If you’ve been following along, you’ve already dipped your toes into the waters of software testing, from understanding the fundamentals to exploring various testing types. Today, we’re delving deeper into the intricacies of retesting versus regression testing, ensuring software reliability and functionality.
So, let’s lay the groundwork by highlighting the key differences between these two essential testing methodologies. Here’s a quick overview:
Retesting
Regression Testing
Bug Detection
- Retesting is explicitly used to check whether known bugs have been fixed or not.
- Regression testing isn’t focused on known defects.
Priority Level
- Retesting is explicitly used to check whether known bugs have been fixed or not.
- Retesting typically has higher priority than regression testing.
- Regression testing isn’t focused on known defects.
- Regression testing is a lower priority as compared to retesting. In some cases, it can be done in parallel with retesting.
Efficiency
- Retesting focuses on defects and is far less time-consuming.
- Regression testing explores larger parts of the software to uncover bugs and can be more time consuming.
Relevance
- Retesting isn’t typically necessary during the testing process unless a bug is discovered and subsequently fixed.
- Regression testing is standard practice and is an integral part of the testing process. It is a good practice to perform regression testing each time the application’s code undergoes alterations to ensure that existing functionalities remain unaffected.
Let's put this into practice...
Examples of Retesting and Regression Testing
Example for Retesting: Let’s say you’re a Salesforce admin tasked with ensuring the smooth functionality of a company’s org. During your routine testing, you stumble upon a custom validation rule designed to check the format of phone numbers. However, you discover that the rule is incorrectly flagging valid international phone numbers as errors.
After alerting the Development team, they promptly rectify the issue. Now comes the crucial step of retesting. You revisit the previously failing test cases for phone number validation, verifying that they now pass flawlessly without any erroneous rejections. This ensures that the bug fix has effectively addressed the initial problem, restoring the functionality to its intended state.
Example for Regression Testing: In another scenario, let’s say you’re a Salesforce consultant working on a project to enhance the lead conversion process within an org’s CRM system. You would be testing a Lightning component developed by your team’s Salesforce developer, used for lead management. After weeks of diligent work, the updates are finally rolled out, promising smoother lead management and increased efficiency. However, amidst the excitement and celebrations, there’s a lingering concern: the impact of these changes on existing functionalities.
To address this, you meticulously execute test cases covering various aspects of lead management, from creation and editing to assignment. This comprehensive regression testing ensures that the recent enhancements haven’t inadvertently disrupted other vital components of the application. By validating the continued smooth operation of functionalities beyond the scope of the recent changes, regression testing safeguards against unintended consequences while maintaining the integrity of the Salesforce application.
Now, it’s your turn. What are your thoughts on retesting versus regression testing? Have you encountered any challenges or insights in your testing endeavors? Share your experiences in the comments below, and let’s continue this conversation together!
Until next time, happy testing!
Let's chat!
