Pass the ISTQB Advance Level CTAL-TTA Questions and answers with ExamsMirror

The statement "Test suite coverage can be increased without the need for refactoring" is accurate because test suite coverage refers to the extent to which the test cases cover the software under test. This coverage can be enhanced by adding new tests that address areas not previously covered, without necessarily modifying the existing test structures or setups. Refactoring is often related to improving the internal design of the tests for better maintainability or performance but does not inherently affect the coverage directly .

The characteristics listed in the question point towards the need to manage synchronization between processes and make efficient use of limited hardware resources, such as microcontrollers and timeslots. Additionally, the complexity and concurrency of tasks highlight the importance of the software's performance over time. Time-behaviour testing is the most appropriate non-functional test type to perform in this scenario as it focuses on evaluating the timing aspects of the system, such as response times, processing times, and throughput rates. It ensures that the system meets its time-related requirements, which is critical for systems reliant on synchronization and limited by hardware performance constraints.

API testing tends to focus on individual inputs more than combinations of inputs. This is because APIs, as the intermediary layers of software, often handle specific types of data input and output rather than user interaction sequences. GUI testing, on the other hand, involves testing the interface with which the user interacts, which frequently includes testing various combinations of user inputs and sequences to simulate actual user scenarios. Thus, GUI testing typically requires checking the integration and behavior of elements in combination to ensure they work together as expected in a user environment .

Control flow analysis is a technique used to examine the sequence in which instructions or statements are executed within a program. In the given pseudocode, the key aspects to consider are the logical flow and any conditional branches that may lead to unreachable code.

The pseudocode provided is:

Program tax check

BEGIN

yearly := 0

tax := 0

get (monthly)

get (tax_rate)

for I = 1..12 loop

yearly := yearly + monthly

tax := tax - (tax_rate * monthly)

ENDLOOP

salary := monthly * 12

IF salary = yearly THEN

print ("Salary OK")

ELSE

print ("Salary not OK")

ENDIF

year_tax := salary * tax_rate

IF year_tax = tax THEN

print ("Tax Problem")

ENDIF

END tax check

Analysis:

Initialization and Input:yearly and tax are initialized to 0. The program takes monthly and tax_rate as input.

Loop Execution:The loop runs from 1 to 12, accumulating monthly into yearly and adjusting tax accordingly.

Salary Calculation and Check:After the loop, salary is calculated as monthly * 12. The program then checks if salary is equal to yearly. Given the loop accumulates monthly into yearly 12 times, salary will always equal yearly, making the IF salary = yearly condition always true. Thus, the "Salary OK" message will always be printed, and the ELSE branch will never be executed.

Yearly Tax Calculation and Check:year_tax is calculated as salary * tax_rate. Then, it checks if year_tax is equal to tax. However, due to the accumulation and subtraction inside the loop, tax would likely not equal year_tax, making the condition IF year_tax = tax false in most practical scenarios. Therefore, the "Tax Problem" message at line 19 is unlikely to be printed.

Conclusion:

Given this flow, the ELSE block associated with the IF salary = yearly condition (line 15) is unreachable. However, the critical analysis indicates that the code at line 19, which prints "Tax Problem", is also unreachable due to the logic flow where the condition is rarely true.

Thus, the result is that line 19 is more certainly unreachable.

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

Analysis:

For Change 1, which involves using multiple servers to maximize throughput and minimize response time, the key concern is how the load is distributed across these servers.

B. Load balancing:

Load balancing is the process of distributing network or application traffic across multiple servers to ensure no single server becomes overwhelmed. It is crucial for maximizing throughput and minimizing response times, particularly during peak volumes.

Explanation of Incorrect Options:

A. Connection pooling:

This is related to managing database connections efficiently but is not directly relevant to distributing web server traffic.

C. Distributed processing:

This refers to dividing processing tasks across multiple processors or machines but is not specific to managing web server load.

D. Caching:

Caching helps improve performance by storing frequently accessed data in memory, reducing the need to retrieve it from the database, but it does not address load distribution across servers.

References:

The ISTQB CTAL-TTA syllabus and standard practices in reviewing system architecture emphasize the importance of load balancing for managing server traffic and ensuring optimal performance during peak loads.

Sources:

ISTQB-CTAL-TTA Syllabus

General knowledge on system architecture and load balancing.

The code provided contains a potential endless loop. The loop is conditioned on the variable 'E' being less than 1 (IF E < 1), but within the loop, there is no operation that modifies the value of 'E'. Therefore, once the loop is entered, if the condition A > B holds true, the value of 'E' remains unchanged, leading to an endless loop situation. The decrement of 'A' in line 15 does not guarantee an exit condition for the loop, as it does not affect the value of 'E'. This is a control flow defect that could cause the program to hang or crash.

Analysis:

When planning and specifying security tests, it's essential to consider several critical aspects:

A. Identifying those from whom permission might be needed to run the tests:

True. It is crucial to get the necessary permissions, especially for penetration testing or other security tests that could be intrusive.

B. Re-assuring the (non-technical) Test Analysts that they will not need to be involved:

False. Security testing often requires a coordinated effort, and non-technical test analysts might still have roles, such as documentation, coordination, or assisting in test preparation. Excluding them entirely could lead to gaps in understanding and execution.

C. Ensuring that appropriate tools will be available for static analysis:

True. Having the right tools is vital for effective security testing, including static analysis tools for identifying vulnerabilities in the code.

D. Planning extra performance efficiency and reliability tests:

True. Performance efficiency and reliability are often linked to security (e.g., DoS attacks), so planning these tests is useful.

Explanation of Incorrect Option:

B: Excluding non-technical test analysts might undermine the testing process as they can still contribute in various supportive roles.

References:

The ISTQB CTAL-TTA syllabus covers security testing and the planning required, highlighting the need for comprehensive involvement of all relevant stakeholders.

Sources:

ISTQB-CTAL-TTA Syllabus

General knowledge on security testing practices.

An ISTQB defined technique for identifying risks when defining a risk-based approach to testing the performance efficiency of a new application is to analyze the requirements to look for areas where performance efficiency requirements have not been well-defined. This technique ensures that testing efforts are focused on areas of the application that are critical for performance but may have insufficient coverage in terms of detailed requirements​​.

To achieve full Modified Condition/Decision Coverage (MC/DC), each condition within a decision must be shown to independently affect the outcome of the decision. For the decision IF X < 5 OR Y > 10 THEN, the conditions are:

Condition 1: X < 5

Condition 2: Y > 10

We need to test these conditions in such a way that each condition independently influences the decision outcome. Let's analyze the options:

Option A:

X=4 and Y=7 (X < 5 is true, Y > 10 is false; overall decision true)

X=6 and Y=12 (X < 5 is false, Y > 10 is true; overall decision true)

X=5 and Y=10 (X < 5 is false, Y > 10 is false; overall decision false)

This set achieves full MC/DC coverage because each condition is shown to independently affect the outcome.

Option B:

X=4 and Y=11 (X < 5 is true, Y > 10 is true; overall decision true)

X=7 and Y=10 (X < 5 is false, Y > 10 is false; overall decision false)

This set achieves full MC/DC coverage because it demonstrates both conditions independently affecting the outcome.

Option C:

X=5 and Y=8 (X < 5 is false, Y > 10 is false; overall decision false)

X=2 and Y=12 (X < 5 is true, Y > 10 is true; overall decision true)

X=4 and Y=4 (X < 5 is true, Y > 10 is false; overall decision true)

This set does not fully achieve MC/DC coverage as it does not demonstrate the impact of Y > 10 being false while X < 5 is false.

Option D:

X=3 and Y=10 (X < 5 is true, Y > 10 is false; overall decision true)

X=5 and Y=15 (X < 5 is false, Y > 10 is true; overall decision true)

X=0 and Y=15 (X < 5 is true, Y > 10 is true; overall decision true)

This set does not achieve MC/DC coverage because it does not show the decision outcome when both conditions are false.

Therefore, the correct answer is B. X=4 and Y=11, X=7 and Y=10.