

  1. A few takeaways from the early days of Google’s quality assurance
  2. Testing at Google
  3. Engineering Roles
  4. Crawl-Walk-Run Approach
  5. Testing on the Toilet (TotT) Concept
  6. And Fixing the Hour Glass for the Test
  7. Google’s tests are erratic
  8. There are several catchy statements in the book “How Google Tests Software,” as well as a conclusion and recommendations.
  • The team depended significantly on manual procedures throughout the early phases of the project, and only a limited number of software engineers were dedicated to the process of developing, testing, and deploying software. As Google expanded, extensive manual testing cycles caused feature deployments to be delayed. When defects were discovered later in the development cycle, it took an increasing amount of time to fix them. Because of this, they felt that moving testing upstream through automation would aid in addressing these issues and increasing velocity.

During testing, Google examines three major areas of importance, which I refer to as the ” Three Gears ” of testing. There are three key components to achieving success. Think in terms of small and rapid increments.

  • The use of “small, frequent releases” and “short, simple tests” is encouraged. It is preferable to release new updates / features in small batches rather than in major releases, and to do so as soon as they give some advantage to the user, get feedback, and repeat as soon as feasible
  • Unit and integration testing should be prioritized, and end-to-end testing should be used only when absolutely necessary. Search Engine Optimizers (SEOs) are urged to seek for ways to shorten testing cycles and reduce test failures.

Software testing is a goal, not a group of people.

  • Initially, Software Engineers tested their own code, but as the team grew, they were able to identify the issues that were preventing them from doing so. Instead of building a standard testing team, they began developing specialized Engineering positions with varied Testing Focuses. (This will be described in further detail in the section under ” Engineering Roles “.)

Communicate Clearly and Effectively

  • Moreover, engineers who specialize in testing are not isolated in their own areas of Google’s offices, but are integrated with the rest of the engineering team
  • Google places a strong emphasis on communicating product quality internally, in order to increase ownership and encourage the team to focus on quality on a daily basis. Using the “Testing on the Toilet” Method to build a Culture of Quality Ownership, they internally share statistics regarding code coverage, which aids in increasing adoption of best practices.

In most software companies, test engineers tend to concentrate on the low-hanging fruit, which means they are only concerned with manual and automated user interface testing. Google combines development and testing efforts in order to prevent quality issues from occurring rather than attempting to solve them afterwards, when it is more expensive and time-consuming to do so. “You create it, you break it,” as the phrase goes at Google. They are divided into three engineering jobs or focus groups:1.Software Engineers (SWEs), who write code, create architecture and documentation, and do unit testing in their code;2.System Engineers (SEs), who design and develop systems; and 3.Network Engineers (NEs).

  1. Roles in the Engineering Field One of the most important reasons that Google obtains outstanding outcomes with fewer testers than many other organizations is that they rarely release a significant group of features at the same time as other companies.
  2. Thus, they will have the opportunity to conduct early testing and experiments on their products, as well as receive feedback from actual people.
  3. That tag served as a reminder to consumers that the product was still in the early stages of development.
  4. Without a doubt, quality is an ongoing work in progress!
  5. to make it through Every day, all of the Automation Suits are running in each of these channels.
  6. There are 5 channels.
  7. Eat your own dogfood is intended to express the concept that if you create a product to sell to someone else, you should be prepared to utilize that product yourself in order to determine whether it is worthwhile to sell to someone else.
  8. 1.Small Written Tests: Written tests are used by SWEs and SETs to assess a single module.

Writing medium-level tests, which are used by SETs and concentrate on the integration of two or more elements. 3.Large tests: written and used by TEs, with a focus on real-world scenarios for end users. Tests on the toilet are conducted.

  • When developing test code or troubleshooting a code failure, it might be difficult to recall what we’ve learned or to come up with better answers to the problems we encounter. If we chance to see similar sorts of postings, such as advice that are too good to resist, it will readily enter our minds and motivate us rather than forcing us to learn the solutions by heart or searching for them on the internet. Google discovered this hidden notion in 2006 while working with a small group of volunteers who were very passionate about software testing
  • It was at this location that the concept was discovered. They began by writing fliers explaining anything from dependency injection to code coverage, which they then plastered in the restrooms of Google offices all around the globe with each episode, a total of nearly 500 stalls globally. Spreading ideas, sharing critical tactics and approaches, generating conversation, and driving new internal tool adoption to educate yourself and the rest of your organization are all possible using this method. This is essentially a sharing of best practices across all levels of testing throughout the organization in order to encourage the Software Engineers and Test Engineers.
You might be interested:  Why Software Is Eating The World? (Solved)

With the goal of spreading the secret weapon concept of “Testing on the Toilet” to the rest of the world, Google has been posting episodes of their podcast on the site linked below on a regular basis, as well as giving PDFs. ‘’ For example, when Google developed, the form of the Google test distribution frequently became unattractive, either being top heavy or shaped like an hourglass.

  • End-to-end testing took longer with the Ice-cream Cone Approach, therefore they switched to the Hour Glass Approach after a short period of experimentation. Later, release cycles were growing even shorter, continuous integration/delivery (CI/CD) and micro services were becoming popular, and the Hour Glass Approachof testing did not support any of these. Due to the fact that it takes less time to run thousands of Unit and Integration Tests compared to managing large UI Tests, and that issues may be discovered early rather than waiting till the UI stage, Google Tests changed to the Pyramid Approach.

The Development of the Test Pyramid At a glance, the accompanying figure provides a clear idea of the advantages of the Test Pyramid Approachahead of the Traditional (Ice-cream Cone) Approach. What is a Flaky Test and how does it work? A flaky test is a test that passes and fails on a regular basis without requiring any code modifications. According to Google’s first findings, about 16 percent of their tests had some degree of flakiness connected with them. In Automated Testing, this is one of the most difficult difficulties to overcome, and the purpose of a good test suite is to make this signal as clear and directed as possible.

One of the most difficult problems they faced was trying to discern whether a new failure was an anomalous outcome or a true failure.

  • An option to automatically re-run tests when they fail
  • Only report a failure if it fails three times in a row
  • A tool that continuously checks the flakiness of tests, and if the flakiness becomes excessive, it instantly quarantines the test for further investigation. In order to prevent flakiness, quarantining removes the test off the critical route and files a bug report with the developers. The use of another instrument to detect changes in the flakiness level of tests and attempt to determine the change that caused the degree of flakiness to change in the tests is also recommended.

There is a new team at Google that is focused to providing accurate and fast information on test flakiness as well as analyzing the data from flaky test executions.

  • Google has developed their own strategy for moving quickly. A highly Agile methodology is used, and it does not get stifled by someone else’s interpretation of what it means to be Agile. Both developers and testers consider the quality of the product in accordance with their engineering role (SWE, SWETTE)Focus
  • They concentrate on breaking down features into small chunks first, coding little test
  • They perform more tests on lower stages than higher stages by following theTest PyramidApproach
  • They focus on breaking down features into small chunks first, coding little test
  • They focus on breaking down features into small chunks first, coding little test They do not have human testers who are dedicated to this task. In each stage of FunctionalNone Functional Testing, test automation is a necessity. A good test engineer is someone who is technically inclined and who is concerned about the product from a user interface (UI) standpoint as well as from a system and end-to-end perspective.
  • I believe that we can apply Google’s “Testing on the Toilet” approach to other software businesses as well, as I have suggested. Using Method 1, we can either copy and paste the PDF versions of Google’s TOT episodes or make our own posters that are more relevant to the firm and display them in areas where both developers and testers will be unable to ignore them. Method 2: We may implement a system known as the “Tip of the Day” Emailing System from the Quality Engineering Department
  • I propose that we begin testing using the new Test Pyramid Method. Automate tests at all stages of the testing process. (We can also bring this Pyramid to the attention of developers.) – Potential projects should include the use of a Code Coverage Tool following the unit test with Quality Gates
  • Auto Retry should be enabled for E2E UI Test Automation Suits in order to decrease test flakiness. For example, npm — g protractor-retry.

It is important for all of us as Test Engineers to strive to be Full Stack Quality Engineers, who will consider the many different aspects of product quality across all of the application’s layers, using various testing methods such as functionality testing, non-functionality testing (usability testing, performance testing, security testing, etc.), as well as being familiar with test automation strategies and technologies.

Google Testing Blogs: /Articles on How Google Tests Software: /How Google Tests Software:

How Google Tests Software

Finalist for the 2012 Jolt Award! Software Testing in the Twenty-First Century Is it necessary for you to get it correctly as well? Then, take a lesson from Google. Famous testing specialist James Whittaker, who was until recently a Google testing leader, and two top Google experts disclose how Google tests software, revealing brand-new best practices that you can employ even if your company isn’t quite the same size as Google. for the time being, anyhow. Techniques for Breakthrough Results That You Can Actually Use Learn how to use 100 percent practical, astonishingly scalable strategies for measuring risk and preparing testing.

exploratory, black box, white box, and acceptability testing are all being implemented.

difficulties with tracking.

“DocsMocks,” interfaces, classes, modules, libraries, binaries, services, and infrastructure are all being tested.

code review and refactoring are underway. making extensive use of test hooks, presubmit scripts, queues, continuous builds, and other techniques With these strategies, you can change testing from a bottleneck to an accelerator – and so increase the overall productivity of your business!

How Google Tests Software by James A. Whittaker, Jason Arbon, Jeff Carollo – Books on Google Play

Test and enhance the security of all of your Web-based products as thoroughly as possible! Hackers will launch indiscriminate attacks on your Web sites, apps, and services, and it is as certain as death and taxes. Identifying these assaults before the black hats do is essential if you’re at risk of being targeted by them. How to Break Web Program is a detailed, hands-on guide on security-testing any Web-based software that is currently available. Throughout this book, two well-known specialists cover every type of Web software exploit, including attacks on clients and servers as well as attacks on state, user input, and more.

The authors explain where to search for possible dangers and attack routes, how to thoroughly test for each of them, and how to mitigate any issues that are discovered along the way.

Whether you’re a software developer, tester, quality assurance professional, or IT manager, this book will assist you in protecting your program in a methodical manner.

Interview and Book Review: How Google Tests Software

James Whittaker, Jason Arbon, and Jeff Carollois wrote ” How Google Tests Software,” a book that goes into great depth into exactly what is indicated on the cover. An insightful and intriguing peek behind the scenes at how a huge technical company such as Google deals with the complexity of software testing is provided by this article. The book begins with an introduction of the approach Google uses to test software, followed by chapters devoted to the two test engineering jobs at Google, which are the Software Engineer in Test (SET) and Test Engineer (TE) responsibilities, and ultimately the duty for Test Engineering Manager.

In his prologue, Alberto Savoia provides an excellent synopsis of the book: The Internet has had a significant impact on the way that most software is created, built, and distributed in recent years.

How GoogleTests Software provides you a highly contemporary and useful insider’s look into how one of the world’s most successful and fastest growing Internetcompanies deals with the specific issues of software testing in the twenty-first century, and how you may apply what you’ve learned.

Related Sponsored Content

The book’s introductory sections provide some interesting background on why Google felt it needed to change the status quo of testing and how they went about doing so. As Patrick Copeland explains in his foreword, the book should be required reading for anyone working in the testing field or managing people who do so: If I wanted to make a difference in testing at Google, I first had to adjust my perception of what it meant to be a tester. The only way for a team to build high-quality software is for everyone in the team to share responsibility for it.

Testing features should be comparable to any features that a real client could encounter.

Several engineers expressed concern about the prospect of having to assume a larger part in testing, stating that “that’s what testing is for.” There was a similar attitude toward testing among testers since many had become used to their responsibilities and the status quo had gained such momentum that change had become a difficult challenge to solve.

  1. As a result of this, they must cease seeing development and testing as different disciplines and instead approach them as one.
  2. Create a little amount of code and put it through its paces.
  3. Test is not a distinct discipline; rather, it is an integral element of the development process in and of itself.
  4. By blending development and testing together until they are no longer identifiable from one another, we may attain high quality.
  5. This chapter contains a wealth of technical and testing information, including some fascinating background information on Google’s test execution and continuous integration systems, as well as their definitions of test size and scope.
  6. The fact that they received a lot of attention from competent testers who joined up to be Test Certified Mentors was one of the perks in particular.

It takes up a significant portion of the book and delves into a number of the practices of this role and how they are carried out, including test planning and a description of ACC (AttributeComponentCapability) Analysis and Google Test Analytics, as well as James Whittaker’s 10-Minute Test Plan, among other things.

  1. Only a few schools offer a standardized curriculum for teaching software testing.
  2. Individuals with TE characteristics are quite rare.
  3. It’s no surprise that Google, or any other corporation for that matter, has difficulty hiring them.
  4. When the emphasis is not on the product, the product suffers as a result.
  5. Every function an engineer does is in service to the overall product’s development.
  6. When workers say, “I work on Chrome,” rather than “I am a tester,” they are indicating that their organization is in good condition.
  7. It was particularly distressing to find that all three writers have now departed Google as a result of their involvement with this book.

While there are several allusions to the Software Engineer (SWE) job in this book, the emphasis is mostly on testing from the perspectives of the Software Test Engineer (STE) and the Test Engineer (TE).

The book’s writers recently spoke with InfoQ about their work.

A: A group of people in the Google Engineering Productivity team discussed the possibility of writing a book.

However, because talking about a book is easier than writing one, it was continually put off.

It was amazing to see that as soon as it became evident that we were going to finish it, a large number of Googlers expressed an interest in participating, and we found ourselves scurrying to get everyone on board with it.

Google has long been at the forefront of cloud software testing.

InfoQ: The book describes Google’s emphasis on engineering productivity, as well as the Software Engineer in Test role, which collaborates with individual projectteams to improve testability and toolsets for software development.

Two things were critical: the first was unquestionably the concentration of the test function under its own management chain, as you point out, and the second was the centralization of the test role under its own management chain.

The second point to mention was the emphasis placed on the technical function of testers.

It gained the respect of developers and enabled them to become more involved in the process.

Once Google “grown up” as a developer culture that prioritized quality over quantity, the necessity for Engineering Productivity diminished, resulting in a culture where it was no longer required.

What is the motivating factor for teams to create their own tools?

The main reason for this is that the tools required for automated testing do not yet available on the market.

I think opensource (which Google has always supported) is the way to go with testtools.

Being a member of the open source community, particularly those behind Selenium and Web Driver, as well as what uTest is doing with Test Engineering tools, is the most effective method to keep up with the latest developments.

What is Google’s perspective on its methodology in relation to the larger Agile community?

You might be interested:  What Is Antivirus Software? (Perfect answer)

We don’t utilize the scrum language, and we don’t bother with scrum masters and other such nonsense.

A highly Agile method is used, and it does not become entangled with someone else’s interpretation of what it means to be Agile.

InfoQ: A combination of gamification with a testing maturity model, according to the book’s description, is the Test Certified Program.

In comparison with passing judgment on their work, providing guidance to developers is just somewhat less dangerous.

We feel that the key to making this strategy work is to first embrace the appropriate model, which we believe to be the one described in the book.

Second, make certain that your very best testers are the ones who are advocating and implementing it.

InfoQ: Even though some would argue that it is still a highly technical position, the Test Engineer function is perhaps the most similar to the traditionalTest Analyst post that many organizations still use today.

The problem here is one of scale.

We had more success attracting testers who were willing to learn to code than we did getting developers who were eager to learn to test.

What does this mean?

The reality for many teams is that they must achieve objectivity, but this is not always the case.

Because your job can be mechanized or crowdsourced into oblivion does not imply you have the fortitude to follow through on it.

Let me state unequivocally that anyone engaged in large-scale functional testing of cloud / online applications and mobile platforms is squandering their time and slowing down their team’s productivity.

As a result, how do you reply to organizations who suggest that you require more of these positions to clearly distinguish between developers and quality assurance?

Google has demonstrated that when the border between developing code and making that code better is blurred, the consequence is code that is generated considerably more quickly and with a lower number of latent faults.

It irritates me when people have a strong emotional attachment to their character.

“I work as a developer” is also true.

When everyone is focused on doing whatever it takes to develop the finest product possible, that is when the magic happens.

How do you believe we got to be known as Google?

The fact that we were Google didn’t help us become better testers.

That is still a distinct edge for Google.

InfoQ: What is the greatest advise you could provide to existing test analysts or fresh grads who are pursuing a career in testing in order to keep up with the evolving skills required for the job?

Get a computer science degree and become proficient in the field.

Learn the difficult material and become proficient in it.

Do you object to being treated in this manner?

InfoQ: Do you have any key recommendations for organizations that, after reading this book, “want to test like Google”?

When your company is small, set up a central test organization.

Copy everything Google has done and make itpart of your software engineering DNA.

Never stop thinking about how you can automate the mundane.

InfoQ: Who is your key audience for this book and what is the keylearning you hope they will take away from reading it?

We hopepeople understand that it can’t be done perfectly, but it can be done alot better.

This Q A is based on the book, ‘How Google Tests Software’, authored by James Whittaker, Jason Arbon and Jeff Carollo, published by Pearson/Addison-Wesley Professional, March 2012, ISBN 0321803027, copyright 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. For more info please visit thepublisher site.

About The Authors

It should be required reading for anyone working in the testing field or managing people who do, as explained in the book’s foreword by Patrick Copeland: “The introductory sections of the book provide some interesting background on why Google felt they needed to change the status quo of testing and how they went about doing it.” To change testing at Google, I first had to change people’s perceptions of what it means to be a tester.

It is only when everyone on a team is accountable for quality that they can create high-quality code.

Testing features should be comparable to any feature that a real client may encounter.

As a result, engineers expressed concern about being expected to take on a greater role in testing by stating that “that’s exactly what testing is for.” There was a similar attitude toward testing among testers because many had grown accustomed to their roles and the status quo had gained such momentum that changing it was becoming a difficult problem to solve.

  • It is impossible to separate testing from development.
  • Once you’ve finished coding, you should test it again.
  • In the world of quality assurance, test is not synonymous with quality.
  • The practices of the SET role, as well as the environments and frameworks that they create and maintain, are discussed in detail in the chapter on the SET position.
  • The history of the Google Test Certifiedprogram, which was instrumental in establishing a developer-testing culture, is also worth reading.
  • A product team that participated in this program received far more testers than they would have received otherwise in a culture where testing resources were scarce.
  • It also covers topics such as risk, crowd sourcing, test cases, and bug reports, as well as some of the different experiments and tools that they have used to solve testing problems.

Any company will find it difficult to find good testers because the right combination of coding and testing skills is extremely hard to come by.

These individuals are technically savvy, concerned about the user’s experience, and knowledgeable about the product from a system and end-to-end standpoint.

Having completed a chapter detailing the Test Management positions and the relevance of these jobs in the process, the last chapter attempts to predict the future of testing at Google, with a special emphasis on products and the expansion of dogfooding or crowd sourcing.

After all, the ultimate goal of software development is to create a product, not to code a product, not to test a product, and certainly not to document a product.

Second-tier importance is assigned to the position of When workers say, “I work on Chrome,” rather than “I am a tester,” they are indicating that the company is in good condition.

This is the one critique I have about the book.

Overall, this is a book that should be read by anybody who is engaged in software development, especially because the testing issues that are highlighted throughout the book are similar to any organization that is testing online, cloud, or mobile-based apps.

In this article, there are several lessons for testers and test managers who are seeking for methods to improve their testing methodology.

InfoQ: What was the primary impetus for authoring this book and sharing the Google method with the rest of the world?

It was evident that demand existed because we already had a conference and a number of popular blogs.

In the end, the three of us decided to get serious about it and wrote the entire thing.

Part of that effort included the inclusion of a “Interviews with Googlers” section of the book, and a number of Googlers also served as official reviewers on behalf of the publisher.

By exporting this book, the author makes his or her leadership position official.

Which of the following things do you believe was a significant influence in Google improving its test practice?

The other was the centralization of the role under its own management chain.

For the second, testers were expected to concentrate on their technical roles.

It gained the respect of the development team and enabled them to become more involved in the project.

Engineering Productivity became obsolete as Google “grown up” to become a developer culture that prioritized quality above quantity, resulting in a culture that did away with the requirement.

What is the impetus for teams to create their own software tools and applications?

Because the technologies required for automated testing do not yet available on the market, this is the primary driving force behind this trend.

When it comes to testtools, I believe that opensource (which Google has always supported) is the way to go.

Being a member of the open source community, particularly those behind Selenium and Web Driver, as well as what uTest is doing with Test Engineering tools, is the most effective method to keep up with the latest technology.

Is there a difference between Google’s approach and that of the larger Agile community?

As a result, we don’t utilize or bother with scrum nomenclature, nor do we have scrum masters or anything of the kind.

A highly Agile method is used, and it does not become entangled in someone else’s interpretation of what it means to be Agile.

InfoQ: A combination of gamification with a testing maturity model, as described in the book, appears to be the Test Certified Program.

In comparison with passing judgment on their work, offering guidance to developers is just somewhat less dangerous.

We feel that the key to making this approach work is to first accept the appropriate model, which we consider to be the model described in the book.

First and foremost, make certain that your top testers are the ones who are in charge of marketing and implementing the program.

InfoQ: The Test Engineer function is perhaps the most similar to the traditionalTest Analyst role, which is still widely used by many organizations, though some would argue that it is still quite technical in its nature.

The issue is one of scale in this situation.

Developers ready to learn to test outperformed testers eager to learn to code when it came to hiring.

What does this entail for Google’s Test Engineers, and how realistic is this concept in terms of implementation?

Which of your friends or colleagues is a tester that is willing to work oneself out of a position?

I won’t give anything away about the solution to this issue because it is addressed in some length in the last chapter of the book.

InfoQ: Throughout the book, you advise readers to “avoid hiring an excessive number of testers,” and you state that the position of the Test Engineer is expected to diminish in the future.

I’m not sure why you’d want anything like that.

An excessive number of testers becomes a crutch for developers, which is detrimental to the product’s overall quality.

The mentality of “I am a tester” is harmful.

When individuals stop focusing on their function and start focusing on their product, that’s when the magic begins to happen.

InfoQ: Some readers of the book may discount many of the tactics you explain, implying that the only reason you were able to accomplish these results was “because you were Google.” I’m curious how you’d respond to anything like this.

This is accomplished by creating software at a rapid and massive scale.

Due to our ability as testers, Google chose us to be their company.

They can produce things in a short period of time due to the Internet’s large scale production capabilities.

Examine testing in the same way that you would build a product.

Certificates and industry training will only teach you the fundamentals of a certain trade or profession.

It is likely that test participants who choose the easy way out will continue to complain about being treated as second-class citizens until the cows come home.

Get first-rate abilities after that.

Do you have any specific recommendations for organizations who, after reading this book, “want to test like Google”?

Hiring someone with excellent technical abilities is essential.

Associating with the product rather than your function is important.

Everything you can should be crowdsourced.

Anyone and everyone who is involved in the development of software.

A chapter from the book has been made accessible to InfoQ readers courtesy of the publishers.

All rights reserved 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. For further information, please see the publisher’s website.

Summary: How Google Tests Software

It should be required reading for anyone working in the testing field or managing people who do, as explained in the book’s foreword by Patrick Copeland: “The introductory sections of the book provide some interesting background on why Google felt it needed to change the status quo of testing and how they went about doing it.” If I wanted to make a difference in testing at Google, I first had to redefine what it meant to be a tester.

The only way for a team to produce high-quality software is for everyone in the team to be accountable for it.

Testing features should be equivalent to any features that a real customer might encounter.

Engineers expressed concern about the prospect of having to play a larger role in testing, stating that “that is what testing is for.” The attitude was equally unsavory among testers, as many had grown comfortable in their roles and the status quo had gained such momentum that change was becoming a very difficult problem to solve.

  • As a result, they must stop treating development and testing as two separate disciplines in order to be successful.
  • Make a small amount of code and put it through its paces.
  • Test is not a separate practice; it is an integral part of the development process in and of itself.
  • Quality is achieved by blending development and testing together until they are indistinguishable from one another.
  • This chapter contains a wealth of technical and testing information, including some fascinating background information on Google’s test execution and continuous integration systems, as well as their test size definitions.
  • One of the advantages was that they received a lot of attention from good testers who signed up to be Test Certified Mentors.

The chapter on the TE role takes up a significant portion of the book and looks into a number of the practices of this role and how they are carried out, including test planning and a description of ACC (AttributeComponentCapability) Analysis and Google Test Analytics, as well as James Whittaker’s 10-Minute Test Plan.

  1. Only a few schools systematically teach software testing.
  2. TEs are extremely rare individuals.
  3. It’s a small wonder that Google, or any other company for that matter, has trouble finding qualified candidates.
  4. When the emphasis is not on the product, the product suffers as a result of this.
  5. All of the roles that an engineer plays are in service to the overall product.
  6. When people say, “I work on Chrome,” rather than, “I am a tester,” it is a sign of a healthy organization.
  7. It was also disappointing to learn that all three authors have since left Google as a result of their work on this book.

While there are a number of references to the Software Engineer (SWE) role in this book, the emphasis is primarily on testing from the perspectives of the STE and TE.

The authors recently spoke with InfoQ about their book.

A group of people in the Google Engineering Productivity team had discussed the possibility of writing a book.

However, discussing about a book is far simpler than actually writing one, so it was continually put off.

It was amazing to see that as soon as it became evident that we were going to finish it, a large number of Googlers expressed an interest in participating, and we found ourselves hurrying to get everyone engaged.

Google has always been at the forefront of cloudsoftware testing.

InfoQ: The book describes Google’s emphasis on engineering productivity, as well as the Software Engineer in Test role, which collaborates with individual projectteams to improve testability and toolsets.

Two things were critical: the first was unquestionably the concentration of the test function under its own management chain, as you correctly point out, and the second was the centralization of the test role under its own management chain.

You might be interested:  What Is A Software Architect? (Solved)

The second point to mention was the emphasis on the technical function of testers.

It gained the respect of the development team and enabled them to become more involved in the process.

When Google “grown up” as a developer culture that prioritized quality over quantity, the necessity for Engineering Productivity diminished, resulting in a culture where it was no longer required.

What is the motivation for teams creating their own tools?

The reason for this is simply that the tools required for automated testing do not yet available on the market.

When it comes to testtools, I believe that opensource (which Google has always supported) is the best option.

Being a member of the open source community, particularly those behind Selenium and Web Driver, as well as what uTest is doing with Test Engineering tools, is the most effective method to keep current.

What is Google’s perspective on its methodology in relation to the broader Agile community?

We don’t utilize the scrum nomenclature, and we don’t bother with scrum masters or anything like that.

A highly Agile method is used, and it does not become entangled with someone else’s definition of what it means to be Agile.

InfoQ: The Test Certified Program presented in the book appears to be a hybrid of gamification and a testing maturity paradigm, according to the author.

Giving guidance to developers is just somewhat less dangerous than passing judgment on their work in terms of its quality.

Making this strategy work requires first adopting the appropriate paradigm, which we feel is described in the book.

Second, make certain that your top testers are the ones who are advocating and implementing it.

InfoQ: The Test Engineer function is perhaps the most similar to the traditionalTest Analyst role that is still in use by many organizations, but some would argue that it is still quite technical.

The issue here is one of scale.

We had more success finding testers who were willing to learn to code than we did finding developers who were eager to learn to test.

What does this mean for Google’s Test Engineers, and how near is this notion to becoming a reality?

That do you know who is a tester who is willing to work themselves out of a job?

I won’t give anything away about the solution to this question because it is addressed in considerable length in the last chapter of the book.

InfoQ: Throughout the book, you advise readers not to “employ too many testers,” and you state that the function of the Test Engineer will continue to shrink in the future.

What would be the point of such a line?

Hiring an excessive number of testers serves as a crutch for developers, which is detrimental to the product.

“I am a tester” is a debilitating state of mind.

Magic arises when individuals stop focusing so much on their position and start focusing on their product.

The book’s audience may ignore many of the tactics you explain, implying that the only reason you were able to do these was “because you are Google.” What would you say in response to such a claim?

By creating software at a rapid pace and on a large scale.

We were hired by Google because we were excellent testers.

They can produce things in a short period of time due to the magnitude of the Internet.

Testing should be treated as if it were development.

Certificates and industrial training will only teach you the fundamentals of a certain field.

Participants who choose the easy way out will continue to complain about being treated as second-class citizens until the cows come home, and then some.

Then you need to learn first-rate skills.

Do you have any key advice for organizations who, after reading this book, “want to test like Google” When your company is tiny, you should establish a central test organization.

Everything Google has done should be emulated and incorporated into your software development DNA.

Never stop thinking about how you can automate the monotonous tasks that you perform every day.

Who is your primary target audience for this book, and what is the most important learning you hope they will get from reading it?

While we recognize that nothing can be done perfectly, we believe that it is possible to do it significantly better.

A version of this Q A is based on the book, ‘How Google Tests Software,’ written by James Whittaker, Jason Arbon, and Jeff Carollo, and published by Pearson/Addison-Wesley Professional in March 2012 under the ISBN 0321803027 with copyright protection from Pearson Education, Inc.

How Google Tests Software (Paperback)

$39.99 Usually ships within 1-5 business days

Description

Finalist for the 2012 Jolt Award Software Testing in the Twenty-First Century Is it necessary for you to get it correctly as well? Then, take a lesson from Google. With the help of two senior Google professionals and legendary testing expert James Whittaker, who was once the company’s testing chief, they disclose exactly how Google tests software, as well as brand-new best practices that you can implement even if your company is not nearly the scale of Google. yet Techniques for Breakthrough Results That You Can Actually Use Investigate strategies for risk analysis and planning testing that are 100 percent realistic as well as impressively scalable.

obtaining actionable feedback concerns that need to be tracked Choosing and designing tools are important tasks.

Code review and refactoring are important tasks.

About the Author

James Whittaker works as an engineering director at Google, where he is in charge of testing Chrome, Google Maps, and Google web-based applications. He used to work for Microsoft and was previously employed as a professor. James is one of the most well-known names in the field of testing all across the world. A Google test engineer, Jason Arbon has been in charge of testing Google Desktop, Chrome, and Chrome OS since its inception in 2011. In addition, he acted as the development team leader for a number of open-source test tools and personalized experimentation projects.

Jeff Carollo works as a software engineer in testing at Google, where he has been in charge of testing Google Voice, the Toolbar, Chrome, and Chrome OS, among other things.

In 2010, he decided to become a software developer and is now in charge of the development of Google+ APIs.

5 effective and powerful ways to test like tech giants

Observing how the “big boys” arrange their testing and quality assurance operations may be beneficial for teams and organizations wishing to get serious about (or further improve) the way they approach software testing and quality assurance activities. If corporations such as Google, Microsoft, and Amazon did not pay close attention to the quality of the goods that they released into the public, they would not be as successful as they are now, and this is a reasonable assumption to make.

However, a closer look at the history of these software behemoths demonstrates that there is no one recipe for success. Here’s how five of the most well-known technology businesses in the world manage their quality assurance and what you can learn from them.

Google: Searching for best practices

The firm that is in charge of the world’s most commonly used search engine has asked us to look at how they manage their testing efforts. What happens next is dependent on the team and the product. The team in charge of the Google search engine, for example, maintains a broad and rigorous testing infrastructure for the search engine itself. Because search is Google’s primary business, the team wants to ensure that the service continues to be of the greatest possible quality and that it does not become stale.

  1. Internal testing by Google workers who are committed to the task
  2. Testing using a crowdsourcing site
  3. “Dogfooding,” which entails having Google personnel use the product in their everyday job
  4. And other measures. During beta testing, a product is released to a select sample of Google product end consumers to see how they react to it

In spite of the fact that this appears to be a sound testing method, ex-Google director James Whittaker says in this video that there is space for improvement, if only because communication between different testing stages and the individuals who are accountable for them is not at its best (leading to things being tested either twice over or not at all). The teams in charge of Google products that are located further afield from the company’s main business, on the other hand, follow a considerably less stringent quality assurance approach.

Google, on the other hand, is serious about testing.

You may get more information on Google’s testing efforts on the Google Testing Blog.

Facebook: Developer-driven testing

Facebook does not have any dedicated testers working for them at all. The social media behemoth instead rely on its engineers to thoroughly test their own (as well as one another’s) work. Unlike in the past, when this was primarily done manually, Facebook today uses a range of automated testing tools to do the same task. For back-end unit testing, technologies such as PHPUnit and Jest (a JavaScript test tool created internally at Facebook) are used, as are tools such as Watir for end-to-end testing.

Furthermore, it is well-known for publicly shaming engineers who make mistakes (for example, by breaking a build or causing the site to go down by accident) by posting a photo of the offender with a clown nose on an internal Facebook page to which everyone is invited.

Additionally, by spending less on testing, more resources are available to be used on other, more worthwhile endeavors, such as research.

For example, a new feature may first be made available to only a tiny fraction of the total number of users before being made available to everyone.

Depending on how the function is being used and the input obtained, the firm will determine whether to expand the rollout or disable the feature, either enhancing it or removing it entirely.

Amazon: Deployment comes first

Amazon, like Facebook, does not have a major quality assurance system in place. It has also been speculated (at least in the past) that Amazon does not place a high priority on the quality assurance profession. Amazon’s test engineer-to-developer ratio of around one to every seven developers further implies that testing is not seen as a critical activity at the company. The firm, on the other hand, has a different point of view on the matter. Rather than an input variable, Amazon considers the ratio of testers to developers to be an output variable.

Amazon’s development and deployment procedures are considered to be so mature (the corporation is famous for deploying software every 11.6 seconds!) that the company does not believe it is necessary to invest in intricate and comprehensive testing efforts.

Spotify: Squads, tribes and chapters

A dedicated testing team is employed by Spotify. They are members of cross-functional teams, each of which is responsible for a certain objective. Employees at Spotify are structured according to what has come to be known as the Spotify model, which is comprised of the following components:

  • Squads. A squad is essentially Spotify’s version of a Scrum team, with less emphasis on procedures and more on ideals as the guiding principles. According to a Spotify credo, “Rules are an excellent start, but rules must be broken when necessary.” If a squad is assigned a mission, some squads could be assigned one or more testers while others might not be assigned any testers at all. Tribes are groupings of squads that are grouped together depending on the business domain in which they operate. Whenever a tester is a member of a squad, he or she is immediately assigned to the tribe that represents the squad as a whole. Chapters. Spotify also employs chapters to put employees who have the same expertise together across various squads and tribes, in order to foster learning and exchanging experiences. For example, all testers from various squads may be placed together in a testing chapter
  • Or

Squads. A squad is essentially Spotify’s version of a Scrum team, with less emphasis on methods and more on ideals as the guiding principles for working together. “Rules are an excellent start, but disregard them when necessary,” according to a Spotify edict. If a squad is assigned a task, certain squads could be assigned one or more testers while others might not be assigned any testers at all; Troops that belong together because they work in the same industry are known as tribes. Whenever a tester is a member of a squad, he or she is immediately assigned to the squad’s overarching tribe.

Spotify also employs chapters to gather employees who have similar skillsets together across various squads and tribes in order to foster learning and exchanging experiences.

Microsoft: Engineers and testers are one

At the moment, Microsoft’s testers outnumber developers by a factor of around 2:3, and, like Google, Microsoft pays testers and developers equally—except that they aren’t called testers; instead, they are software development engineers working in test (or SDETs). The high ratio of testers to developers at Microsoft can be explained by the fact that a significant portion of the company’s income originates from shippable products that are installed on client computers, rather than websites and online services, rather than websites and online services.

Given the difficulty (or at the very least inconvenience) of updating these products in the event of a defect or the addition of new features, Microsoft devotes a significant amount of time, effort, and money to ensuring that the quality of its products meets a high level before release.

What you can learn from the big guns of IT

If the culture, viewpoints, and methods around testing and quality assurance can differ so much among five of the largest technology organizations, it is possible that there is no one best approach to organize testing operations. All five have carefully constructed their testing procedures, selecting the methods that work best for them, and all five have had a great deal of success. Surely they must be doing something right, don’t you think? Nonetheless, there are a few lessons to be learned from the examples above that may be applied to your testing strategy:

  • The fact that testing and quality assurance (QA) methods at five of the world’s largest technology businesses may differ so widely suggests that there is no one best approach to organize testing and quality assurance (QA). Using what works best for them, each of the five has tailored its testing methods, resulting in a high level of success. You have to think that they’re doing something right, right? There are a few lessons to be learned from the examples above that may be applied to your testing approach, however:

Here’s another view on the spectrum of testing activities (or “schools,” as the author refers to them), published by Alan Page, a former Microsoft principle engineer who worked on the Windows operating system.

Keep learning

  • Technology beacon’s Quality Guide will take you on an in-depth exploration of the condition of quality. In addition, you may get the free World Quality Report 2021-22. Make use of these top 10 performance engineering strategies that actually work to put performance engineering into effect. Using TechBeacon’s Buyer’s Guide for Selecting Software Test Automation Tools, you may find the tools you require. With TechBeacon’s Guide, you may learn about the best strategies for decreasing software faults. Take your testing career to the next level by joining us. The Careers Topic Center on TechBeacon provides professional information to help you prepare for your next career move.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *