Writing test cases for a module often takes more time than coding the module itself. I think that this is not unusual, and any project that is serious about testing must factor in additional time and effort for this activity. In the company I work for, we never write automated tests. All testing is carried out by running the program, feeding input and checking output manually. This form of testing is important as well, but totally inadequate. A unit test written by the developer can test aspects that a user or operator can never have access to.
Of course, all test cases are not created equal. Often we hear about projects that use JUnit based testing framework, but this in itself does not prove how good the testing is. There are several things to look for:
- Test coverage - how much of the program has been subjected to testing.
- Test scenario - a program is meant to be used in many different scenarios. How many of the possible scenarios have been tested.
- Test data - has the program been tested for variations in data?
For a project like SimpleDBM, testing is additionally complicated by two things:
- Liberal use of threads and multi-threading constructs complicate testing.
- Recovery operations need the system to be crashed in various ways.
It is not always possible to write test cases that are non-intrusive. Sometimes it is necessary for the program being tested to cooperate with the test framework. For example, in the BTree split page test case, I need to be able to crash the system at specific points in order to test recovery. To do this, I use flags within the BTree module that the test framework can manipulate to trigger this behaviour. For normal operations, the flags can be switched off.