We are getting there. Currently we still rely QA's hands clicking on those buttons to carry out the test plans. That is what kills us at the end of the sprint.
What I mean is some of the tasks we have on hand can't be easily broken into incremental check-in. If we even do, those changes are not testable to the QA, usually the backend change in order to support UI.
The biggest challenge we have is how to execute the acceptance tests we setup with QA in user story time. It looks like the process we have put in place needs some change.
In a sprint of two-week or three-week iteration, we usually end up with QA struggling with finishing testing in time. Do you have any suggestion how we get around it?
The cause of the problem is that we tend to check in the code close to the end of the sprint due to the complexity of the implementation or testability of the code change. There are some talks about separating QA sprint from Development sprint, what are your thoughts on this?
I am actually facing the same problem in several of our projects. What we did is have a master set of reference data that are required for down stream tables to be populated. The person who writes the junit is still responsible for populating whatever data he needs to test certain scenario and cleaning them up at tearDown().
One of the tools you can extract data from the database is Oracle SQL Developer. I normally use it if I need it to be a DML script.
We also have some in-house utilities to transform data between database and csv or xml. The csv and xml format makes your life easier if you need to modify some of the data to test different cases.
You can use any kind of application server to prepare for the test. In fact, if you can also use J2EE 1.4, which has EJB 2.1. It is fairly close to the tested version 2.0. I did mine in newer version.
IMHO, these are more than enough to take care of SQL and PL/SQL exams. I like Oracle Concepts a lot, it gives you an overall Oracle database architecture. I admit this is a poor boy way to prepare for the exam - you have to map the objectives to the document. I only skimmed through the objectives and document, in case I miss something, here is Oracle9i Database List of Books
I used Oracle PL/SQL Programming by Steven Feuerstein and Oracle PL/SQL online documentation long time ago before there is any book targetted for the test.
I like the book a lot, it is well organized and help you learn PL/SQL in no time. It was considered PL/SQL bible back then.
I am just trying to create a case that fits in the scenario you describe. Of course, you will be better off naming it in a self-explanatory way, such as getAllLastName() in the home.
Thanks, I was confused by the role of bean provider and the client. Bean providers should wrap it up as EJBException NO MATTER WHAT, clients will receive them differently depends on whether it is remote or local.
I agree with Valentin, just move on with other subjects. I myself experienced subtle differences in the spec and Weblogic, JBoss. One thing you can relex is there are no ambiguious questions in the real exam. Almost every question, you know what its intention is for.
I now will post my results in mock exam and real exam.
ejbcertificate (the last week of my preparation) : 70 HFEJB (one the same day when I took the real exam): 65 real exam : 91
Just give people an idea whether you are ready. And of course, I was not very careful when I did the mock exam (finished all the questions in an hour). Because I became too cautious in the real exam, I only had 30 minutes left when I answered all questions.
Your first question - home interface already has remove methods(one for session, one for entity) so what else do you want to remove? Message bean ? MDB doesn't have a home.
Your second question - I guess you might be able to declare a method that starts with 'remove' in component interface since it doesn't violate the rule. But again, it alreday has a remove method in component. Why do you need other remove methods?
