Wouldn’t it be better to call testing cloud services in production monitoring?

(From the Q&A session after Ruud’s EuroSTAR webinar).

Q: Wouldn’t it be better to call the testing you do after the system has gone live, “monitoring” instead of “testing”? To prevent people from thinking that you can go live before testing has completed and reported about quality and risks? – Rik Marselis

A: I think we need to broaden our definition of testing and make monitoring a part of testing. Realize yourself that the maintenance department might not monitor the service, since it is maintained by the supplier… This type of testing is related to Continuous Integration as used in Agile – Ruud Teunissen

5 thoughts on “Wouldn’t it be better to call testing cloud services in production monitoring?

  1. I think we might cause a lot of confusion if we don’t make a clear distinction between testing in production (which is a pro-active activity) and monitoring which, to me, is rather re-active. So, I fully support the need to monitor cloud services inproduction, but I think calling that ‘testing’ has more setbacks than benefits. Let’s keep calling monitoring monitoring and testing testing!

    • Hi Ben,

      Thanks for your comment. We agree to call it monitoring, but we just want to see monitoring as a part of the work of testers. Therefore we want to stretch the definition of testing to imply monitoring.

  2. Interesting phenomenon: we actually DO suggest testing in production… Executing tests on the service, while it is in use!

  3. Pingback: Monitor or test? | Testing Experiences

Leave a Reply