CTAL-TTA Leak Questions

Quantitative Questionnaires are the best elicitation technique for questioning a large number of stakeholders specifically to obtain information for non-functional acceptance criteria. This method allows for collecting measurable, numerical data from a broad audience efficiently, which is crucial for understanding and defining non-functional requirements such as performance, scalability, and usability

In this scenario, the small supermarket chain faces two primary risks due to hosting both the data warehousing software and the product inventory application on the same server:

Resource Conflicts: Co-existence of both applications on the same server may introduce resource conflicts, potentially impacting the functionality of the product inventory application.

Data Loss/Corruption: In the event of loss or corruption of product inventory data during transfer to the warehouse, it may not be possible to restore from backup in the required timeframe, resulting in lost business.

Appropriate Non-Functional Test Types:

Reliability Testing (Option C):

Reliability testing ensures that the system performs consistently and accurately over time, even under load. This will help in identifying potential issues related to data loss or corruption and ensure that backup and restore processes work as expected within the required timeframe.

Stress Testing (Option C):

Stress testing evaluates the system's behavior under extreme conditions, such as peak loads. This will help in identifying resource conflicts and the system's ability to handle concurrent operations of both the data warehousing software and the product inventory application without performance degradation.

Explanation of Incorrect Options:

A. Compatibility Testing and Reliability Testing:

Compatibility testing is not directly relevant to the identified risks. Reliability testing is correct, but it needs to be paired with stress testing to address resource conflicts effectively.

B. Load Testing and Portability Testing:

Load testing alone does not cover the extreme conditions needed to identify resource conflicts. Portability testing is not relevant to the identified risks.

D. Maintainability Testing and Load Testing:

Maintainability testing is not directly relevant to the immediate operational risks. Load testing is part of the solution but needs to be paired with stress testing.

References:

The ISTQB CTAL-TTA syllabus covers various non-functional testing types and their relevance to different risk scenarios. Reliability and stress testing are crucial in this context to ensure the system can handle concurrent applications and maintain data integrity under load.

Sources:

ISTQB-CTAL-TTA Syllabus

General knowledge on non-functional testing types and their applications.

Including security testing in a test approach is valid when there are concerns about unauthorized access or activities, such as the threat of unauthorized copying of applications or data (option A). This type of testing aims to uncover vulnerabilities that could be exploited to compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the system. The other options listed—availability measurements (option B), system's peak load handling (option C), and frequent software changes (option D)—relate to different aspects of testing, such as reliability, performance, and maintainability, which are not directly associated with security testing.

To determine the percentage of decision testing coverage achieved by the given suite of test cases, we need to analyze the decisions and outcomes in the provided logic.

Detailed Analysis

Identify all decisions in the logic:

IF account number is valid

IF customer account is active

IF oldBalance < zero

IF balance now >= zero

IF account holder is VIP customer

Calculate the number of unique decisions:

There are 5 unique decision points in the logic.

Determine the possible outcomes for each decision:

IF account number is valid → 2 outcomes (True, False)

IF customer account is active → 2 outcomes (True, False)

IF oldBalance < zero → 2 outcomes (True, False)

IF balance now >= zero → 2 outcomes (True, False)

IF account holder is VIP customer → 2 outcomes (True, False)

Test Cases Analysis

Test Case A

Account number valid → True

Account is active → True

OldBalance = -100 → True (less than zero)

Balance now = +200 → True (greater than zero)

Not a VIP customer → False

Test Case B

Account number valid → True

Account is active → True

OldBalance = -100 → True (less than zero)

Balance now = -50 → False (less than zero)

Is a VIP customer → True

Coverage Calculation

To calculate the decision coverage, we need to see how many of the possible outcomes are covered by the test cases:

IF account number is valid (True in both A and B, False not tested)

IF customer account is active (True in both A and B, False not tested)

IF oldBalance < zero (True in both A and B, False not tested)

IF balance now >= zero (True in A, False in B, both outcomes tested)

IF account holder is VIP customer (False in A, True in B, both outcomes tested)

Out of the 10 possible outcomes (2 for each decision), the given test cases cover 6 outcomes:

Account number valid → True

Account number valid → False (not covered)

Customer account active → True

Customer account active → False (not covered)

OldBalance < zero → True

OldBalance < zero → False (not covered)

Balance now >= zero → True

Balance now >= zero → False

Account holder is VIP → True

Account holder is VIP → False

Thus, 6 out of the 10 outcomes are covered by the test cases, giving us a decision coverage percentage of:

Decision Coverage=(610)×100%=60%\text{Decision Coverage} = \left(\frac{6}{10}\right) \times 100\% = 60\%Decision Coverage=(106​)×100%=60%

References:

The sample questions and answers provided in the ISTQB CTAL-TTA documentation confirm this calculation method and the expected coverage percentage for similar logical scenarios​​​​​​.