350 likes | 921 Views
Evaluation of Load Testing Tools WebLOAD Professional Vs NeoLoad 3.1. PROJECT PRESENTATION Prof: Daniel Amyot Presented By… ANVESH ALUWALA GURPREET SINGH DHADDA. Agenda…. Business context Our Goal in the project Load Testing Methodology List of Criteria
E N D
Evaluation of Load Testing ToolsWebLOAD Professional Vs NeoLoad 3.1 PROJECT PRESENTATION Prof: Daniel Amyot Presented By… ANVESH ALUWALA GURPREET SINGH DHADDA
Agenda… • Business context • Our Goal in the project • Load Testing • Methodology • List of Criteria • Description to WebLOAD Professional & NeoLoad 3.1 • Final Recommendation
Our Business Context… • Company: weexcel Inc. • Developers: 25 • QA Testers: 4 • The company planned to launch an web application and they want to Load Test the application before deployment • The company needs a recommendation of the tool that meets the maximum goals set by the company
Our one and only Goal… • Recommend the tool that best serves the organization’s purpose to test their web applications before deployment
Intro to Load Testing… • Although both Load Testing and Performance Testing seem similar, their goals are different. • Load testing operates at a predefined load level, usually the highest load that the system can accept while still functioning properly. • On the other hand, performance testing uses load testing techniques and tools for measurement and benchmarking purposes and uses various load levels. • We can generally call the Load Testing as the subset of Performance testing.
Load Testing… • Load Tests determine the applications behavior under load, up to and including its limits (not just at its limits). • Load tests specifically refer to the load size (number of concurrent users) and related values.
Methodology… • We compare two tools: WebLOAD Professional & NeoLoad 3.1 • We use an E-Commerce website for creating the test process. • It will be a quantitative analysis. • Each criteria will have a specific range. • Both the tools will be marked for each criteria within the specific range. • The tool which scores high overall will be recommended.
Criteria… Minimal criteria… • Scope for automation. • Detect performance bottlenecks. • Display response times under variable loads. • Must support HTTP/S, SOAP and TCP/IP Internet protocols. • MS Windows compatible.
Criteria…(Contd.) Good to have criteria… • Cost and License. • Ease of use. • Steadiness of the tool. • Documentation available for the tool. • Variety of reports provided by the tool. • Support scripting for scenario generation. • Customer support. • Reputation of the tool in market.
WebLOAD Professional… • This tool is from the family of “Radview” Testing process: • Creating and editing scripts • Creating and running Load Tests • Analyzing Load Test results • Scripts can be added in JavaScript language • Also provides script correlation, script validations and script parameterization
NeoLoad 3.1 • This tool is from “Neotys” Testing process: • Record -Capture a scenario • Design -Graphical interface -Defining dynamic parameters -Defining logical options(delay, loops, try catch, etc) -Checking the virtual users
NeoLoad 3.1 Testing process(contd.) • Monitors -Create monitoring machine(select OS, Databases and Web EJB Architecture) -Select performance counters System(CPU User, CPU system, CPU idle, etc.) Memory(memory used, memory free) • Runtime -Select load generator -Select duration • Analyze results
Marking of tools on each criteria… • Scope for automation: The test cases should run automatically after defined time intervals. WebLOAD: This tool supports automation of test cases NeoLoad: Even this tool supports automation of running test cases by specifying the time interval in the duration policy • Detect performance bottlenecks: should specify an alert message when the system is in critical stage WebLOAD: Gives a detail report of the errors NeoLoad: Gives a quick alert message and details regarding that error
Marking of tools on each criteria… • Display response times under variable loads WebLOAD: The reports generated specify clearly the response times for different loads NeoLoad: We can track the response times at every instance during the run time of the test process • Must support HTTP/S, SOAP and TCP/IP Internet protocols WebLOAD: Wide range of protocols are supported NeoLoad: Wide range of protocols are supported
Marking of tools on each criteria… • MS Windows compatible: The tool must mainly support MS Windows OS but support for other platforms is considered as an advantage. WebLOAD: Supports MS Windows OS NeoLoad: Supports Linux, Solaris, IBM AIX, HP-UX and VMWare other than MS Windows OS • Cost and License: The competitive price matters a lot in evaluation. WebLOAD: Cost is over $5000 for 100 virtual users NeoLoad: Cost is cheaper when compared to WebLOAD
Marking of tools on each criteria… • Ease of use: Usability is important. The tool should be easy to learn for the testers. WebLOAD: Little tricky to create the script parameters and validations NeoLoad: Self-explanatory and easy to use • Steadiness of the tool: The tool should not crash or hang up in between. WebLOAD: Little bit slow in runtime NeoLoad: Runs perfect on threshold loads too
Marking of tools on each criteria… • Quality of reports provided by the tool: At the end, the reports on the test should be precise and of variety of representation types WebLOAD: Need not be a performance analyst in order to examine the test results. NeoLoad: Provides enough charts to represent the results efficiently • Support scripting for scenario generation WebLOAD: This supports scripting NeoLoad: This is only GUI based
Marking of tools on each criteria… • Customer support WebLOAD: The Radview team provides excellent service NeoLoad: The Neotys team are equally helpful • Documentation for the tool WebLOAD: Precise documentation available NeoLoad: Well formatted documentation is available • Reputation of the tool in market WebLOAD: Captured 3% of the market share NeoLoad: New tool, but good competitor for WebLOAD.
Final Recommendation… • After the quantitative analysis of both the tools we recommend NeoLoad 3.1 and the detailed results and evaluation to choose this tool will be explained in the final report.