CLIAMS:We claim
1. A method for automating testing of a software, the method comprising:
receiving, using one or more hardware processors, at least one test case associated with at least one test platform;
executing, using one or more hardware processors, the at least one test case associated with the at least one test platform;
interjecting, using one or more hardware processors, a variable time delay between successive runs for the at least one test case, the variable time delay based on at least inertia associated with the at least one test platform;
building, using one or more hardware processors, a sequence of one or more test results for the at least one test case;
determining, using one or more hardware processors, an output consistency based on the one or more test results for the at least one test case; and
determining, using one or more hardware processors, a fault associated with the at least one test platform or the software based on the output consistency.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the inertia comprises at least one of a time interval to recover by faulty wireless channel, a time interval to recover in faulty disk, a time interval to recover in loaded CPU, a time interval to recover in loaded memory, and a time interval to recover in a congested network channel.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein number of times the at least one test case is executed is fixed initially based on the respective inertia associated with the at least one test platform.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein distinct repetitive runs for the at least one test case is performed, at least one run of the distinct repetitive runs being performed for each of the at least one test platform.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein number of times the at least one test case is executed varies based on nature of the at least one test case and pattern of the one or more test results.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the variable time delay varies from a predefined lower threshold to a predefined upper threshold.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the output consistency comprises:
testing if last N test results to execute a test case result in an unanimous outcome, N being a design parameter.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the output consistency comprises:
testing if predefined percentage or more than the predefined percentage of the last N test attempts to execute the at least one test case results in a common outcome, N being a design parameter.
9. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the output consistency comprises:
determining majority of predetermined N attempts to execute the at least one test case, N being a design parameter.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the output consistency comprises:
testing if there is at least one pass outcome in fixed length string of the one or more test results;
11. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the output consistency comprises:
determining pass/fail state of at least one of the software and the at least one test platform by aggregating individual test results from each of the at least one test case;
12. A system for automating testing of a software, the system comprising:
one or more hardware processors; and
a computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more hardware processors, cause the one or more hardware processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving, using one or more hardware processors, at least one test case associated with at least one test platform;
executing, using one or more hardware processors, the at least one test case associated with the at least one test platform;
interjecting, using one or more hardware processors, a variable time delay between successive runs for the at least one test case, the variable time delay based on at least inertia associated with the at least one test platform;
building, using one or more hardware processors, a sequence of one or more test results for the at least one test case;
determining, using one or more hardware processors, an output consistency based on the one or more test results; and
determining, using one or more hardware processors , a fault associated with the at least one test platform or the software based on the output consistency.
13. The system of claim 12, wherein the inertia comprises at least one of a time interval to recover by faulty wireless channel, a time interval to recover in faulty disk, a time interval to recover in loaded CPU, a time interval to recover in loaded memory, and a time interval to recover in a congested network channel.
14. The system of claim 12, wherein the medium stores further instructions that, when executed by the one or more hardware processors causes the one or more hardware processors to perform operations comprising: fixing initially number of times the at least one test case is executed, the fixing based on the respective inertia associated with the at least one test platform.
15. The system of claim 12, wherein the medium stores further instructions that, when executed by the one or more hardware processors causes the one or more hardware processors to perform operations comprising: performing distinct repetitive runs for the at least one test case, at least one run of the distinct repetitive runs being performed for each of the at least one test platform.
16. The system of claim 12, wherein number of times the at least one test case is executed varies based on nature of the at least one test case and pattern of the one or more test results.
17. The system of claim 12, wherein the variable time delay varies from a predefined lower threshold to a predefined upper threshold.
18. The system of claim 13, wherein the operation of determining the output consistency comprises:
testing if last N test results to execute the at least one test case result in an unanimous outcome, N being a design parameter.
19. The system of claim 12, wherein the operation of determining the output consistency comprises:
testing if predefined percentage or more than the predefined percentage of the last N test attempts to execute the at least one test case results in a common outcome, N being a design parameter.
20. The system of claim 12, wherein the operation of determining the output consistency comprises:
determining majority of predetermined N attempts to execute the at least one test case, N being a design parameter.
21. The system of claim 12, wherein the operation of determining the output consistency comprises:
testing if there is at least one pass outcome in fixed length string of the one or more test results;
22. The system of claim 12, wherein the operation of determining the output consistency comprises:
determining pass/fail state of at least one of the software and the at least one test platform by aggregating individual test results from each of the at least one test case;
23. A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions for automating testing of a software that, when executed by the one or more hardware processors, cause the one or more hardware processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving, using one or more hardware processors, at least one test case associated with at least one test platform;
executing, using one or more hardware processors, the at least one test case associated with at least one test platform;
interjecting, using one or more hardware processors, a variable time delay between successive runs for the at least one test case, the variable time delay based on at least inertia associated with the at least one transient faulty test platform;
building, using one or more hardware processors, a sequence of the one or more test results for the at least one test case;
determining, using one or more hardware processors, an output consistency based on the one or more test results for the at least one test case; and
determining, using one or more hardware processors ,a fault associated with the at least one test platform or the software based on the output consistency.

Dated this 12th day of March, 2015
Shwetha A Chimalgi
Of K&S Partners
Agent for the Applicant
,TagSPECI:TECHNICAL FIELD
The present disclosure relates generally to automating testing of software, and more particularly but not limited to automating testing of a software associated with a transient faulty test platform.