AppendixSMART-T Questionnaire

This appendix lists the questions used in the SMART-T process to guide themigration of software testing to the cloud. The questions are structured similar tothe SMIG questionnaire from SMART, but are geared towards software testingand cloud computing. The questions focus on the following areas: (1) businessdrivers and technical factors; (2) stakeholders; (3) the legacy test environment andthe target test environment; (4) defining candidate test cases for migration; (5)describing the existing test environment; and (6) describing the target testenvironment in the cloud.

S. Tilley and T. Parveen, Software Testing in the Cloud,SpringerBriefs in Computer Science, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-32122-1,� The Author(s) 2012

87

Business Drivers and Technical Factors

Discussion Topic Questions

Goal and Expectations of

Migration

What are the business drivers for the migration

effort?

What are the technical drivers for the migration

effort?

Has prior pilot studies been done within the

organization for migration of software testing?

What are the expectations from the migration

effort?

What are the short-term goals?

What are the long-term goals?

What are perceived advantages/disadvantages in

migrating testing to the cloud?

Budget and Schedule

What is the timeframe for the migration?

What is the budget for migration?

Who is paying for the migration?

Are there any potential for additional resources?

Any constraints related to budget?

Other EffortsHave any other migration efforts been attempted?

What was the outcome?

Why did it fail or succeed?

What are lessons learned?

88 Appendix: SMART-T Questionnaire

Stakeholders

Discussion Topic Questions

Legacy Test Environment End

Users

Who are the end users of the legacy testing

environment?

Do all of them belong to the same organization or

group inside an organization?

Legacy System Owners

Who owns the legacy testing environment?

If there is more than one owner, are these separate

organizations?

Will the owners be directly involved with the

migration?

Legacy System Developers and

Maintainers

Who is the developer for the legacy test harness?

Are developers available to support the migration

process?

Is the maintenance group separate from the

development group?

If so, are maintainers available to support the

migration process?

People Conducting the Migration

Are current developers or maintainers going to be

performing the migration?

If not, what organization is performing the

migration?

What is the process for bringing them up to speed on

the legacy system?

Will this organization be available during the

SMART-T engagement?

TargetEnvironment

Owners

Is the target cloud environment owned and

maintained by a separate organization?

If so, will representatives be available during the

SMART-T engagement and during the migration

process?

Appendix: SMART-T Questionnaire 89

Legacy Test Environment and Target Test Environment

Discussion TopicQuestions

High Level Understanding of the Legacy Test

Environment

What is the main functionality provided by the legacy

test environment

What is the history of the legacy test environment

What is the high-level architecture of the system?

What portion of the system is envisioned for migration?

What is the current user interface to the system?

How complex is the user interface?

Candidate Test cases for

Migration

Have potential test cases for migration been identified?

What was the process to identify these test cases?

What applications will be using these tests?

How do these selected tests/test suites represent the goals

of migration?

What types of tests are currently in use in the system?

What types of tests will be migrated?

What programming language(s) is(are) the tests written

in?

What dependencies exist between the tests/test suites?

Are dependencies easy to identify?

Are the tests readable and easy to understand?

Are the tests documented?

Are the test results clear and easy to understand?

How difficult is test maintenance in the current system?

What difficulties exist in test maintenance?

High Level Understanding of

the Target Environment

What is the main driver to choose the cloud?

What are the main components in the target test environment?

Is it a standard or proprietary environment?

90 Appendix: SMART-T Questionnaire

Define Candidate Test Cases for Migration

Discussion Topic Questions

Characteristics of Test

Cases

Which application does the test cases belong to?

How many test cases are there?

What language are the test cases written in?

What is the high-level flow of execution for the

test cases?

What tools are needed to execute the test cases?

Are these tools commercial or home grown?

How are they test results presented?

Test Case Creation Who creates the test cases?

What process is followed in creating the test

cases?

Are manual test cases written before test cases are

automated?

What portion of the test cases can be converted to

automated test cases?

Test Code A nalysis What programming languages were used in the

development of the system?

What code documentation is available?

What coding standards are followed?

Is the coding standards document available?

What is the code structure?

What is the mapping between this structure and

the module view of the system?

Appendix: SMART-T Questionnaire 91

What coding standards are followed?

Is the coding standards document available?

Describe Existing Test Environment

Discussion

Topic

Questions

Functionality What is the main functionality provided by the system?

History What is the history of the system?

How old is it?

Who built it?

Who maintains it?

Platform What is the execution platform?

Test

Documentation

What system documentation is available?

How old is the documentation?

What part of the system is not documented or has outdated

documentation?

Development

Environment

What is the development environment?

Architecture Is there architecture documentation for the system?

How old is the architecture documentation?

Is there support available for all commercial components?

How will the commercial components adapt to the cloud

environment?

Are there any proprietary interfaces or connectors?

What are the major modules of the system?

What is the runtime view of the system?

How is dependencies handled?

Code What programming languages were used in the

development of the system?

What code documentation is available?

92 Appendix: SMART-T Questionnaire

Describe Target Test Environment

Discussion Topic

Questions

Constraints What are the constraints for using cloud for testing applications in this

organization?

What are the security concerns?

What are potential problems caused by these constraints (i.e. direct calls

to the operating system)?

Are there constraints on the use of commercial products?

If there are problems, are there potential replacements?

Ownership Who owns the target cloud environment?

If an external organization, what current communication and

collaboration exists?

Test Execution Platform

Where will the tests be executed?

Will they be hosted/ stored in the cloud or will they be delivered as

needed?

Are there requirements to write deployment procedures?

Cloud Infrastructure

What are the major components of the cloud infrastructure to be used

for testing?

Which components are commercial and which will be developed

internally?

Is there documentation available?

How well specified is the infrastructure?

Does thecloud environment provide infrastructure services; i.e.

communication, security, data storage?

How will these services be handled?

What is the communication model?

Are there tools to help in this area?

Are there available libraries and tools for the legacy platform to connect

to the infrastructure?

Appendix: SMART-T Questionnaire 93

References

1. Agrawal H.: Efficient coverage testing using global dominator graphs. In: Proceedings ofProgram Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering (PASTE’99), pp. 11–20, 1999

2. Amazon EC2 Pricing. http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/3. Amazon S3 Pricing. http://aws.amazon.com/s3/pricing/4. Amazon Web Services (AWS). http://aws.amazon.com/5. Apache. Ant. http://ant.apache.org/6. Apache. http://www.apache.org/7. Apache. Hadoop: An open source implementation of MapReduce. http://lucene.apache.

org/hadoop/8. Apache. Word Count http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/WordCount9. Armbrust, M., Fox, A., Grith, R., Joseph, A., Katz, R., Konwinski, A., Lee, G., Patterson,

D., Rabkin, A., Stoica, I., Zaharia, M.: Above the clouds: a Berkeley view of cloudcomputing. Technical Report UCB/EECS-2009-28, Electrical Engineering and ComputerSciences, University of California at Berkeley, 2009

10. Barham, P., Dragovic, B., Fraser, K., Hand, S., Harris, T., Ho, A., Neugebauer, R., Pratt, I.,Warfield, A.: Xen and the art of virtualization. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACMSymposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP), pages 164–177, October 2003

11. Beck, K.: Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change. Addison-WesleyProfessional, Boston (1999)

12. Beck, K.: Test Driven Development: By Example. Addison-Wesley Longman PublishingCo., Inc., Boston (2002)

13. Bergey, J., O’Brien, L., Smith, D.: Options Analysis for Reengineering (OAR): A methodfor mining legacy assets. Technical Report CMU/SEI-2001-TN-013, Pittsburgh, PA:Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2001

14. Berndt, D., Watkins, A.: High volume software testing using genetic algorithms. In:Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences(HICSS), 2005

15. Black, J., Melachrinoudis, E., Kaeli, D.: Bi-criteria models for all-uses test suite reduction.In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2004:May 23–28, 2004; Edinburgh, UK). IEEE CS Press, 2004

16. Bower, E.: Performance analysis of a distributed execution environment for JUnit test caseson a small cluster. MSE thesis, Department of Computer Sciences, Florida Institute ofTechnology, July 2010

17. Brodie, M., Stonebraker, M.: Migrating Legacy Systems-Gateway, Interfaces & IncrementalApproach. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., San Francisco (1995)

S. Tilley and T. Parveen, Software Testing in the Cloud,SpringerBriefs in Computer Science, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-32122-1,� The Author(s) 2012

95

18. Bryce, R.: Renewable Energy Can’t Run the Cloud. Wall Str. J. May 29, 201219. Buyya, R., Yeo, C., Venugopal, S., Broberg, J., Brandic, I.: Cloud computing and emerging

IT platforms: vision, hype, and reality for delivering computing as the 5th utility. FutureGener. Comput. Syst. 25, 599–616 (2009)

20. Chen, Y.F., Rosenblum, D., Vo, K.P.: Testtube: a system for selective regression testing. In:Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE’94: May16–21, 1994; Sorrento, Italy), pp. 211–220. IEEE CS Press, 1994

21. Chu, C., Kim, S., Lin, Y., Yu, Y., Bradski, G., Ng, A., Olukotun, K.: Map-Reduce formachine learning on multicore. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems(NIPS), pp. 281–288, Vancouver, Canada, 2006

22. Chun, B.: Dart: distributed automated regression testing for large-scale networkapplications. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Principles ofDistributed Systems, 2004

23. Cimitile, A., Carlini, U., Lucia, A.: Incremental migration strategy: data flow analysis forwrapping. In: Proceedings of the 5th IEEE Working Conference on Reverse Engineering(WCRE’98: Oct. 12–14, 1998; Honolulu, HI), pp. 59–68. IEEE CS Press, 1998

24. Cimitile, A., Lucia A., Lucca G., Fasolino A.: Identifying objects in legacy systems. In:Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Program Comprehension (WPC’97:May 28–30, 1997; Detroit, MI), pp. 138–147. IEEE CS Press, 1997

25. Comella-Dorda, S., Wallnau, K., Seacord, R. Robert, J. A survey of legacy systemmodernization approaches. Technical Report CMU/SEI-2000-TN-003. Pittsburgh, PA:Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2000

26. Cooney, M.: U.S. Energy lab nabs 10-petaflop IBM supercomputer for future research.Network World, February 2011

27. Copeland, P.: Google’s innovation factory: testing, culture, and infrastructure. In:Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification,and Validation (ICST 2010: April 6–10, 2010; Paris, France), pp. 11–14. IEEE CS Press, 2010

28. Crane, D., Pascarello, E., James, D.: Ajax in Action. Manning Publications Co., Greenwich(2005)

29. Dean, J., Ghemawat, S.: MapReduce: a flexible data processing tool. Commun. ACM 53(1),72–77 (2010)

30. Dean, J., Ghemawat, S.: MapReduce: simplified data processing on large clusters. Commun.ACM 51(1), 107–113 (2008)

31. Dean, J., Ghemawat, S.: MapReduce: simplified data processing on large clusters. In: 6thSymposium on Operating System Design and Implementation (OSDI’04), 2004

32. DejaGnu: http://www.gnu.org/software/dejagnu/33. Do, H., Rothermel, G., Kinneer, A.: Prioritizing JUnit test cases: an empirical assessment

and cost-benefits analysis. Empir. Softw. Eng.: Int. J. 11(1), 33–70 (2006)34. Dollimore, J., Kindberg, T., Coulouris, G.: Distributed Systems: Concepts and Design, 4th

edn. Addison Wesley,Boston (2005)35. Duarte, A., Cirne, W., Brasileiro, F., Machado, P.: Gridunit: software testing on the grid. In:

Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2006:May 20–28, 2006; Shanghai, China), pp. 779–782. IEEE CS Press, 2006

36. Duarte, A., Wagner, G., Brasileiro, F., Cirne, W.: Multi- environment software testing onthe grid. In: Proceedings of the 2006 Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Systems: testingand Debugging (PADTAD’06), pp. 61–68. ACM Press, 2006

37. Duarte, R., Cirne, W., Brasileiro, F., Duarte, P., Machado, D.: Using the computational gridto speed up software testing. In: Proceedings of 19th Brazilian Symposium on SoftwareEngineering, 2005

38. Elbak, A., Andersen, P.: IDC Energy Report—Potential Server and Datacenter CO2 Savingsin Denmark, October, 2009

96 References

39. Elbaum, S., Malishevsky, A., Rothermel, G.: Incorporating varying test costs and faultseverities into test case prioritization. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conferenceon Software Engineering (ICSE 2001: May 12–19, 2001; Toronto, Canada), pp. 329–338,IEEE CS Press, 2001

40. Elbaum, S., Malishevsky, A., Rothermel, G.: Test case prioritization: a family of empiricalstudies. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 28(2), 159–182 (2002)

41. Electric Cloud. http://www.electric-cloud.com/42. Elsayed, T., Lin, J., Oard D.: Pairwise document similarity in large collections with

MapReduce. In: Proceedings of the 46th Annual Meeting of the Association forComputational Linguistics (ACL 2008), Companion Volume, pp. 265–268, Columbus,Ohio, 2008

43. Eucalyptus. http://open.eucalyptus.com44. Expect. http://expect.nist.gov/45. Feldmen, S.: Make-A program for maintaining computer programs. Softw. Pract.

Experience 9(4), 255–256 (Apr. 1979)46. Fischer, K., Raji F., Chruscicki, A.: A methodology for retesting modified software. In:

Proceedings of National Telecommunication Conference, pp. B6.3.1–B6.3.6, 198147. Foster, I., Kesselman, C.: The Grid: Blueprint for a New Computing Infrastructure. Morgan

Kaufmann, San Francisco (2004)48. Foster, I., Zhao, Y., Raicu, I., Lu, S.: Cloud Computing and Grid Computing 360-degree

compared. Grid Computing Environments Workshop, pp. 1–10, 200849. Ghemawat, S., Gobio, H., Leung, S.: The Google file system. In: Proceedings of the 19th

ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP 2003), pp. 29–43, BoltonLanding, New York, 2003

50. GNU: GCC, the GNU Compiler Collection: http://gcc.gnu.org/ Last accessed: January, 201151. Google. Google C++ Testing Framework. Online at code.google.com/p/googletest/52. Goseva-Popstojanova, K., Hamill, M., Perugupalli, R.: Large empirical case study of

architecture-based software reliability. In: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE InternationalSymposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE), pp. 43–52, 2005

53. Hadoop Cluster. http://www.michael-noll.com/tutorials/running-hadoop-on-ubuntu-linux-multi-node-cluster/

54. Hadoop Streaming. http://hadoop.apache.org/common/docs/r0.15.2/streaming.html55. Harrold, M., Soffa M.: An incremental approach to unit testing during maintenance. In:

Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance (CSM’88:Nov. 16–19, 1998; Bethesda, MD), pp. 362–367. IEEE CS Press, 1998

56. Harrold, M., Gupta, R., Soffa, M.: A methodology for controlling the size of a test suite.ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2(3), 270–285 (1993)

57. Harrold, M., Jones, J., Li, T., Liang, D., Orso, A., Pennings, M., Sinha, S., Spoon, S.,Gujarathi, A.: Regression test selection for java software. In: Proceedings of the ACMConference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications(OOPSLA), November 2001

58. Hartmann, J., Robson, D.: Techniques for selective revalidation. IEEE Softw. 7(1), 31–36(1990)

59. Hoste, K., Eeckhout, L.: Cole: compiler optimization level exploration. In: Proceedings ofthe 6th annual IEEE/ACM international symposium on code generation and optimization(CGO ‘08), pp. 165–174. ACM Press, 2008

60. HP. Loadrunner. www.hp.com/LoadRunner61. http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/test.html62. http://www.linuxselfhelp.com/gnu/dejagnu/html_chapter/dejagnu_6.html63. IBM. http://www.ibm.com64. IEEE Std. 610.12-1990, Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology, IEEE,

1990

References 97

65. Jeffrey, D., Gupta N.: Test case prioritization using relevant slices. In: Proceedings ofInternational Computer Software Applications Conference, pp. 411–420, September 2006

66. Jetty. http://www.mortbay.org67. Kajko-Mattsson, M., Lewis, G., Smith, D.: Evolution and maintenance of SOA-based

systems at SAS. In: Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference onSystem Sciences (HICSS 2008), 2008

68. Kaner, C., Bond, W., McGee, P.: High volume test automation. Keynote, InternationalConference on Software Testing Analysis and Review (STAREAST 2004: Orlando, FL,May 20, 2004)

69. Kaner, C., Bach. J.: GUI-Level Test Automation and Its Requirements. www.testingeducation.org/k04/documents/BBSTGUIautomation.ppt

70. Kapfhammer, G.: Automatically and transparently distributing the execution of regressiontest suites. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Testing ComputerSoftware, 2001

71. Kim J., Porter A.: A history-based test prioritization technique for regression testing inresource constrained environments. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference onSoftware Engineering (ICSE 2002: May 19–25, 2002; Orlando, FL). IEE CS Press, 2002

72. Kundra, V.: Federal Cloud Computing Strategy. www.cio.gov/documents/Federal-Cloud-Computing-Strategy.pdf

73. Kung, D.C., Gao, J., Hsia, P., Toyoshima, Y., Chen, C.: On regression testing of object-oriented programs. J. Syst. Softw. 32(1), 21–31 (1996)

74. Lakhotia, A.: Understanding someone else’s code: analysis of experiences. J. Syst. Softw.23, 269–275 (1993)

75. Lauriat, S.: Advanced Ajax: Architecture and best practices. Prentice Hall PTR, UpperSaddle River (2007)

76. Leon, D., Podgurski, A.: A comparison of coverage-based and distribution- basedtechniques for filtering and prioritizing test cases. In: Proceedings of the 14th IEEEInternational Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE), pp. 442–453, 2003

77. Leung, H., White, L.: Insights into regression testing. In: Proceedings of the Conference onSoftware Maintenance, pp. 60–69, October 1989

78. Lewis, G., Morris, E., Simanta, S., Wrage L.: Common misconceptions about service-oriented architecture. In: Proceedings of the 6th International IEEE Conference onCommercial-off-the-Shelf (COTS)-Based Software Systems (ICCBSS’07), IEEE, 2007,pp. 123–130

79. Lewis, G.: Service-Oriented Architecture and its Implications for Software LifecycleActivities. Webinar Series, Carnegie Mellon University, Software Engineering Institute,2008. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/webinars/14aug2008.cfm

80. Lewis, G., Morris, E., Smith, D.: Migration of legacy components to service-orientedarchitectures. Softw. Archaeol. 8, (2005)

81. Lewis, G., Morris, E., Simanta, S., Wrage, L.: Effects of service-oriented architecture onsoftware development lifecycle activities. Softw. Process: Improv. Pract. 13, 135–144 (2008)

82. Lewis, G., Morris, E., Smith, D., Simanta, S.: SMART: Analyzing the Reuse Potential ofLegacy Components in a Service-Oriented Architecture Environment. Technical NoteCMU/SEI-2008-TN-008, Carnegie Mellon University, Software Engineering Institute, 2008

83. Li, J., Chinneck, J., Woodside, M., Litoiu, M.: Deployment of services in a cloud subject tomemory and license constraints. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 2009 International Conferenceon Cloud Computing (CLOUD 2009), pp. 33–40. IEEE Press, 2009

84. Lin J.: Scalable language processing algorithms for the masses: a case study in computingword co-occurrence matrices with Mapreduce. In: Proceedings of the 2008 Conference onEmpirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP 2008), pp. 419–428,Honolulu, Hawaii, 2008

85. Lin, J., Dyer C.: Data-Intensive Text Processing with MapReduce. Morgan & ClaypoolPublishers, San Rafael (2010)

98 References

86. Mann, K., Jones, T.: Distributed Computing with Linux and Hadoop. IBM DeveloperWorks, December 2008

87. McCarthy, J.: John McCarthy’s 1959 Memorandum. IEEE Ann. Hist. Comput. 14(1), 20–23(1992)

88. McGee, P., Kaner, C.: Experiments with high volume test automation. ACM SIGSOFTSoftw. Eng. Notes 29(5), 1–3 (2004)

89. Memon, A., Porter, A., Yilmaz, C., Nagarajan, A., Schmidt, D., Natarajan, B.: Skoll:distributed continuous quality assurance. (ICSE 2004: May 23–28, 2004; Edinburgh, UK),pp. 459–468. IEEE CS Press, 2004

90. Microsoft Virtual PC. http://www.microsoft.com/virtualpc91. Nurmi, D., Wolski, R., Grzegorczyk, C., Obertelli, G., Soman, S., Youseff L., Zagorodnov,

D.: Eucalyptus: a Technical Report on an Elastic Utility Computing Architecture LinkingYour Programs to Useful Systems. UCSB Computer Science Technical Report, Number2008-10, 2008

92. Nurmi, D., Wolski, R., Grzegorczyk, C., Obertelli, G., Soman, S., Youseff, L., Zagorodnov,D.: The Eucalyptus open source cloud-computing system. In: Proceedings of CloudComputing and Its Applications workshop (CCA’08), 2008

93. Onoma, A., Tsai, W., Poonawala, M., Suganuma, H.: Regression testing in an industrialenvironment. Commun. ACM 41(5), 81–85 (May 1998)

94. OurGrid. http://www.ourgrid.org/95. Patton, R.: Software Testing, 2nd edn. Sams, Indiana (2005)96. Qu, B., Nie, C., Xu, B., Zhang, X.: Test case prioritization for black box testing. In:

Proceedings of the 31st IEEE International Conference on Computer Software andApplications (COMPSAC), pp. 465–474, 2007

97. Rothermel, G., Harrold, M.: A safe, efficient regression tests selection technique. ACMTrans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 6(2), 73–210 (1997)

98. Rothermel, G., Harrold, M.J.: Analyzing regression test selection techniques. IEEE. Trans.Softw. Eng. 22(8), 529–551 (1996)

99. Rothermel, G., Harrold, M.J., Dedhia, J.: Regression test selection for C++ software.J. Softw. Test, Verification, Reliab. 10(6), 77–109 (2000)

100. Rothermel, G., Untch, R., Chu, C.: Prioritizing test cases for regression testing. IEEE Trans.Softw. Eng. 27(10), 929–948 (2001)

101. Rothermel, G., Untch, R., Chu, C., Harrold, M.: Test case prioritization: an empirical study.In: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Conference of Software Maintenance(ICSM), pp. 179–188, 1999

102. Saff, D., Ernst M.: An experimental evaluation of continuous testing during development.International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA 2004: July 2004;Boston, MA), pp. 76–85. ACM Press, 2004

103. Saff, D., Ernst, M.: Reducing wasted development time via continuous testing. In:Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering(ISSRE), pp. 281–292, Denver, CO. 2003

104. SauceLab. http://saucelabs.com/105. SEI. Migrating Legacy Systems to SOA Environments http://www.sei.cmu.edu/training/

V06.cfm106. Shadish, W., Cook, T., Campbell, D.: Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for

Generalized Causal Inference. Houghton Mifflin, Boston (2002)107. Shivastava, A., Thiagarajan, J.: Effectively prioritizing tests in development environment.

In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA),pp. 97–106. ACM Press, 2002

108. Skytap. http://www.skytap.com/109. SOASTA. http://www.soasta.com/110. Spring Framework. http://www.springsource.org/

References 99

111. Sreedevi, S., Bryce, R., Viswanath, G., Kandimalla, V., Koru, A.: Prioritizing user-session-based test cases for web applications testing. In: Proceedings of the 1st IEEE InternationalConference on Software Testing Verification and Validation (ICST 2008), pp. 141–150.IEEE CS Press, 2008

112. Srikanth, H., Williams, L., Osborne, J.: System test case prioritization of new and regressiontest cases. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Empirical SoftwareEngineering, pp. 64–73, 2005

113. Tanenbaum, A., Steen, M.: Distributed Systems: Principles and Paradigms, 2nd edn.Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2006)

114. TCL. http://tcl.sourceforge.net/115. Tilley, S.: The evolution process framework. Lecture notes, Software Maintenance &

Evolution course, Florida Institute of Technology, Spring 2009116. Tilley, S.: SWE 5002: Software Engineering 2, Florida Institute of Technology, offered

Spring 2009117. Tilley, S., Parveen, T.: 2nd International Workshop on Software Testing in the Cloud

(STITC 2010), Held as part of the 3rd International Conference on Software Testing,Verification and Validation (ICST 2010: April 6–9, 2010; Paris, France)

118. Tilley, S., Parveen, T. (eds.): Software Testing in the Cloud: Perspectives on an EmergingDiscipline. IGI Global, 2012.

119. US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). A NIST Definition of CloudComputing. Report SP 800-145, Sept. 2011

120. uTest. http://www.utest.com/121. Vaquero, L., Merino, L., Caceres, J., Lindner, M.: A break in the clouds: towards a cloud

definition. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 39(1), 50–55122. VMWare. Understanding Full Virtualization, Paravirtualization, and Hardware Assist.

http://www.vmware.com/resources/techresources/1008123. VMware. vSphere Hypervisor (ESXi). http://www.vmware.com/products/vsphere-hypervisor/124. Vokolos, F., Frankl, P.: Empirical evaluation of the textual differencing regression testing

technique. In: Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Conference of SoftwareMaintenance (CSM’88: Nov. 16-19, 1998; Bethesda, MD), pp. 44–53. IEEE CS Press, 1998

125. Walcott, K., Soffa, M., Kapfhammer, G., Roos, R.: Time aware test suite prioritization. In:Proceedings of the International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA),pp. 1–12, ACM Press, 2006

126. White, T.: Hadoop: The Definitive Guide. O’Reilly, Yahoo! Press (2009)127. Wolfe, J., Haghighi, A., Klein, D.: Fully distributed EM for very large datasets In:

Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 1184–1191,Helsinki, Finland, 2008

128. Wong, E., Horgan, J.R., London, S., Bellcore, H.: A study of effective regression testing inpractice. In: Proceedings of the 8th IEEE International Symposium on Software ReliabilityEngineering (ISSRE), pp. 264–274, 1997

129. Wu, B., Lawless, D., Bisbal, J., Richardson, R., Grimson, J., Wade, V., O’Sullivan, D.: Thebutterfly methodology: a gateway-free approach for migrating legacy information systems.In: Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems(ICECCS), Italy, September 1997

130. Xavier C., Iyengar S.: Introduction to parallel algorithms. In: Zomaya, A.Y. (ed.) WileySeries on Parallel & Distributed Computing, Wiley, New York (1998)

131. xUnit. http://sourceforge.net/projects/xunit/132. Yahoo!. Managing a Hadoop Cluster. http://developer.yahoo.com/hadoop/tutorial/module7

.html133. Youseff, L., Wolski, R., Gorda, B., Krintz, C.: Paravirtualization for HPC systems.

Workshop on Xen in high-performance cluster and grid computing, 2006134. Yuejian, L., Nancy, W.: An overview of regression testing. ACM SIGSOFT Softw. Eng.

Notes 24(1), 69–73 (January 1999)

100 References

135. Zhang, X., Nie, C., Xu, B., Qu, B.: Test case prioritization based on varying testingrequirement priorities and test case costs. In: Proceedings of the IEEE InternationalConference on Quality Software (QSIC), pp. 15–24, 2007

136. Zheng, L., Harman, M., Hierons, R.: Search algorithms for regression test caseprioritization. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 33(4), 225–237 (2007)

References 101

About the Authors

Scott Tilley is a faculty member at the Florida Institute of Technology, where heis a Professor of Software Engineering in the Department of Computer Sciences, aProfessor of Information Systems in the College of Business, and an AssociateMember of the Harris Institute for Assured Information. He is also a VisitingScientist at Carnegie Mellon University’s Software Engineering Institute. Hiscurrent research is in software testing, cloud computing, and system migration. Heis the lead editor of the book Software Testing in the Cloud: Perspectives on anEmerging Discipline (IGI Global, 2012). He writes the weekly ‘‘TechnologyToday’’ column for the Florida Today newspaper (Gannett). Scott holds a PhD inComputer Science from the University of Victoria.

Tauhida Parveen is an independent consultant and trainer with an emphasis oncloud computing and software testing. She has worked in quality assurance withorganizations such as WikiMedia Foundation, Millennium Engineering &Integration, Yahoo!, Sabre, and Progressive Auto Insurance. She has presentedat numerous trade conferences, published in several academic journals, andorganized workshops at international events. She is an ISTQB Foundation LevelCertified Software Tester (CTFL). She is the co-editor of the book SoftwareTesting in the Cloud: Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline (IGI GLobal, 2012).Tauhida holds a PhD in Computer Science from the Florida Institute ofTechnology.

S. Tilley and T. Parveen, Software Testing in the Cloud,SpringerBriefs in Computer Science, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-32122-1,� The Author(s) 2012

103