skip to main content
column

Cloud9: a software testing service

Authors Info & Claims
Published:27 January 2010Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Cloud9 aims to reduce the resource-intensive and laborintensive nature of high-quality software testing. First, Cloud9 parallelizes symbolic execution (an effective, but still poorly scalable test automation technique) to large shared-nothing clusters. To our knowledge, Cloud9 is the first symbolic execution engine that scales to large clusters of machines, thus enabling thorough automated testing of real software in conveniently short amounts of time. Preliminary results indicate one to two orders of magnitude speedup over a state-of-the-art symbolic execution engine. Second, Cloud9 is an on-demand software testing service: it runs on compute clouds, like Amazon EC2, and scales its use of resources over a wide dynamic range, proportionally with the testing task at hand.

References

  1. Amazon EC2. http://aws.amazon.com/ec2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. J. Barnat, L. Brim, and P. Rockai. Scalable multi-core LTL model-checking. In Intl. SPIN Workshop, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. J. Barnat, L. Brim, and J. Stribna. Distributed LTL modelchecking in SPIN. In Intl. SPIN Workshop, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. C. Cadar, D. Dunbar, and D.R. Engler. KLEE: Unassisted and automatic generation of high-coverage tests for complex systems programs. In Symp. on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. C. Cadar, V. Ganesh, P.M. Pawlowski, D.L. Dill, and D.R. Engler. EXE: Automatically generating inputs of death. In Conf. on Computer and Communication Security, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. V. Chipounov, V. Georgescu, C. Zamfir, and G. Candea. Selective symbolic execution. In Workshop on Hot Topics in Dependable Systems, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Eucalyptus software. http://open.eucalyptus.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. C. Flanagan and P. Godefroid. Dynamic partial-order reduction for model checking software. SIGPLAN Not., 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. P. Godefroid. Model checking for programming languages using Verisoft. In Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. P. Godefroid, N. Klarlund, and K. Sen. DART: Directed automated random testing. In Conf. on Programming Language Design and Implementation, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. G.J. Holzmann, R. Joshi, and A. Groce. Swarm verification. In Intl. Conf. on Automated Software Engineering, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. J.C. King. Symbolic execution and program testing. Communications of the ACM, 1976. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. R. Kumar and E.G. Mercer. Load balancing parallel explicit state model checking. In Intl. Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Methods in Verification, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. C. Lattner and V. Adve. LLVM: A compilation framework for lifelong program analysis and transformation. In Intl. Symp. on Code Generation and Optimization, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. R. Majumdar and K. Sen. Hybrid concolic testing. In Intl. Conf. on Software Engineering, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. S. McConnell. Code Complete, chapter 3. Microsoft Press, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Redhat security. http://www.redhat.com/security/updates/classification/, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. K. Sen. Concolic testing. In Intl. Conf. on Automated Software Engineering, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. U. Stern and D.L. Dill. Parallelizing the Murf verifier. In Intl. Conf. on Computer Aided Verification, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Underwriters Labs. http://www.ul.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Cloud9: a software testing service
    Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review
      ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review  Volume 43, Issue 4
      January 2010
      105 pages
      ISSN:0163-5980
      DOI:10.1145/1713254
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2010 Authors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 27 January 2010

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • column

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader