Over a million developers have joined DZone.
{{announcement.body}}
{{announcement.title}}

Can You Really Have a Ton of Testing To Do?

DZone 's Guide to

Can You Really Have a Ton of Testing To Do?

You might want to be careful next time you tell someone you have a ton of testing to do. They might prove you wrong.

· DevOps Zone ·
Free Resource

I heard someone say that they had a ton of testing to do to me recently as they entered another weekly test cycle, and I pondered whether testing could be measured in tons. And since mass and energy are irrevocably connected, I wondered whether it could be true, as we are happy to talk about the energy expended in testing.

The standard definition of a kilogram changed late last year from the physical platinum prototype kept under lock and key near Paris, to a calculated value based on Planck's constant. With this new definition of the kilogram, a precise definition of Planck’s constant is required, 6.626070150×10−34 Joule-seconds. So does it help to plagiarise his equation for our purposes?

Planck’s constant (h) defines the value of the relationship between frequency (f) and energy (E) in particle physics, specifically light.

E = hf.

How does this relate to application testing?

Well, the energy expended in testing is certainly related to the frequency (f) of test cycles. The higher the frequency, the greater the energy. But similarly, we are not typically talking about testing one particle; we're usually talking about a compound structure with greater mass, making the Energy is greater as well.

Clearly, with software testing, Planck’s minuscule value is inappropriate, so we need a new value and we need a standard form of energy. As we know, most testers run on alcohol. A glass of wine contains about 100 kilocalories (Kcal) and weighs 125 grams. The average person burns about 100 Kcal per hour working at a desk job, so handily they need one glass of plonk per hour to test.

Now, this is the bit I don’t know. What have you observed? How long does it take to test a particle, or a single unit? Is it reasonable to use an hour as an approximation at this stage?

Hence, our "Plonk" constant based on the measurements is (staying in hours as SI not very helpful on this scale):

h = E/f = 0.125 kg/1 per hour = 0.125 Kg-hours

So a ton of testing requires 8,000 hours and is physically impossible in a week for one person; after all, it would take about a sleepless year. But if it was an automated regression test, that could easily have touched 8,000 units and that could be realistic. Equally, while it is running you don’t need any bodily fuel but you might chose to put your feet up and have a glass – does that count?

So I think anyone who has a “Tonne of testing to do this week” either needs a much bigger team or some technology to help.

Topics:
application testing ,mathematics ,plancks constant ,devops ,calculation

Opinions expressed by DZone contributors are their own.

{{ parent.title || parent.header.title}}

{{ parent.tldr }}

{{ parent.urlSource.name }}