Blocking issues can infuse a great deal of intrigue into otherwise normal testing days.
In this article, I plan to highlight a few steps that a tester can take when confronted with them.
Recommended IPTV Service Providers
- IPTVGREAT – Rating 4.8/5 ( 600+ Reviews )
- IPTVRESALE – Rating 5/5 ( 200+ Reviews )
- IPTVGANG – Rating 4.7/5 ( 1200+ Reviews )
- IPTVUNLOCK – Rating 5/5 ( 65 Reviews )
- IPTVFOLLOW -Rating 5/5 ( 48 Reviews )
- IPTVTOPS – Rating 5/5 ( 43 Reviews )
I shall assume that our esteemed audience already has a comprehensive understanding of defect severity and priority. Need a brief refresher? Consider this enlightening resource.
Is it always required to halt all testing procedures when faced with a blocking problem?
In select cases, “yes,” but not constantly. It’s possible that some testing tasks can still be attempted.
Image Source
Below are a number of scenarios I’ve experienced throughout my testing professional path. I am confident that adhering to the steps explained below (subsequently summarized into a flowchart) can make this process more straightforward.
Let’s delve into it.
Actions to Implement when faced with a Blocking Defect
Step #1: Devote time to pinpointing the fundamental source of the issue.
I ardently believe that an examiner’s duties should go beyond simply documenting defects. If time allows it, we should scrutinize what could have incited the issue. While it’s possible that we may not always decipher the exact problematic area, we should aim to perform as in-depth troubleshooting as feasible. Any vital details can be included as additional comments to the defect.
This approach has been vastly applicable in my projects, often leading to quicker issue resolution. Root cause exploration offers the following advantages:
- It enhances value by equipping developers with more detailed guidance for bug elimination.
- Moreover, it enables QA testers to figure out if the issue originates from user mistake (like data entry or utilization errors) that could be rectified by the tester. When such errors are relayed to developers without going through QA verification, they are regarded as non-issues and might tarnish the tester’s credibility.
As a result, I advise verifying our discoveries before documenting a defect.
Here are some real-world examples drawn from my projects that demonstrate the points mentioned above:
I participated in a project that demanded we drop a file at a specific spot during testing. We would retitle the file to match the name designated in the configuration file afterward. A scheduled task would subsequently retrieve the data file and import the data into the system. We would then validate the data in the database and the user interface.
Occasionally, situations arise where the task would execute, but the data wouldn’t load. After exploration, we found out that the tester had overlooked modifying the file name when dropping it at the assigned spot.
While this issue was decidedly a blocker, it wasn’t developer-dependent. We needed to employ meticulousness and prevent these minor errors.
The following are standardized categories, root causes, and solutions:
#1) Hosts File Problem– Suppose your hosts file comprises erroneous parameters leading to the problem. In such instances, you can either renew the hosts file yourself or ask for help from someone with the needed access permissions to perform the renewal, allowing testing to continue while also lodging a defect for developer investigation.
Caution: Ensure that implementing these revisions is approved by your project teams before moving forward.
#2) Configuration– Often, we encounter configuration problems, like wrong environment settings or other setup difficulties, leading to blocking defects. Under such circumstances, testers can alter the settings and proceed with testing.
Caution: Once again, ascertain that you have authorization before implementing any changes.
#3) Code Problem – If you assume that the issue stems from the code, testers are incapable of correcting it. Under this situation, log a blocker defect and wait for a solution before restarting the testing.
#4) Deployment Problem – Poor deployment frequently generates blocking defects, typically detected during a validity test. Under such circumstances, testing should be instantaneously stopped until a new build is obtained.
#5) Environment Down – If the environment isn’t functioning, such as unsuccessful database connectivity to the server or the website URL not operating, testers have limited options other than reporting the defect and waiting for the system to be functional.
Thus, if a feasible workaround is available, apply it to enable uninterrupted testing. Researching the root cause is generally the optimal approach to establish if a workaround is possible.
Step #2: It’s easy to get captured in an endless cycle when researching the root cause. As a result, make certain it doesn’t devour a full day and all available resources.
Ponder the following suggestions:
- Pursue balance and be aware of when to conclude the investigation.
- A tester’s expertise and proficiency play a vital role in carrying out successful root cause analysis. However, it is advisable to involve the team and team leader as needed.
- If the root cause analysis becomes time-consuming, promptly report the problem and provide as much data as possible. Screenshots can be immensely effective in speeding up the process.
- If required, follow up. Dispatch an email to the manager or developer to draw attention to the crucial issue.
- Continue troubleshooting after notifying the relevant individuals.
Justifications for promptly reporting blocking defects:
- Management should be informed of any downtime caused by a devastating defect. This data needs to be communicated to the client and might necessitate modifications to the project plan (like QA schedules) and variations in deliverables, among others.
- Delays in QA deliverables should be backed with evidence. Consequently, it’s better to communicate as soon as possible rather than waiting until day-end.
Step #3: Having performed the issue analysis and communicated it, what should be done next?
- If the issue is obstructing access to a specific functional area, determine if it impacts other areas too.
- If the front-end application is non-operational, check whether backend/middleware/database testing can still be executed.
- If no test implementation can occur, consider allocating time to documentation-related chores relevant to your project.
- You might also examine potential zones for automation if you find yourself repeatedly performing manual tasks. Automation isn’t always reliant on sophisticated tools. For instance, the generation of reports can be automated using straightforward Excel macros and similar methods.
- Devote time to discover open-source tools that can boost your project’s efficiency.
- And finally, aim for innovation, as it is currently the reigning mantra!
To wrap up, here is a flowchart summarizing the entire discussion:
Flowchart: Procedures for Managing a Blocking Defect
Author: This excellent piece was authored by Priya R., from the STH team.
What steps do you implement when faced with a blocking defect?