JP7367410B2 - Generation program, generation method, and information processing device - Google Patents

Description

The present invention relates to a generation program, a generation method, and an information processing device.

In recent years, system configurations have become larger and more complex, and the number and combinations of system components have also increased accordingly. For example, one way to configure a client-server system is a three-tier system. In a three-tier system, for example, a web server, an application server, and a database server work together, and various configurations can be selected for the type and number of servers to be implemented, and the number of combinations is enormous.

Furthermore, as systems become larger and more complex, test procedures for the constructed systems also tend to become longer and longer, making the task of creating test procedure manuals more complex.

In this regard, techniques related to generation of test procedures are known (for example, Patent Document 1 and Patent Document 2).

JP2009-252167A Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 2013-152667

However, for example, when a test procedure is automatically generated, the accuracy of the generated test procedure is still not sufficient, and complicated work is required for correction. Therefore, it is desired to provide a technology that can generate test procedures with high accuracy.

In one aspect, the present invention aims to improve the accuracy of test procedure generation.

The generation program according to one aspect of the present invention performs a test on common components that are common between system configurations that are specified based on configuration procedure management information that includes a plurality of configuration procedure information that associates system configurations and test procedures. A first system configuration and a second system configuration that have a common component that has fewer elements than the components included in the system configuration to be generated and that has the largest number of components included in the system configuration to be generated. A third system configuration that has a relationship that changes to a fourth system configuration when a component that is a difference between a component included in the system configuration to be generated and a common component is added. The system configuration and the fourth system configuration are identified based on the configuration procedure management information, and the common test items common to the first system configuration and the second system configuration and the fourth system configuration are tested. The system configuration to be generated and the corresponding test items are determined based on the additional test items that are not included in the test items of the third system configuration among the items, and the combinations that are executed according to the combination of the components are determined. A process that outputs a test procedure in which the system configuration to be generated and the corresponding test items are arranged so that the combination test item is placed after other test items, based on attribute information including test item information. have the computer execute it.

The accuracy of test procedure generation can be improved.

FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating generation of an exemplary test procedure. FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a block configuration of an information processing device according to an embodiment. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an operational flow of test item analysis processing according to the embodiment. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating difference information according to the embodiment. FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating minimum additional component information according to the embodiment. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating identification of combination test items. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating propagation of combination test items. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating attribute information according to an embodiment. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating analysis information according to an embodiment. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an operational flow of test procedure generation processing according to the embodiment. FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating a process for specifying common components and additional components. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating generation of a test procedure for an input system configuration. FIG. 2 is a diagram of information showing example components and test items. 1 is a diagram illustrating a hardware configuration of a computer for realizing an information processing apparatus according to an embodiment.

Hereinafter, some embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings. Note that the same reference numerals are given to corresponding elements in a plurality of drawings.

As mentioned above, it is desired to provide a technique for improving the accuracy of test procedure generation. Note that the test procedure is information indicating the order in which test items are executed. The test item is, for example, the content of the test to be executed in the process.

Given a system configuration, one approach to generating test procedures that corresponds to the system configuration is to use machine learning. However, for example, there are situations in which it is difficult to prepare a large amount of training data that associates a set of system building elements with a test procedure for the constituent elements of that set. Even if a model were built using machine learning using a small amount of training data, it would not be possible to build a model that would create correct test procedures.

Further, by comparing multiple pieces of information that associate a system configuration with a corresponding test procedure, it is possible to estimate to some extent the test items that correspond to the components of the system configuration. However, test items include specific test items that are tests specific to a component, and combination test items that are required to be executed as a result of combining components.

Specific test items are test items for individual components, and for example, in the case of a web server, they may include a test to see if the web server has started, a test for the web server's response to a request from a client, and the like.

Further, a combination test item is a test item for a combination of constituent elements, and is, for example, a test that is requested to be executed as a result of combining a plurality of constituent elements, such as a cooperation test between a web server and an application server.

Note that the state of the system cannot often be determined even if the combination test items are tested unless they are executed after the tests of the unique test items of each component are completed. Therefore, the unique test items are executed before the combination test items.

Now, assume that a new system configuration and a corresponding test procedure are generated. In this case, if it is not known which test items are unique test items and which test items are combination test items, a test procedure with an incorrect execution order may be generated. Alternatively, if you do not know which test items are unique test items and which test items are combination test items, you may end up including unnecessary test items when generating a new system configuration and corresponding test procedures. , test items may be omitted. An example of generating a test procedure based on a comparison of system configurations will be described below.

FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating the generation of an exemplary test procedure. FIG. 1A is a diagram illustrating configuration procedure management information 101 that associates groups of components included in a system configuration with test procedures for that system configuration. In the configuration procedure management information 101, for example, records in which item numbers, system configurations, and test procedures are associated are registered. The item number is, for example, identification information for identifying the system configuration of the record. The system configuration is information on the components included in the system configuration identified by the item number of the record. For example, in FIG. 1, the system with item number 1 includes three components C1, C2, and C3. Further, the test procedure is information indicating a test procedure to be executed for the system configuration identified by the item number of the record. For example, in FIG. 1, test items are executed in the order of T1-T2-T3-T4-T5-T6 for the system identified by item number 1. Note that the record of the configuration procedure management information 101 may be referred to as configuration procedure information in one embodiment.

In addition, in FIG. 1, the components are represented by adding a number n to C such as C1, C2, C3, etc., but these are actually components such as a web server, an application server, a database, etc. It may be. In one example, component C1 is Apache and component C2 is Tomcat. Further, in FIG. 1, test items are represented by adding a number n to T such as T1, T2, T3, etc., but these may actually be processes executed in a test. For example, if the component is MySQL, the test item may be the execution of a command such as "mysqlshow -u root mysql".

By comparing a plurality of records of the configuration procedure management information 101, it is possible to estimate the test items corresponding to the components of the system configuration.

For example, when comparing system configuration No. 1: C1-C2-C3 and system configuration No. 4: C1-C5-C6, component C1 is common, but other components are different. There is. Also, when comparing the procedure in item number 1: T1-T2-T3-T4-T5-T6 and the procedure in item number 4: T1-T2-T16-T17-T18-T19, T1 and T2 match. However, other test items are different. Therefore, the test items of component C1 can be specified as T1 and T2. Note that item number 2 and item number 3 also include component C1, and T1 and T2, which were identified as test items for C1, are also included in the test procedures for item number 2 and item number 3. There is. Therefore, it is presumed that the estimation that the test items of component C1 are T1 and T2 is correct.

However, in such comparisons between records, there are some components for which it is difficult to identify corresponding test items. For example, the test procedure for the system configuration of item number 1: C1-C2-C3 is T1-T2-T3-T4-T5-T6. Of these, T1 and T2 are estimated to be test items for the component C1, so the remaining test items: T3-T4-T5-T6 are for the system configuration components C2 and C3 of item number 1. It is presumed that this is one of the test items. However, it is not known which test item among the test items T3-T4-T5-T6 is a test item unique to component C2 and which test item is unique to component C3. Alternatively, it is not known whether the test items: T3-T4-T5-T6 include a combination test item.

Furthermore, when comparing the system configuration of Item No. 3 and the system configuration of Item No. 4, the difference is that component C7 is added in the system configuration of Item No. 3. Comparing the test procedure for item number 3: T1-T2-T14-T16-T17-T9-T15-T20 and the test procedure for item number 4: T1-T2-T16-T17-T18-T19, the test items: T9-T14-T15-T20 are added in item number 3. Therefore, it is estimated that the component: C7 and the test items: T9-T14-T15-T20 are related. However, it is not possible to specify which of the test items: T9-T14-T15-T20 is the unique test item of the component: C7, and whether or not a combination test item is included.

Even if you try to generate test procedures for a new system configuration based on such ambiguous information, unnecessary test items may be included, test items that should be executed may not be added, or the execution order may be incorrect. Sometimes this happens. For example, FIG. 1C is a diagram illustrating the system configuration of a new system and a new test procedure generated for the system configuration. The system configuration of the system shown in FIG. 1(c) is C1-C7-C2-C3, and has a system configuration in which a new component C7 is added to the system configuration of item number 1 for which the test procedure is known. There is. In this case, test item C7 in Figure 1(b): T9-T14-T15-T20 is added to test procedure No. 1: T1-T2-T3-T4-T5-T6, and a new test procedure is created. : T1-T2-T3-T4-T5-T6-T9-T14-T15-T20 can be generated. However, if the added T9-T14-T15-T20 includes combination test items, there is a risk that unnecessary test items have been added, or test items that are originally required to be executed in combination may have been added. There is also a possibility that it may have leaked. Additionally, there is a risk of generating test procedures with incorrect execution order. Therefore, it is desired to provide a technology that can streamline the generation of test procedures.

In the embodiment described below, test items common between system configurations and test items added due to changes between system configurations are combined to identify test items for the system configuration for which a test procedure is to be generated. Furthermore, a test procedure in which the test items are arranged is generated using information as to whether the identified test item is a unique test item or a combination test item. Therefore, generation accuracy can be improved. Hereinafter, embodiments will be described in more detail.

FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating a block configuration of the information processing device 200 according to the embodiment. The information processing device 200 includes, for example, a control section 201 and a storage section 202. The control unit 201 may operate as, for example, a specifying unit 211, a determining unit 212, an output unit 213, and the like. The storage unit 202 may store information such as configuration procedure management information 101, difference information 400, minimum additional component information 500, attribute information 800, and analysis information 900, which will be described later. The details of each of these units and the information stored in the storage unit 202 will be described later.

Next, generation of a test procedure according to the embodiment will be described. For example, in the test of an information technology (IT) system, by using the property that there is a dependency in the execution order of test items, the embodiment described below identifies specific test items and combination test items. The results are then used to improve the accuracy of test procedure generation.

An example of test item analysis processing according to the embodiment will be described below. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an operational flow of test item analysis processing according to the embodiment. For example, the control unit 201 may start the operation flow shown in FIG. 3 when an instruction to execute the test item analysis process is input.

In step 301 (hereinafter, step will be abbreviated as "S", for example, S301), the control unit 201 reads the constituent elements of each record of the configuration procedure management information 101 and information on the test procedure.

In S<b>302 , the control unit 201 extracts differences between each record of the configuration procedure management information 101 and generates difference information 400 . In one embodiment, the control unit 201 may generate difference information 400 by comparing each record of the configuration procedure management information 101 with each of other records registered in the configuration procedure management information 101.

FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating difference information 400 according to the embodiment. The difference information 400 includes records in which, for example, numbers, reference item numbers, partner item numbers, additional components, deleted components, common components, additional test items, and deleted test items are associated with each other. The number is identification information for identifying the record of the difference information 400. The reference item number and the partner item number are, for example, objects to be compared in the process of S302, and may be the item numbers of two records selected from the configuration procedure management information 101. Note that the reference item number is the item number that is the source of comparison, and the partner item number is the item number of the comparison partner. For example, in the record with number 1 of difference information 400, item number 1 is selected as the reference item number, and item number 2 is selected as the target item number to be compared with reference item number: 1. has been done. Further explanation will be given below using the record numbered 1 as an example.

The additional component is a component added to change the system configuration component of the reference item number to the system configuration component of the partner item number. For example, referring to the configuration procedure management information 101, the system configuration of reference item number: 1 is C1-C2-C3, and the system configuration of partner item number: 2 is C1-C4-C2-C3. Comparing these, it can be seen that a component: C4 is added to the system configuration of reference item number: 1 in counterpart item number: 2. Therefore, C4 is registered as an additional component.

The deleted component is a component that is deleted in order to change from a component of the system configuration of the reference item number to a component of the system configuration of the partner item number. In addition, when changing from the system configuration of standard item number 1: C1-C2-C3 to the system configuration of partner item number: 2: C1-C4-C2-C3, there are no components to be deleted, so the difference information In the top entry of 400, "-" indicating empty is registered.

The common component is a component that is common between the system configuration component of the reference item number and the system configuration component of the partner item number. For example, the system configuration of standard item number: 1: C1-C2-C3 and the system configuration of partner item number: 2: C1-C4-C2-C3 have C1-C2-C3 in common, so the difference information In the top entry of 400, C1-C2-C3 are registered.

The additional test item is a test item added to change the test procedure for the system configuration of the standard item number to the test procedure for the system configuration of the target item number. In other words, the additional test item is, for example, a test item that is not included in the test procedure for the system configuration of the reference item number among the test procedures for the system configuration of the partner item number. For example, referring to the configuration procedure management information 101, the test procedure for reference item number: 1 is T1-T2-T3-T4-T5-T6, and, for example, the test procedure for partner item number: 2 is T1-T2. -T7-T8-T3-T4-T9-T10-T11. Comparing these, test items: T7-T8-T9-T10-T11 are added to the system configuration of standard item number: 1 in counterpart item number: 2. Therefore, T7-T8-T9-T10-T11 are registered as additional test items.

The deleted test item is a test item that is deleted in order to change the test procedure for the system configuration of the reference item number to the test procedure for the system configuration of the partner item number. In addition, from the test procedure for standard item number 1: T1-T2-T3-T4-T5-T6 to the test procedure for partner item number: 2: T1-T2-T7-T8-T3-T4-T9-T10-T11. To change, test items: T5-T6 are deleted. Therefore, T5-T6 are registered in the top entry of the difference information 400.

For example, as described above, when differences between combinations of system configurations are extracted in S302 and records are registered in the difference information 400, the flow advances to S303.

In S303, the control unit 201 extracts information on a record that is the smallest additional component. For example, the control unit 201 extracts the record with the minimum additional component from among the records registered in the difference information 400 for each item number registered in the standard item number, and extracts the record with the minimum additional component. Information 500 may be generated.

FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating minimum additional component information 500 according to the embodiment. The minimum additional component information 500 may be, for example, information obtained by extracting some records of the difference information 400, and the same information as the difference information 400 may be registered in the record of the minimum additional component information 500. .

In S304, the control unit 201 specifies combination test items. For example, if two records registered in the minimum additional component information 500 contain the same test item as additional test items even though the additional components are different, the control unit 201 controls the The additional test item may be determined to be a combination test item.

FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating identification of combination test items. FIG. 6A shows the configuration procedure management information 101 described above. Further, FIG. 6(b) shows the system configuration information of the record identified by number 1 and the system configuration information of the record identified by number 18 of the minimum additional component information 500. There is. The record identified by number: 1 is a comparison between the system configuration of item number: 1 and the system configuration of item number: 2, and in item number: 2, component: C4 is added. Furthermore, the record identified by number: 18 is a comparison between the system configuration of item number: 4 and the system configuration of item number: 3, and in item number: 3, component: C7 is added.

Furthermore, as shown in FIG. 6(c), when comparing the test procedures, the record identified by number: 1 is a comparison between the test procedure of item number: 1 and the test procedure of item number: 2, In item number: 2, test items: T7, T8, T9, T10, and T11 are added. In addition, the record identified by number 18 is a comparison between the test procedure of item number 4 and the test procedure of item number 3, and in item number 3, test items: T14, T9, T15, and T20 are compared. has been added.

Here, the component added in the record identified by number: 1: C4 and the component added in the record identified by number: 18: C7 are different, but the test is common. Item: T9 has been added. In this case, it can be determined that the test item: T9 is not a unique test item specific to the component: C4 or the component: C7, but is a combination test item.

For example, in S304, if there is a deleted test item even though there is an added component and there is no deleted component, the control unit 201 determines that the deleted test item is a combination test item. It's fine. This is because a test item that is deleted despite the addition of a component can be determined to be a combination test item that no longer needs to be executed due to the addition of the component.

For example, in the example shown in FIG. 6, test items T5 and T6 have been deleted even though component C4 has been added in the record identified by number 1. Therefore, test items: T5 and T6 can be determined to be a combination test item. Similarly, in the record identified by number: 18, although component: C7 has been added, test items: T18 and T19 have been deleted. Therefore, test items T18 and T19 can be determined to be combination test items.

For example, as described above, in S304, the control unit 201 can specify the combination test item using the information in the record of the minimum additional component information 500.

Subsequently, in S305, the control unit 201 propagates the combination test items and further specifies combination test items. For example, the control unit 201 may determine all test items that are arranged later in the test procedure of the configuration procedure management information 101 than the test items determined to be combination test items to be combination test items. The propagation of combination test items will be explained in more detail below.

Generally, in a test procedure, tests for specific test items specific to components are first performed, and then tests for combination test items for combinations of components are performed. For example, if the system configuration includes server A and server B, after the construction test of server A (test items specific to server A) and the construction test of server B (test items specific to server B) are completed, A combination test such as a cooperation test between A and server B is executed. In many cases, it is not possible to determine the state of the system even if the combined test items are tested before the tests of the unique test items specific to each component (server A and server B) are not completed correctly. Therefore, it can be assumed that the test for the combination test item is executed after the test for the unique test item is completed.

By using this premise, further combination test items can be specified. For example, suppose that a certain test item turns out to be a combination test item. In this case, according to this premise, it is possible to determine that all test items subsequent to that test item are combination test items.

FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating the propagation of combination test items. FIG. 7 shows part of the test procedure for three system configurations, system configuration 1 to system configuration 3. For example, assume that test item T2 is found to be a combination test item. In this case, test item T3 following test item T2 in the test procedure for system configuration 1 and test item T7 following test item T2 in the test procedure for system configuration 2 are both determined to be combination test items. be able to.

Further, for example, assume that test items T3 and T7 are identified as combination test items as described above. In this case, it is possible to further specify a combination test item using the newly specified combination test items: T3 and T7. For example, in FIG. 7, the test procedure for system configuration 3 includes test item: T3, and test item: T11 following test item: T3 can also be determined to be a combination test item. By propagating the identification of combination test items in this way, it is possible to identify many combination test items from the test procedures registered in the configuration procedure management information 101. In S305, the control unit 201 may identify a combination test item by repeating this propagation process until no new combination test item is identified.

In S<b>306 , the control unit 201 sets information on the identified combination test item in the attribute information 800 .

FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating attribute information 800 according to the embodiment. Note that in the attribute information 800, test items included in the test procedure of the configuration procedure management information 101 and attribute information for the test items may be registered in association with each other. Note that all attributes may be uniquely set in the initial state. The control unit 201 may then update the attribute information 800 by setting the attribute to a combination for the test item identified as a combination test item in the processes of S304 and S305. In the attribute information 800 in FIG. 8, it can be seen that test items T1 and T2 have unique attributes, and these test items are unique test items. It can also be seen that test items T9 and T10 have combination attributes, and these test items are combination test items.

In S307, the control unit 201 attempts to identify specific test items for each component. For example, the control unit 201 identifies a record with one additional component in the minimum additional component information 500. Then, among the additional test items of the record with one additional component, the test item whose attribute is uniquely set in the attribute information 800 is identified as the unique test item of the component indicated by the additional component. It's fine. Furthermore, for components for which specific test items cannot be identified using this method, the specific test items corresponding to the components can be identified by comparing multiple test procedures, as illustrated with reference to Figure 1(b). It's okay. In this case as well, since combination test items can be excluded by using the attribute information 800, specific test items that correspond to the constituent elements can be specified with high accuracy.

In S308, the control unit 201 registers the correspondence between the identified components and the specific test items in the analysis information 900, and this operational flow ends.

FIG. 9 is a diagram illustrating analysis information 900 according to the embodiment. In the analysis information 900, test items and configuration information regarding constituent elements are registered in association with each other. The test item is, for example, a test item included in the test procedure of the configuration procedure management information 101. In the configuration information, when the test item of the record is a unique test item, the component to be tested by the unique test item is registered. On the other hand, if the test item of the record is a combination test item, information indicating that it is a combination test item is registered in the configuration information.

As described above, according to the operation flow shown in FIG. 3, specific test items corresponding to the constituent elements can be specified. It is also possible to specify combination test items to be executed on combinations of components.

<Generation of test procedure>
Next, a process of generating a test procedure for a system configuration for which an input test procedure is to be generated will be described using information obtained in the operation flow of FIG. 3.

FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an operational flow of test procedure generation processing according to the embodiment. For example, the control unit 201 may start the operation flow shown in FIG. 10 when the system configuration for which a test procedure is to be generated is input. In the following, an example of processing will be described assuming that C1-C7-C2-C3 is input as the system configuration for which a test procedure is to be generated.

In S1001, the control unit 201 determines whether a system configuration that matches the input system configuration is registered in the configuration procedure management information 101. For example, if a system configuration that matches the input system configuration: C1-C7-C2-C3 is registered in the configuration procedure management information 101, the control unit 201 may determine Yes, and the flow proceeds to S1002. . In S1002, the control unit 201 obtains a test procedure from the record of the configuration procedure management information 101 having a system configuration that matches the input system configuration, outputs it as a test procedure for the input system configuration, and this operation flow ends. do.

On the other hand, in S1001, if the system configuration that matches the input system configuration: C1-C7-C2-C3 is not registered in the configuration procedure management information 101, the control unit 201 may determine No, and the flow is Proceed to S1003.

In S1003, the control unit 201 identifies test procedure information used to generate a test procedure for the input system configuration: C1-C7-C2-C3. In one example, the control unit 201 may identify common components and additional components in order to generate a test procedure for the input system configuration.

FIG. 11 is a diagram illustrating a process for identifying common components and additional components that is executed in the process of S1003.

In S1101, the control unit 201 may obtain from the difference information 400 a record that has common components that are similar to the input system configuration: C1-C7-C2-C3 and satisfy a predetermined condition. In one example, the control unit 201 uses the difference information 401 to select a record in which the most similar common component among the common components having fewer components than the input system configuration: C1-C7-C2-C3 is registered. You may obtain it from In the example of FIG. 4, the record with number: 1 of the difference information 400 is a record in which an additional component: C4 is added to the common components: C1-C2-C3, and the control unit 201 has this number: 1. record.

In S1102, the control unit 201, for example, sets the record including the difference obtained by subtracting the identified common component C1-C2-C3 from the input system configuration: C1-C7-C2-C3: C7 as an additional component as difference information. Specify from 400. In the example of FIG. 4, the record numbered 18 in the difference information 400 includes an additional component C7, and the control unit 201 may specify the record numbered 18. Once the additional component is identified, the operational flow in FIG. 11 ends and the flow advances to S1004.

In S1004, the control unit 201 determines test items for the input system configuration based on the specified information. Then, in S1005, the control unit 201 determines the order of the identified test items.

FIG. 12 is a diagram illustrating the determination of test items and execution order for the input system configuration executed in S1004 and S1005.

FIG. 12A shows a system configuration corresponding to the common components and additional components identified in the process of S1003 with respect to the input system configuration. As shown in FIG. 12(a), the input system configuration: C1-C7-C2-C3 is the common component of the record number 1 of the difference information 400: C1-C2-C3, and the input system configuration: Additional component: Can be generated by adding C7. Further, the additional component: C7 is a component added to change the system configuration of item number: 4 to item number: 3, as shown in the record numbered 18 in the difference information 400.

In FIG. 12(b), the system configuration of FIG. 12(a) described above is replaced with a test procedure. For example, the test item corresponding to the common component C1-C2-C3 is the test procedure with item number 1: T1-T2-T3-T4-T5-T6, and the test item with number 1 deleted from the difference information 400: It can be generated by deleting T5-T6. That is, the test items for the common components: C1-C2-C3 can be determined as T1-T2-T3-T4. In addition, test items: T1-T2-T3-T4 of common component C1-C2-C3, which are generated by deleting the deleted test items from the test procedure of item number: 1, are the same as the test procedure of item number: 1. , Item number: This is a common test item that is common to the test procedure of 2.

Further, the additional component: C7 is added when changing the system configuration of item number: 4: C1-C5-C6 to the system configuration of item number: 3: C1-C7-C5-C6. Therefore, additional test items added when changing the system configuration of Item No. 4: C1-C5-C6 to the system configuration of Item No. 3: C1-C7-C5-C6: T14-T9-T15-T20 can be used as a test item for additional component: C7.

Therefore, the control unit 201 adds the test procedure: T14-T9-T15-T20 of the component: C7 to the test procedure: T1-T2-T3-T4 of the common component: C1-C2-C3. Test items for the input system configuration may be specified. As a result, test items: T1-T2-T3-T4-T14-T9-T15-T20 are specified.

Subsequently, the control unit 201 determines the order of the identified test items (S1005). For example, the control unit 201 specifies a combination test item from among the test items T1-T2-T3-T4-T14-T9-T15-T20 specified by referring to the analysis information 900. For example, the control unit 201 can specify that T9-T15-T20 are combination test items by referring to the analysis information 900. Therefore, the control unit 201 arranges the unique test items: T1-T2-T3-T4-T14 in front, and then arranges the combination test items: T9-T15-T20, and the test procedure: T1-T2. -T3-T4-T14-T9-T15-T20. For example, regarding the order of specific test items and the order of combination test items in the test procedure, the order of the test procedures in the configuration procedure management information 101 used to generate the test procedure in S1003 is maintained. A test procedure may be determined.

In S1006, the control unit 201 outputs the generated test procedure, and this operation flow ends.

As described above, according to the embodiment, the test items of the test procedure for the input system configuration are specified by combining the common components and the additional components. This can prevent it from being included in the procedure. For example, in the example of FIG. 1(c), the combination test items T5 and T6 that have been included in the test procedure can be deleted according to the above operation flow.

Further, according to the embodiment, since the unique test items and the combination test items can be specified, a test procedure can be generated so that the combination test items are placed after the unique test items. Therefore, the accuracy of test procedure generation can be improved. For example, in the example of FIG. 1C, the unique test item: T14, which has been placed after the combination test item: T9, can be placed before the combination test item: T9.

Further, for example, according to the embodiment, it is possible to generate a highly accurate test procedure even in a situation where it is difficult to prepare a large amount of training data and a model cannot be constructed by machine learning.

Note that in the above-described embodiment, the components expressed by attaching a number n to C such as C1, C2, C3, etc. may actually be components such as a web server, an application server, and a database. Further, test items expressed by adding a number n to T, such as T1, T2, T3, etc., may actually be commands or the like to be executed in a test.

FIG. 13 is information showing exemplary components and test items. In the example of FIG. 13(a), the component C1 is Apache, and the component C2 is Tomcat. Further, in the example of FIG. 13(b), test item T1 is execution of the MySQL mysqlshow command, and test item T2 is execution of MySQL "mysqlshow -u root mysql". Note that, as in the above-described embodiment, when components are managed by Cn and test items are managed by Tn, the storage unit 202 stores the correspondence information of the components shown in FIG. , and the test item correspondence information shown in FIG. 13(b) may be stored.

Further, the above-described embodiment shows an example of a method for identifying common components and additional components used to generate a test procedure for the system configuration input in the process of S1003. However, the method of specifying the information used in the test procedure of the input system configuration is not limited to this.

For example, in another embodiment, the control unit 201 evaluates the common component record and the additional component record registered in the difference information 400, and inputs the information using the information of the highly evaluated record. A test procedure for the system configuration may be generated. The evaluation may be performed such that, for example, a set of records that has more common components and fewer additional components has a higher evaluation. That is, for example, when generating the input system configuration: C1-C7-C2-C3, the common component: C1 is created rather than the set of records of common component: C1-C7 and additional component: C2-C3. -C7-C2 and additional components: Appreciate the set of records in C3. This is because, for example, generating a test procedure using a set of records with many common components and few additional components tends to generate a test procedure with higher accuracy.

Furthermore, the evaluation may be performed such that the higher the degree of matching between the set of common components and additional components used to generate the test procedure and the input system configuration, the higher the evaluation.

Any one of the above evaluation criteria may be used to identify common components and additional components, or a combination of evaluation criteria may be used to identify common components and additional components. Below, we describe an example of combining evaluation criteria to identify common components and additional components for use in generating test procedures.

For example, (a) assume that the input system configuration is C1-C7-C2-C3. Furthermore, (b) the constituent elements of the record of the configuration procedure management information 101 are assumed to be C1-C2-C3. Furthermore, it is assumed that (c) the common components used to generate a test procedure for the input system configuration are C1-C2-C3, and (d) the additional component is C7.

In this case:
Let Na=number of elements in (a), Nb=number of elements in (b), Nc=number of elements in (c), and Nd=number of elements in (d).

In addition, the following is defined.
- MAX (i, j): The maximum value of i and j. For example, MAX(i,j) is i if i>j, and j if i≦j.
・C(x,y): A combination of x and y. Note that the order of arrangement may be random. For example, C((c),(d))=C1-C2-C3-C7=C1-C7-C2-C3.
- #(x) is the number of constituent elements of x. For example, #(C((c),(d)))=#(C1-C2-C3-C7)=4.
- S (x, y) is the number of matching components between x and y. For example, S(C1-C2-C3, C1-C7-C3-C2)=3 (C1-C2-C3 match in any order).
- R(x, y) is the ratio of the number of components of y to x. For example, R(Nc, Na)=3/4=0.75.
- P(x, y) is a function that becomes 1 when x and y completely match, and becomes 0 otherwise. For example, P(C1-C2, C2-C1)=1 (match in any order).

For example, using the above definition, for (a) the input system configuration, the set of (c) common components and (d) additional components can be evaluated using the following formula.
Evaluation value: V((a),(b),(c),(d))=S((a),C((c),(d)))/MAX(Na,#(C((c) ), (d))))*R(Nc,Na)*P((b),(c))

For example, the control unit 201 selects (c) common components and (d) additional components from the difference information 400, and also selects (d) from the configuration procedure management information 101, and performs the above combinations by round robin. Evaluation value: V may be evaluated. Then, the control unit 201 may execute a process of generating the test procedure from S1004 onward using the set of the (c) common component and the (d) additional component with the obtained high evaluation value: V. An example of calculation using the formula for the above evaluation value: V is shown below.

(Example 1)
(a): C1-C7-C2-C3
(b): C1-C2-C3
(c): C1-C2-C3
(d):C7
V((a),(b),(c),(d)=S(C1-C7-C2-C3,C1-C2-C3-C7)/MAX(4,#(C1-C2-C3-C7 ))*R(3,4)*P(C1-C2-C3,C1-C2-C3)=(4/4)*(3/4)*1=0.75

(Example 2)
(a): C1-C7-C2-C3
(b): C1-C2
(c): C1-C2
(d):C3-C7
V((a),(b),(c),(d)=S(C1-C7-C2-C3,C1-C2-C3-C7)/MAX(4,#(C1-C2-C3-C7 )*R(2,4)*P(C1-C2, C1-C2)=(4/4)*(2/4)*1=0.5

In this case, the set of (c) common component and (d) additional component with V=0.75 in Example 1 is better than the set of (c) common component and (d) additional component with V=0.5 in Example 2. The evaluation is higher for the component set. Therefore, the control unit 201 may execute the process of generating the test procedure after S1004 using the set of (c) common components and (d) additional components in Example 1.

As mentioned above, it is also possible to identify a set of (c) common components and (d) additional components for use in generating a test procedure according to predetermined evaluation criteria.

Note that as another definition of the above P(x, y), P(x, y)=S(x, y)/MAX(#(x), #(y)) can also be used. In this case, the greater the number of matches, the greater the weight.

Although the embodiments have been illustrated above, the embodiments are not limited thereto. For example, the above-described operational flow is an example, and the embodiments are not limited thereto. If possible, the operational flow may be executed by changing the order of processing, may include additional processing, or may omit some processing. For example, the processes of S307 and S308 in FIG. 3 described above may not be executed. In this case, the control unit 201 may identify the combination test item using the attribute information 800 in the process of S1005.

Moreover, although the above embodiment describes an example in which the minimum additional component information 500 is created and used, the embodiment is not limited to this. For example, in another embodiment, the minimum additional component information 500 may not be created, and the control unit 201 may obtain the information from the difference information 400 instead.

Furthermore, in the above-described embodiment, an example is described in which a test procedure is generated so that the unique test items are placed first and the combination test items are placed after them in the process of S1005. However, embodiments are not limited thereto. For example, in another embodiment, the control unit 201 further determines whether the unique test item of the additional test item and the combination test item have the same The location of the insertion may be determined during the test procedure. Then, the control unit 201 separately inserts the unique test item and the combination test item from the additional test items of the additional component identified in S1003 at the respective positions where the identified unique test item and combination test item are to be inserted. You may.

Note that in the above-described embodiment, in S1003 of FIG. 10 and the operation flow of FIG. 11, the control unit 201 of the information processing apparatus 200 operates as the specifying unit 211, for example. Further, in the process of S1004 in FIG. 10, the control unit 201 of the information processing apparatus 200 operates as the determining unit 212, for example. In the processes of S1005 and S1006 in FIG. 10, the control unit 201 of the information processing device 200 operates as the output unit 213, for example.

FIG. 14 is a diagram illustrating a hardware configuration of a computer 1400 for realizing the information processing device 200 according to the embodiment. A hardware configuration for realizing the information processing apparatus 200 in FIG. 14 includes, for example, a processor 1401, a memory 1402, a storage device 1403, a reading device 1404, a communication interface 1406, and an input/output interface 1407. Note that the processor 1401, memory 1402, storage device 1403, reading device 1404, communication interface 1406, and input/output interface 1407 are connected to each other via a bus 1408, for example.

The processor 1401 may be, for example, a single processor, a multiprocessor, or a multicore. The processor 1401 provides some or all of the functions of each of the control units 201 described above by using the memory 1402 to execute, for example, a program that describes the procedure of the above-described operational flow. For example, the processor 1401 of the information processing device 200 may operate as the specifying unit 211, the determining unit 212, and the output unit 213 by executing a program stored in the storage device 1403.

Memory 1402 is, for example, a semiconductor memory and may include a RAM area and a ROM area. The storage device 1403 is, for example, a hard disk, a semiconductor memory such as a flash memory, or an external storage device. Note that RAM is an abbreviation for Random Access Memory. Further, ROM is an abbreviation for Read Only Memory.

Reading device 1404 accesses removable storage medium 1405 according to instructions from processor 1401. The removable storage medium 1405 is, for example, a semiconductor device (such as a USB memory), a medium in which information is input/output by magnetic action (such as a magnetic disk), or a medium in which information is input/output by optical action (CD-ROM, etc.). DVD, etc.). Note that USB is an abbreviation for Universal Serial Bus. CD is an abbreviation for Compact Disc. DVD is an abbreviation for Digital Versatile Disk.

The storage unit 202 described above may include, for example, a memory 1402, a storage device 1403, and a removable storage medium 1405. The storage device 1403 of the information processing device 200 may store, for example, configuration procedure management information 101, difference information 400, minimum additional component information 500, attribute information 800, and analysis information 900. Further, the storage device 1403 of the information processing apparatus 200 may store correspondence information of the components shown in FIG. 13(a) and correspondence information of the test items shown in FIG. 13(b).

A communication interface 1406 transmits and receives data to and from an external device according to instructions from the processor 1401. The input/output interface 1407 may be, for example, an interface between an input device and an output device. The input device is, for example, a device such as a keyboard or mouse that receives instructions from a user. The output device is, for example, a display device such as a display, and an audio device such as a speaker.

Each program according to the embodiment is provided to the information processing device 200 in the following format, for example.
(1) Installed in the storage device 1403 in advance.
(2) Provided by a removable storage medium 1405.
(3) Provided by a server such as a program server.

Note that the hardware configuration of the computer 1400 for realizing the information processing apparatus 200 described with reference to FIG. 14 is an example, and the embodiment is not limited to this. For example, some components may be replaced or deleted from the hardware configuration of FIG. 14, or new components may be added. Furthermore, some or all of the functions of the control unit 201 described above may be implemented as hardware such as FPGA and SoC. Note that FPGA is an abbreviation for Field Programmable Gate Array. SoC is an abbreviation for System-on-a-Chip.

Above, several embodiments are described. However, the embodiments are not limited to the embodiments described above, but should be understood to include various modifications and alternative forms of the embodiments described above. For example, it will be understood that the various embodiments can be embodied by changing the components without departing from the spirit and scope thereof. Furthermore, it will be understood that various embodiments can be implemented by appropriately combining a plurality of components disclosed in the embodiments described above. Furthermore, various embodiments can be implemented by deleting or replacing some components from all the components shown in the embodiments, or adding some components to the components shown in the embodiments. Those skilled in the art will understand that this can be done.

101: Configuration procedure management information 200: Information processing device 201: Control unit 202: Storage unit 211: Specification unit 212: Determination unit 213: Output unit 1400: Computer 1401: Processor 1402: Memory 1403: Storage device 1404: Reading device 1405: Removable storage medium 1406: Communication interface 1407: Input/output interface 1408: Bus

Claims (5)

Configurations that are included in the system configuration for which test procedures are generated, among common components that are common between system configurations that are identified based on configuration procedure management information that includes multiple pieces of configuration procedure information that associate system configurations and test procedures. identifying a first system configuration and a second system configuration having a common component that has a smaller number of elements than the element and has the largest number of the components included in the system configuration to be generated;
The third system configuration has a relationship in which the system configuration is changed to a fourth system configuration when a difference component between the component included in the system configuration to be generated and the common component is added. identifying the system configuration of No. 3 and the fourth system configuration based on the configuration procedure management information;
A common test item that is common to the first system configuration and the second system configuration, and a test item that is not included in the test item of the third system configuration among the test items of the fourth system configuration. determining test items corresponding to the system configuration to be generated based on the additional test items;
The combination test item corresponds to the system configuration to be generated so that it is placed after other test items based on attribute information including information on a combination test item to be executed according to a combination of components. Outputs a test procedure listing the test items to be tested.
A generation program that causes a computer to perform a process. Furthermore, among the configuration procedure information included in the configuration procedure management information, the system configuration of the first configuration procedure information is changed to the system configuration of the second configuration procedure information, and the system configuration of the third configuration procedure information is changed. When the same test item is added even though the added components are different due to the change to the system configuration of the fourth configuration procedure information, the same test item is determined to be the combination test item. The generation program according to claim 1, which causes a computer to execute the process. Further, in the test procedure of the plurality of configuration procedure information included in the configuration procedure management information, a test item placed after the test item determined to be the combination test item is determined to be the combination test item. The generation program according to claim 2, which causes a computer to execute the processing. Configurations that are included in the system configuration for which test procedures are generated, among common components that are common between system configurations that are identified based on configuration procedure management information that includes multiple pieces of configuration procedure information that associate system configurations and test procedures. identifying a first system configuration and a second system configuration having a common component that has a smaller number of elements than the element and has the largest number of the components included in the system configuration to be generated;
The third system configuration has a relationship in which the system configuration is changed to a fourth system configuration when a difference component between the component included in the system configuration to be generated and the common component is added. identifying the system configuration of No. 3 and the fourth system configuration based on the configuration procedure management information;
A common test item that is common to the first system configuration and the second system configuration, and a test item that is not included in the test item of the third system configuration among the test items of the fourth system configuration. determining test items corresponding to the system configuration to be generated based on the additional test items;
The combination test item corresponds to the system configuration to be generated so that it is placed after other test items based on attribute information including information on a combination test item to be executed according to a combination of components. Outputs a test procedure listing the test items to be tested.
computer-implemented generation methods, including Configurations that are included in the system configuration for which test procedures are generated, among common components that are common between system configurations that are identified based on configuration procedure management information that includes multiple pieces of configuration procedure information that associate system configurations and test procedures. identifying a first system configuration and a second system configuration having a common component that has a smaller number of elements than the element and having the largest number of the components included in the system configuration to be generated; and a third system configuration. the third system configuration having a relationship that when a difference component between the component included in the system configuration to be generated and the common component is added, the system configuration is changed to a fourth system configuration; a specifying unit that specifies the fourth system configuration based on the configuration procedure management information;
A common test item that is common to the first system configuration and the second system configuration, and a test item that is not included in the test item of the third system configuration among the test items of the fourth system configuration. a determining unit that determines a test item corresponding to the system configuration to be generated based on the additional test item;
The combination test item corresponds to the system configuration to be generated so that it is placed after other test items based on attribute information including information on a combination test item to be executed according to a combination of components. an output unit that outputs a test procedure listing test items to be tested;
Information processing equipment, including.

Images