[RESOLVED] Coverage Analysis not reporting nodes used in request

Hi!

ok.. now I get it.. sorry.. the request is including attachments, could that be the difference between those that work ok?

regards,

/Ole
eviware.com

That's a possibility.  Let me review all requests that are showing as covered and ones that aren't and see if that pattern persists.

I reviewed all of the requests and there is another request that has an attachment section and the fields submitted in that request are showing coverage.  It's important to note, neither request actually has data for the photo attachment section.  They are not being used at this time in our testsuite. 

However, I find it odd that the raw request is showing encoded data submitted to the server (this would be for an image file) even though the request itself (in either the XML or Form view) does not have attachment data configured.  Even further, the Groovy script we had coded for attaching photos, the actual data itself, was commented out.  Any reasons why you think this data is making it into the request in spite of all appearences that data is not configured for SOAP request?

Hi!

hmm.. how were you attaching data through a groovy script? Could that data still be lingering in the request or had you removed it?

Once again the project file would help immensely, is there some kind of agreement we could sign to have access to them?

regards!

/Ole
eviware.com

We weren't attaching the image through a GroovyScript, we were populating a variable with encoded data via Groovy Script and trying to pass that in to the XML structure of the request. 

We had originally configured the request by pointing it to a file on the file system however we "deleted" that part of the request by clicking the delete button within the Form.  There seems to be a bug with that as the request is still adding the photo to the request anyway.

With regards to submitting the project file to Eviware, I'll have to ask about the NDA process.

Hi!

ok.. please check that the "Attachments" tab for your request is empty (displayed at the bottom of the form editor).

regards!

/Ole
eviware.com

Indeed, there were attachments configured on the attachments tab.  Removing these entries resulted in the coverage analysis being corrected.

Hi!

ok.. thanks.. so basically the presence of an (invalid?) attachment screwed up the coverage calculation.. we'll check it out!

regards,

/Ole
eviware.com

I would say "invalid" in the sense that the formed request did not have this node configured, however the attachments tab did have something configured and was sending the attachment in the request.  As such, the coverage analysis was "off by one" node when attempting to parse through the XML as it wasn't expecting that one node to be sent when it actually was?