Difference between revisions of "CyberShake Testing"
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
== References == | == References == | ||
| + | |||
| + | #Maechling, P., E. Deelman, Y. Cui (2009), Implementing Software Acceptance Tests as Scientific Workflows, Proceedings of the IEEE International Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium 2009, Las Vegas Nevada, July, 2009 | ||
== Related Entries == | == Related Entries == | ||
Revision as of 07:57, 20 February 2011
Computational scale and complexity of the SCEC CyberShake system requires automated and repeatable system-level testing capabilities. The CyberShake testing must be capable of end-to-end testing, showing that all elements, inputs, earth models, computational codes, and data processing and reduction codes all work together.
The CyberShake Testing system combines a distributed workflow-based HPC software testing harness together with a database of reference problems and expected solutions.
Contents
CyberShake Test Harness
We required a workflow-based system capable of automating multiple CyberShake HPC calculations. This is modeled on the virtual data processing model of Pegasus.
CyberShake Test Oracle
We require a reference database that describes specific test problems, describes the input files, and output files, and defines a list of expected results.
Required Evaluation Tests
- Rupture Generator
- SGT Calculation
- Mesh Maker
- Distance Calculation
- Site-Rupture Set Determination
- Ten moderate earthquake distributed around California
- List of Sites
References
- Maechling, P., E. Deelman, Y. Cui (2009), Implementing Software Acceptance Tests as Scientific Workflows, Proceedings of the IEEE International Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium 2009, Las Vegas Nevada, July, 2009
Related Entries
CyberShake CyberShake Workplan
