Questões de Concurso
Comentadas para analista legislativo - sistemas
Foram encontradas 108 questões
Resolva questões gratuitamente!
Junte-se a mais de 4 milhões de concurseiros!
I. Arquiteturas cliente/servidor representam um significativo desafio para os testadores de software. Assim, o teste de software cliente/servidor pode ocorrer em 3 diferentes níveis: (1) aplicações clientes individuais são testadas no modo “não conectado” e a operação do servidor e a rede subjacente não são consideradas; (2) o software cliente e as aplicações do servidor associadas são testadas em conjunto, mas as operações da rede não são explicitamente exercitadas; (3) a arquitetura completa cliente/servidor, incluindo operações e desempenho da rede, é testada.
II. Ambientes baseados na arquitetura cliente/servidor possuem natureza distribuída, seus aspectos de desempenho são associados com o processamento de transações, podem reunir diferentes plataformas de hardware, devem atender e controlar os acessos de um ou mais clientes às bases de dados residentes nos servidores, possuem complexidade inerente à comunicação em rede e concorrência por recursos, dentre outras características.
A afirmativa I
I. Referem-se a testes que são conduzidos na interface do software. Examinam algum aspecto fundamental do sistema, sem se preocupar com a estrutura lógica interna do software.
II. Testes exaustivos podem ser impraticáveis, mas podem ser aplicados testes que examinam caminhos lógicos importantes e estruturas de dados essenciais podem ser submetidas à prova quanto à sua validade.
III. São baseados em um exame rigoroso do detalhe procedimental. Caminhos lógicos internos ao software e colaborações entre componentes são testados, definindo-se casos de teste que exercitam conjuntos específicos de condições e/ou ciclos.
IV. Focalizam os requisitos funcionais do software, permitindo ao engenheiro de testes derivar conjuntos de condições de entrada que vão exercitar plenamente todos os requisitos funcionais de um programa.
V. Tentam encontrar erros: em funções incorretas ou omitidas, de interface, de comportamento ou desempenho, de iniciação e término.
VI. Ao usá-los, o engenheiro de testes pode derivar casos de teste que garantam que todos os caminhos independentes de um módulo tenham sido exercitados pelo menos uma vez.
A associação dos tipos de teste de CP ou testes de CB com as características de I a VI é apresentada, correta e respectivamente, em:
I. O sistema deve ser resistente a falhas, ou seja, falhas de processamento não devem causar a interrupção da sua função global. O teste deve forçar o software a falhar de diversos modos e verificar se a reabilitação é adequadamente realizada.
II. As informações armazenadas pelo sistema devem ser protegidas de todo o tipo de invasão e ataque. O teste deve tentar invadir o sistema e atacar suas vulnerabilidades de forma a verificar se os mecanismos de proteção são realmente capazes de protegê-lo.
III. O sistema deve ser capaz de suportar grande demanda por recursos. O teste deve submeter o sistema a situações extremas de demanda por recursos, frequência ou volume anormais.
Isabel indicou, de forma adequada e respectiva, os seguintes testes para as situações I, II e III:
I. ser evitada com o uso de um Sistema de Controle de Versão (SCV) que trabalhasse com o modelo alocar-modificar- desalocar. Neste modelo, o repositório permite que somente uma pessoa por vez possa modificar o arquivo.
II. ser evitada com o uso de um SCV que trabalhasse com o modelo copiar-modificar-unificar. Neste modelo, Renato e Luiza criariam uma cópia de trabalho pessoal do arquivo armazenado no repositório. Eles então trabalhariam de forma paralela, modificando suas próprias cópias. No final, as cópias locais seriam unificadas em uma nova versão.
III. ser evitada por qualquer SCV, marcando o arquivo como não-unificável. Neste caso, tanto o modelo alocar-modificar- desalocar quanto o modelo copiar-modificar-unificar, impediriam que houvesse a sobrescrita no arquivo quando Renato e Luiza acessassem-no ao mesmo tempo.
IV. causar atrasos e tempo perdido com o uso de um SCV que trabalhasse com o modelo alocar-modificar-desalocar. Isso porque Renato poderia alocar o arquivo, esquecer dele e sair de férias. Luiza continuaria esperando para editar o arquivo e teria que pedir a um administrador para liberar o arquivo alocado por Renato.
V. ser evitada com o uso de um SCV que trabalhasse com o modelo copiar-modificar-unificar. Caso as alterações de Luiza viessem a se sobrepor às alterações de Renato, na unificação das cópias dos arquivos o SCV detectaria o problema, desfaria automaticamente as sobreposições e poderia seguramente salvar o arquivo unificado de volta no repositório.
Está correto o que se afirma APENAS em:
- 12 têm conhecimentos jurídicos, contábeis e de informática;
- 56 têm conhecimentos de informática;
- 49 têm conhecimentos contábeis.
Além disso, todos que têm conhecimentos jurídicos também conhecem informática, e 8 funcionários não têm conhecimento jurídico, nem de informática e nem contábil. Nas condições dadas, o número de funcionários que têm conhecimentos de informática e de contabilidade (simultaneamente), mas que não têm conhecimentos jurídicos, é igual a
By JONATHAN WEISMAN and ASHLEY PARKER
Feb. 11, 2014
WASHINGTON - Ending three years of brinkmanship in which the threat of a devastating default on the nation’s debt was used to wring conservative concessions from President Obama, the House on Tuesday voted to raise the government’s borrowing limit until March 2015, without any conditions.
The vote - 221 to 201 - relied almost entirely on Democrats in the Republican-controlled House to carry the measure and represented the first debt ceiling increase since 2009 that was not attached to other legislation. Only 28 Republicans voted yes, and only two Democrats voted no.
Simply by holding the vote, Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio effectively ended a three-year Tea Party-inspired era of budget showdowns that had raised the threat of default and government shutdowns, rattled economic confidence and brought serious scrutiny from other nations questioning Washington’s ability to govern. In the process, though, Mr. Boehner also set off a series of reprisals from fellow Republican congressmen and outside groups that showcased the party’s deep internal divisions.
During the October 2013 government shutdown, The Times’s David Leonhardt explained the debt limit and how a failure to raise it could have affected the economy both at home and abroad.
"He gave the president exactly what he wanted, which is exactly what the Republican Party said we did not want,” said a Republican representative, Tim Huelskamp of Kansas, who last year unsuccessfully tried to rally enough support to derail Mr. Boehner’s re-election as speaker. “It’s going to really demoralize the base.”
The vote was a victory for President Obama, Democrats and those Senate Republicans who have argued that spending money for previously incurred obligations was essential for the financial standing of the federal government. “Tonight’s vote is a positive step in moving away from the political brinkmanship that’s a needless drag on our economy,” Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, said in a statement.
"A clean debt ceiling is a complete capitulation on the speaker’s part and demonstrates that he has lost the ability to lead the House of Representatives, let alone his own party,” said Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots. “It is time for him to go.”
Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, commended the speaker and promised to pass the bill as soon as possible. “We’re happy to see the House is legislating the way they should have legislated for a long time,” he said.
(Adapted from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/12/us/politics/ boehner-to-bring-debt-ceiling-to-vote-without-policy- attachments. html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_2014021 2&_r=0)
Brinkmanship is the technique of pushing a dangerous situation to the limits of safety in order to secure the greatest advantage.
Em qual dos exemplos abaixo a palavra brinkmanship está empregada de forma incorreta?
By JONATHAN WEISMAN and ASHLEY PARKER
Feb. 11, 2014
WASHINGTON - Ending three years of brinkmanship in which the threat of a devastating default on the nation’s debt was used to wring conservative concessions from President Obama, the House on Tuesday voted to raise the government’s borrowing limit until March 2015, without any conditions.
The vote - 221 to 201 - relied almost entirely on Democrats in the Republican-controlled House to carry the measure and represented the first debt ceiling increase since 2009 that was not attached to other legislation. Only 28 Republicans voted yes, and only two Democrats voted no.
Simply by holding the vote, Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio effectively ended a three-year Tea Party-inspired era of budget showdowns that had raised the threat of default and government shutdowns, rattled economic confidence and brought serious scrutiny from other nations questioning Washington’s ability to govern. In the process, though, Mr. Boehner also set off a series of reprisals from fellow Republican congressmen and outside groups that showcased the party’s deep internal divisions.
During the October 2013 government shutdown, The Times’s David Leonhardt explained the debt limit and how a failure to raise it could have affected the economy both at home and abroad.
"He gave the president exactly what he wanted, which is exactly what the Republican Party said we did not want,” said a Republican representative, Tim Huelskamp of Kansas, who last year unsuccessfully tried to rally enough support to derail Mr. Boehner’s re-election as speaker. “It’s going to really demoralize the base.”
The vote was a victory for President Obama, Democrats and those Senate Republicans who have argued that spending money for previously incurred obligations was essential for the financial standing of the federal government. “Tonight’s vote is a positive step in moving away from the political brinkmanship that’s a needless drag on our economy,” Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, said in a statement.
"A clean debt ceiling is a complete capitulation on the speaker’s part and demonstrates that he has lost the ability to lead the House of Representatives, let alone his own party,” said Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots. “It is time for him to go.”
Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, commended the speaker and promised to pass the bill as soon as possible. “We’re happy to see the House is legislating the way they should have legislated for a long time,” he said.
(Adapted from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/12/us/politics/ boehner-to-bring-debt-ceiling-to-vote-without-policy- attachments. html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_2014021 2&_r=0)
By JONATHAN WEISMAN and ASHLEY PARKER
Feb. 11, 2014
WASHINGTON - Ending three years of brinkmanship in which the threat of a devastating default on the nation’s debt was used to wring conservative concessions from President Obama, the House on Tuesday voted to raise the government’s borrowing limit until March 2015, without any conditions.
The vote - 221 to 201 - relied almost entirely on Democrats in the Republican-controlled House to carry the measure and represented the first debt ceiling increase since 2009 that was not attached to other legislation. Only 28 Republicans voted yes, and only two Democrats voted no.
Simply by holding the vote, Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio effectively ended a three-year Tea Party-inspired era of budget showdowns that had raised the threat of default and government shutdowns, rattled economic confidence and brought serious scrutiny from other nations questioning Washington’s ability to govern. In the process, though, Mr. Boehner also set off a series of reprisals from fellow Republican congressmen and outside groups that showcased the party’s deep internal divisions.
During the October 2013 government shutdown, The Times’s David Leonhardt explained the debt limit and how a failure to raise it could have affected the economy both at home and abroad.
"He gave the president exactly what he wanted, which is exactly what the Republican Party said we did not want,” said a Republican representative, Tim Huelskamp of Kansas, who last year unsuccessfully tried to rally enough support to derail Mr. Boehner’s re-election as speaker. “It’s going to really demoralize the base.”
The vote was a victory for President Obama, Democrats and those Senate Republicans who have argued that spending money for previously incurred obligations was essential for the financial standing of the federal government. “Tonight’s vote is a positive step in moving away from the political brinkmanship that’s a needless drag on our economy,” Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, said in a statement.
"A clean debt ceiling is a complete capitulation on the speaker’s part and demonstrates that he has lost the ability to lead the House of Representatives, let alone his own party,” said Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots. “It is time for him to go.”
Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, commended the speaker and promised to pass the bill as soon as possible. “We’re happy to see the House is legislating the way they should have legislated for a long time,” he said.
(Adapted from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/12/us/politics/ boehner-to-bring-debt-ceiling-to-vote-without-policy- attachments. html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_2014021 2&_r=0)
By JONATHAN WEISMAN and ASHLEY PARKER
Feb. 11, 2014
WASHINGTON - Ending three years of brinkmanship in which the threat of a devastating default on the nation’s debt was used to wring conservative concessions from President Obama, the House on Tuesday voted to raise the government’s borrowing limit until March 2015, without any conditions.
The vote - 221 to 201 - relied almost entirely on Democrats in the Republican-controlled House to carry the measure and represented the first debt ceiling increase since 2009 that was not attached to other legislation. Only 28 Republicans voted yes, and only two Democrats voted no.
Simply by holding the vote, Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio effectively ended a three-year Tea Party-inspired era of budget showdowns that had raised the threat of default and government shutdowns, rattled economic confidence and brought serious scrutiny from other nations questioning Washington’s ability to govern. In the process, though, Mr. Boehner also set off a series of reprisals from fellow Republican congressmen and outside groups that showcased the party’s deep internal divisions.
During the October 2013 government shutdown, The Times’s David Leonhardt explained the debt limit and how a failure to raise it could have affected the economy both at home and abroad.
"He gave the president exactly what he wanted, which is exactly what the Republican Party said we did not want,” said a Republican representative, Tim Huelskamp of Kansas, who last year unsuccessfully tried to rally enough support to derail Mr. Boehner’s re-election as speaker. “It’s going to really demoralize the base.”
The vote was a victory for President Obama, Democrats and those Senate Republicans who have argued that spending money for previously incurred obligations was essential for the financial standing of the federal government. “Tonight’s vote is a positive step in moving away from the political brinkmanship that’s a needless drag on our economy,” Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, said in a statement.
"A clean debt ceiling is a complete capitulation on the speaker’s part and demonstrates that he has lost the ability to lead the House of Representatives, let alone his own party,” said Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots. “It is time for him to go.”
Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, commended the speaker and promised to pass the bill as soon as possible. “We’re happy to see the House is legislating the way they should have legislated for a long time,” he said.
(Adapted from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/12/us/politics/ boehner-to-bring-debt-ceiling-to-vote-without-policy- attachments. html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_2014021 2&_r=0)
Sérgio Rodrigues
Sobre palavras
Nossa língua escrita e falada numa abordagem irreverente
02/02/2012
Consultório
‘No aguardo’, isso está certo?
(Virgílio Mendes Neto)
Virgílio tem razão: uma praga de “no aguardo” anda infestando nossa língua. Convém tomar cuidado, nem que seja por educação: antes de entrarmos nos aspectos propriamente linguísticos da questão, vale refletir por um minuto sobre o que há de rude numa fórmula de comunicação que poderia ser traduzida mais ou menos assim: “Estou aqui esperando, vê se responde logo!”.
(Onde terá ido parar um clichê consagrado da polidez como “Agradeço antecipadamente sua resposta”? Resposta possível: foi aposentado compulsoriamente ao lado de outros bordados verbais do tempo das cartas manuscritas, porque o meio digital privilegia as mensagens diretas e não tem tempo a perder com hipocrisias. O que equivale a dizer que, sendo o meio a mensagem, como ensinou o teórico da comunicação Marshall McLuhan, a internet é casca-grossa por natureza. Será mesmo?)
Quanto à questão da existência, bem, o substantivo “aguardo” existe acima de qualquer dúvida. O dicionário da Academia das Ciências de Lisboa não o reconhece, mas isso se explica: estamos diante de um regionalismo brasileiro, um termo que tem vigência restrita ao território nacional. Desde que foi dicionarizado pela primeira vez, por Cândido de Figueiredo, em 1899, não faltam lexicógrafos para lhe conferir “foros de cidade”, como diria Machado de Assis. Trata-se de um vocábulo formado por derivação regressiva a partir do verbo aguardar. Tal processo, que já era comum no latim, é o mesmo por meio do qual, por exemplo, do verbo fabricar se extraiu o substantivo fábrica.
Sérgio Rodrigues
Sobre palavras
Nossa língua escrita e falada numa abordagem irreverente
02/02/2012
Consultório
‘No aguardo’, isso está certo?
(Virgílio Mendes Neto)
Virgílio tem razão: uma praga de “no aguardo” anda infestando nossa língua. Convém tomar cuidado, nem que seja por educação: antes de entrarmos nos aspectos propriamente linguísticos da questão, vale refletir por um minuto sobre o que há de rude numa fórmula de comunicação que poderia ser traduzida mais ou menos assim: “Estou aqui esperando, vê se responde logo!”.
(Onde terá ido parar um clichê consagrado da polidez como “Agradeço antecipadamente sua resposta”? Resposta possível: foi aposentado compulsoriamente ao lado de outros bordados verbais do tempo das cartas manuscritas, porque o meio digital privilegia as mensagens diretas e não tem tempo a perder com hipocrisias. O que equivale a dizer que, sendo o meio a mensagem, como ensinou o teórico da comunicação Marshall McLuhan, a internet é casca-grossa por natureza. Será mesmo?)
Quanto à questão da existência, bem, o substantivo “aguardo” existe acima de qualquer dúvida. O dicionário da Academia das Ciências de Lisboa não o reconhece, mas isso se explica: estamos diante de um regionalismo brasileiro, um termo que tem vigência restrita ao território nacional. Desde que foi dicionarizado pela primeira vez, por Cândido de Figueiredo, em 1899, não faltam lexicógrafos para lhe conferir “foros de cidade”, como diria Machado de Assis. Trata-se de um vocábulo formado por derivação regressiva a partir do verbo aguardar. Tal processo, que já era comum no latim, é o mesmo por meio do qual, por exemplo, do verbo fabricar se extraiu o substantivo fábrica.