Decoding Smoke Testing vs. Sanity Testing
As QA testers, we
constantly encounter various testing terminologies, and two that often come up
are smoke testing and sanity testing. While they might sound
similar, understanding their distinct purposes is crucial for effective
software testing and ensuring the quality of our applications. Let's dive into
the key differences between these valuable testing techniques.
Smoke
Testing: Is the Build Stable Enough to Test?
Think of smoke
testing as the very first check you perform on a new software build, much like
turning on a brand-new device for the first time. The main question it aims to
answer is: "Is the build stable enough for further testing?".
Here's
a breakdown of smoke testing:
- Definition: Smoke
testing is a preliminary test to check if the basic
functionalities of a build are working without any critical failures.
It acts as a build acceptance check.
- When
Performed:
It is conducted immediately after a new build is released, such as
daily builds.
- Scope: Smoke
testing has a broad and shallow scope, covering the major
features superficially. This includes checking core workflows like
login, homepage load, and basic navigation. Think of it as a shallow
and wide approach to build validation.
- Objective: The primary
objective is to reject unstable builds early, thus preventing
wasted effort on more detailed testing. If the "device doesn't power
on" (major functionalities fail), there's no point in deep diving.
- Depth: Smoke tests
involve surface-level checks without detailed validation.
- Outcome: If a smoke
test fails, it indicates that the build is too unstable and is rejected
for further testing.
- Terminology: Smoke
testing is also known as Build Verification Testing (BVT).
Example: After receiving a new build of an
e-commerce website, a smoke test might involve verifying if you can log in,
navigate to the product catalog, and view a product page.
Sanity
Testing: Did the Recent Fix Work Without Breaking Anything Else?
Sanity testing
comes into play after minor changes have been made to a codebase, such
as bug fixes or small updates. Imagine getting your phone screen repaired –
you'd turn it on to specifically check if the new screen works and if the basic
phone functionalities are still intact. The core question here is: "Did
the recent fix work without breaking anything else?".
Let's
explore the details of sanity testing:
- Definition: Sanity
testing is a focused test to verify specific functionality or
bug fixes after these minor changes. It ensures that the changes
work as intended. It is a change validation check.
- When
Performed:
Sanity testing is done after code changes or fixes are implemented
on a stable build, such as post-bug fixes or minor updates.
- Scope: It has a narrow
and deep scope, targeting the specific areas impacted by the recent
changes. If a payment bug was fixed, sanity testing would focus
heavily on payment processing. This is a narrow and deep approach
to change validation.
- Objective: The
objective is to validate the rationality of the changes and decide
if further testing is justified. If the screen replacement caused
the microphone to stop working, further testing is needed on the microphone
functionality.
- Depth: Sanity
testing involves in-depth testing of specific modules or fixes.
- Outcome: If a sanity
test fails, it means the specific fixes need to be sent back for rework.
- Terminology: While
sometimes confused with Regression Testing, sanity testing is more
targeted. Regression testing aims to ensure that changes haven't
negatively impacted existing functionalities across the application,
whereas sanity testing focuses on the immediate impact of the specific
changes.
Example: After a bug fix related to payment
processing is deployed, a sanity test would involve thoroughly testing various
checkout scenarios to confirm the fix works and hasn't introduced new issues in
the payment flow.
Key
Differences at a Glance:
Here's a quick
summary of the core distinctions:
- Focus: Smoke
testing focuses on build stability, while sanity testing focuses on
change validation.
- Scope: Smoke
testing is shallow and wide, covering major functionalities. Sanity
testing is narrow and deep, targeting specific changes.
- Timing: Smoke
testing is done on new builds, while sanity testing is performed on
stable builds after minor changes.
Conclusion: Testing Smarter and Saving Time
Both smoke
testing and sanity testing are essential practices in quality assurance. By
understanding their distinct roles and when to apply them, QA testers can
significantly improve the efficiency and effectiveness of their testing
efforts, ensuring that only stable and correctly modified software proceeds to
more comprehensive testing phases. They are valuable tools for testing
smarter and saving time.
Comments