Chapter 30 — Laboratory II

Chapter 30 — Laboratory II

Lesson map

Lesson 30 published. Map, example, EX088.

flowchart TD
  N0["Learning outcomes"]
  N1["30.1 End-to-end lifecycle"]
  N2["30.2 Recovery and failure tests"]
  N3["30.3 Comparing with Laboratory I"]
  N4["Synthesis"]
  N0 --> N1 --> N2 --> N3 --> N4
  N4 --> EX["Worked example"]
  EX --> Q["Exercise EX088"]

Logical drawing

flowchart LR
  N0["Learning outcomes"]
  N1["30.1 End-to-end lifecycle"]
  N2["30.2 Recovery and failure tests"]
  N3["30.3 Comparing with Laboratory I"]
  N4["Synthesis"]
  N0 --> N1 --> N2 --> N3 --> N4 --> Q["EX088"]

[Learning outcomes]
    |
    v
[30.1 End-to-end lifecycle]
    |
    v
[30.2 Recovery and failure tests]
    |
    v
[30.3 Comparing with Laboratory I]
    |
    v
[Synthesis]
    |
    v
[Worked example] --> [Exercise EX088]

Learning outcomes

You will (1) test the full lifecycle end to end; (2) test recovery and failure handling; (3) compare with Laboratory I.

30.1 End-to-end lifecycle

Laboratory II tests the whole lifecycle in the trial tenant: a synthetic joiner is created from a test HR record and gains team access; they move team and lose old groups after the grace period; they leave and are disabled the same evening, with a report listing their finance account. Elena checks each step's timing and result. End-to-end tests catch problems that single-control tests miss, such as a mover whose grace period never ended because of a date format. Each run is recorded with its timings.

30.2 Recovery and failure tests

Elena also tests what happens when things go wrong. A synthetic operative loses a security key: the recovery steps are followed and the lost key is revoked. The HR test file is missing one night: the evening job must stop and alert rather than treat everyone as leavers. A synthetic administrator account is used outside working hours: an alert must reach the IT lead. Testing failure handling is essential, because these paths are rarely used and therefore often broken. Each result is logged as evidence.

30.3 Comparing with Laboratory I

Laboratory II runs thirty tests, twenty-nine of which pass. The single failure is the missing HR file test: the job stopped but sent no alert. It is fixed and retested. Compared with Laboratory I, more tests cover failure paths and end-to-end flows, and the earlier failures stay fixed, confirmed by rerunning them. Elena records results in the same evidence format, showing steady progress and giving the IT lead confidence before the capstone changes go live. The IT lead signs off the results before go-live.

Worked example

Twenty-nine of thirty Laboratory II tests pass; the missing-HR-file job stopped safely but sent no alert, which is fixed and retested.

Synthetic case. Tests and failures are synthetic.

Errors and limits

A job that treats a missing HR file as everyone leaving would disable every account at once.

Exercises

• EX088 — Lab II result. How many Laboratory II tests passed? Rubric: 3 = 29 of 30;; 2 = 29;; 1 = 30;; 0 = none.
• EX089 — Missing file behaviour. What must the evening job do if the HR file is missing? Rubric: 3 = stop and alert, not disable everyone;; 2 = stop;; 1 = disable;; 0 = none.
• EX090 — Rerun purpose. Why rerun Laboratory I tests? Rubric: 3 = confirm earlier fixes stay fixed;; 2 = regression;; 1 = vague;; 0 = none.

Synthesis

End-to-end and failure-path tests show the lifecycle works and fails safely.

Continue studying — chapter 30 of 40

← Chapter 29 (draft) · Course chapter index · Chapter 31 (draft) →