Integration testing ensures software modules, once individually validated, function cohesively as a unified system, addressing potential conflicts that arise from their interaction. Strategic approaches like incremental methods enable earlier bug detection, fostering more robust and reliable software development.
Choose the Right Integration Strategy: Select between Big Bang for simpler systems or Incremental methods (Bottom-up, Top-down, Hybrid) for complex projects to optimize bug detection and isolation. Incremental approaches, though requiring planning, facilitate earlier issue resolution and more precise root cause identification.
Integrate Testing within the Test Pyramid: Position integration testing as the crucial middle layer of the test pyramid, allocating approximately 15-20% of your testing efforts. This strategy balances the cost-effectiveness of unit tests with the comprehensive coverage of end-to-end scenarios, optimizing resource allocation.
Implement Core Integration Best Practices: Maximize test reliability by ensuring all modules undergo unit testing first, developing a comprehensive test plan, and validating input data. Automate repetitive tasks and conduct regression testing after each integration to proactively prevent new changes from impacting existing functionalities.
A testing phase that ensures seamless communication and data flow between integrated modules or components within a system.
Components that work well on their own don't always work well when integrated with each other. That's why integration testing is so necessary in your testing project.
In this article, I'll show you:
What integration testing is
Why integration testing is crucial in any testing project
The different types of integration testing and how to do each of them
Integration testing best practices
Let's dive in!
What is integration testing?
Integration testing is a type of testing in which multiple parts of a software are gradually integrated and then tested as a group.
The goal of integration testing is to check if different software components work seamlessly with each other.
Example of integration testing
Let's say that you are testing a software with 10 different modules.
Each of these modules have been unit tested. They all pass, which means they work well individually. That's a good sign. However, can we be sure that those individual parts work well together?
Conflicts can always arise. Just like how people who work well on their own may not always work well as a team.
Once those modules are integrated, things can go wrong in several ways, such as:
Inconsistent code logic
Inconsistent data rule
Conflicts with third-party services
Inadequate exception handling
That's why testers must perform integration testing to cover those scenarios. Out of the 10 modules, testers can first choose and integrate 2 modules. If these modules interact smoothly, they carry on with another 2 modules, until all modules are tested.
Approaches to integration testing
There are 2 most common approaches to integration testing:
Big Bang Approach
Incremental Approach
1. Big Bang integration testing
Big Bang Integration testing is an integration testing approach in which all modules are integrated and tested at once, as a singular entity. AKA, a Big Bang.
Big Bang integration testing is not carried out until all components have been successfully unit tested.
Advantages of Big Bang integration testing:
Suitable for simple and small-sized systems with low level of dependency among software components.
Little to no planning beforehand required
Easy to set up since all modules are integrated simultaneously
Management and coordination efforts are minimized since there is only one major testing phase
Disadvantages of Big Bang integration testing:
Costly and time-consuming for large systems with a huge number of units as testers have to wait until all modules have been developed to start testing
Waiting for all modules to be developed before testing also means late defect detection
Hard to isolate and pinpoint bugs in specific modules
Hard to debug due to the complexity of multiple integrated modules
Best Practices when using Big Bang testing:
Clearly define the interactions between each unit/function before testing to minimize missing defects
Perform extensive logging for more accurate fault localization
Incremental integration testing is an approach in which 2 or more modules with closely related logic are grouped and tested first, then gradually move on to other groups of modules, instead of testing everything at once. The process ends when all modules have been integrated and tested.
Incremental integration testing is more strategic than Big Bang testing since it requires substantial planning beforehand.
Advantages:
Earlier bug detection compared to Big Bang testing since the modules are integrated and tested as soon as they are developed.
You can identify root cause of bugs more easily since the modules are tested in relatively small groups, and so when bugs surface, you know exactly where to look.
More flexible testing strategy
Disadvantages:
In earlier stages of the project, sometimes some components haven't been coded. However, you still need those components to do incremental integration testing. This leads to the creation of stubs and drivers, which are essentially mock components that will be used as substitutes for actual components.
You also need to have a complete definition and logic of your system before it can be broken down into small units.
Types of incremental integration testing
You can further divide incremental integration testing into 3 smaller approaches:
Bottom-up approach: you perform testing for low-level components first, then gradually move to higher-level components.
Top-down approach: you perform testing for high-level components first, then gradually move to lower-level components.
Hybrid approach: this is where you combine the two former approaches
But what is low-level components and high-level components? The concept of “low” vs “high” here refers to the position of the software component in the system hierarchy when you do integration testing.
Low-level components perform the most fundamental tasks in the system (data structures, simple functions, etc). These components are specific and low-impact.
High-level components are more comprehensive and complex. They perform more far-reaching tasks, such as data processing, data management, or security mechanisms. If these high-level modules are malfunctioning, the entire system is affected.
If you put that in the context of an eCommerce website, it's going to look like this:
Aspect
Low-Level Modules
High-Level Modules
Complexity
Simple functionalities
Complex, multi-functional
Scope
Focused on specific tasks
Comprehensive functionalities
Granularity
Smaller and modular
Larger and more integrated
Examples
Input validation module
Database connection
HTTP request handling
Product data processing
Basic data structures
User management module
Product catalog module
Shopping cart & checkout
Payment processing
Order processing
Bottom-up integration testing explained
With bottom-up integration testing, you start integrating modules at the lowest level, then gradually move to higher-level modules.
As you can see in this diagram, the lower level components are shirts and polo (specific types of clothes). Shirts and polos fall under the “Tops” category, which falls under the “Men's clothing” category. At the highest and most generic level, they are simply called “Clothing”.
When using the bottom-up approach for integration testing, we go from the specific modules to more comprehensive modules, or from the “shirt” module to the “clothing” module.
Here is when you should use bottom-up integration testing:
Complexity is primarily found in lower-level modules (which means bugs are more likely to be found there)
You team follows incremental development (which means developing lower-level components first before moving to higher-level modules)
Bug localization is a crucial aspect of the project since the granularity of the bottom-up approach provides more exact bug isolation
Higher-level modules are still under development or likely to change frequently
With top-down integration testing, testers start with the highest-level modules, then gradually move to lower-level modules. Here's a simple diagram to illustrate:
Here's when you should use top-down integration testing:
When complex workflows are in the higher-level components
When you want to simulate real-world scenarios and user interactions
When lower-level modules are more well-defined, stable, and unlikely to change significantly
Hybrid Integration Testing is also called Sandwich Testing. It is an approach in which testers perform both top-down and bottom-up testing simultaneously.
Advantages:
QA teams can tailor their integration testing activities based on project requirements, combining the strengths of different methods.
More flexibility in terms of using resources
Ensuring that both the low-level and high-level software components are verified at the same time
Disadvantages:
Effective communication among team members is crucial to ensure consistency and proper tracking of issues
Teams may find it challenging to switch between different integration strategies
Integration testing in the test pyramid
If you ever wanted to create a test strategy, test pyramid is a great framework to follow.
The Test Pyramid is a popular framework to illustrate the proportion of different types of tests in a software testing strategy. The idea is to focus resources on automating tests at lower levels (unit tests and integration tests) while minimizing the more expensive E2E tests at the top.
The 3 layers of test pyramid include:
Unit Testing: This is the foundation of the pyramid. Unit tests focus on individual components of the software. These tests are quick to write and execute, so they are usually automated to speed up the process.
Integration Testing: This is the middle layer of the pyramid. These tests check the interactions between integrated components to ensure that different parts of the system work together as expected.
E2E Testing: This is the top layer. These tests focus on verifying that the entire system works together as expected from the user's perspective. These tests are generally fewer in number compared to other types of tests (like unit and integration tests) because they are more complex, slower to run, and can be more brittle.
How to decide the ratio between unit testing, integration testing, and E2E testing?
If you follow The Test Pyramid strategy, usually you'll go with a testing ratio of roughly 70-80% unit tests, 15-20% integration tests, and 5-10% end-to-end (E2E) tests.
The rationale is that:
Unit tests are fast, easy to maintain. More importantly, they catch bugs early, so we need a lot of unit tests to cover most of the codebase and ensure that components work correctly in isolation. Achieving around 80% coverage is realistic and effective.
Integration tests and E2E tests are generally more expensive and complex to perform, so it's best to limit them to critical user flows.
Although these ratios are a good guideline, in actual practices, you should vary it based on your team size and resources.
Integration testing vs End-to-end testing
Put simply:
Integration testing checks the interactions between individual components.
End-to-end testing checks the flow of an entire user journey.
The scope of end-to-end testing is bigger than that of integration testing.
Here is a simple comparison table of differences between integration testing vs. end-to-end testing for you:
End-to-End Testing
Integration Testing
Purpose
Checks system behavior in real-world scenarios
Checks integration between components
Scope
Broader in scope and covers the entire technology stack of the application
Interaction between different components/modules
Testing stage
Performed at the end of the software development lifecycle before releases
After unit testing and before end-to-end testing
Technique
Black-box testing, often uses User Acceptance Testing (UAT)
Ensure that all modules have been unit tested before moving to the integration phase so that the integration test results are reliable
Develop a comprehensive test plan and strategy that outlines the scope, objectives, test cases, and resources required for integration testing.
Automate repetitive and complex test cases to improve testing efficiency and maintain test consistency across different test runs.
Validate the input test data for higher test reliability
Perform regression testing after each integration to ensure that new changes do not impact previously integrated components adversely.
Katalon for integration testing
The Katalon Platform is a powerful All-in-One platform to help QA teams plan and design test cases in 1 place without having to use any additional tools. Katalon also supports a wide range of application types, including API Testing and UI Testing to cover all of your needs.
1. Increased Test Coverage
A major pain of testers performing UI Testing is the huge number of devices and browsers to test the application on. The UI of an application may look perfectly fine on this device but is messy on another due to differences in screen sizes, resolution, or other technical specifications. Katalon allows you to stay within budget thanks to its cross-platform, cross-browser testing capabilities on cloud environments.
2. Reduce Test Maintenance Effort
Katalon Platform is also built for test maintenance. When an application is updated, testers need to review if their test cases need to be adapted for the code changes. This is a daunting task that Katalon Platform can help you with thanks to its page object design model approach.
Katalon stores locators across tests in an object repository. When changes occur, locators and artifacts are already grouped together to make updates easily.
Integration testing is a type of software testing where individual software modules or components are integrated and tested as a unified group to ensure they work seamlessly together and that data flows correctly between them.
What are the main approaches to performing Integration Testing?
+
The two most common approaches to integration testing are the Big Bang Approach and the Incremental Approach. The Big Bang approach tests all modules simultaneously as a single entity, while the Incremental approach tests modules in smaller, related groups.
How do Top-down and Bottom-up Integration Testing differ?
+
Top-down and Bottom-up are sub-approaches of Incremental Integration Testing. Top-down testing starts by integrating and testing high-level components first, then gradually moves to lower-level components. Conversely, Bottom-up testing begins with testing low-level components and progressively integrates them upwards to higher-level components.
What is the key difference between Integration Testing and Unit Testing?
+
Unit testing focuses on verifying the functionality of individual units or components of code in isolation, often using mocks or stubs for dependencies. Integration testing, on the other hand, focuses on verifying the interactions and data flow between multiple integrated units or modules, using real dependencies.
When should Integration Testing be performed in the software development lifecycle?
+
Integration testing is performed after unit testing is complete for all modules and before end-to-end or system testing. It is crucial to ensure that previously unit-tested modules function correctly when combined, helping to detect interface or interaction issues early in the development cycle.
The Katalon Team is composed of a diverse group of dedicated professionals, including subject matter experts with deep domain knowledge, experienced technical writers skilled, and QA specialists who bring a practical, real-world perspective. Together, they contribute to the Katalon Blog, delivering high-quality, insightful articles that empower users to make the most of Katalon’s tools and stay updated on the latest trends in test automation and software quality.
on this page
Test with Katalon
Write and run automation tests across thousands of environments.