1. PROJECT PRESENTATION Prof: Daniel Amyot Presented By… ANVESH ALUWALA GURPREET SINGH DHADDA Evaluation of Load Testing Tools WebLOAD Professional Vs NeoLoad 3.1

2. Agenda… Business context Our Goal in the project Load Testing Methodology List of Criteria Description to WebLOAD Professional & NeoLoad 3.1 Final Recommendation

3. 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

4. Our one and only Goal… Recommend the tool that best serves the organization’s purpose to test their web applications before deployment

5. 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.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. 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.

10. Range for each criteria… CRITERIARANGE Scope for automation0-10 Detect performance bottlenecks0-10 Display response times under variable loads0-10 Must support HTTP/S, SOAP and TCP/IP Internet protocols0-10 MS Windows compatible0-10 Cost and License0-5 Ease of use0-10 Steadiness of the tool0-5 Quality of reports provided by the tool0-10 Support scripting for scenario generation0-5 Customer support0-5 Documentation available for the tool.0-5 Reputation of the tool in market0-5 TOTAL100

11. 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

12. Screenshots…Creating agenda

13. Screenshots…Running Test

14. Screenshots…Analyzing results

15. 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

16. 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

17. Screenshots…creating scenario

18. Screenshots...runtime

19. Screenshots…analysis

20. 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

21. 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

22. 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

23. 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

24. 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

25. 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.

26. Final marking of the tools… CRITERIARANGEWebLOADNeoLoad Scope for automation0-1010 Detect performance bottlenecks0-1010 Display response times under variable loads0-10910 Must support HTTP/S, SOAP and TCP/IP Internet protocols 0-1010 MS Windows compatible0-10910 Cost and License0-535 Ease of use0-10710 Steadiness of the tool0-535 Quality of reports provided by the tool0-1010 Support scripting for scenario generation0-550 Customer support0-555 Documentation available for the tool.0-544 Reputation of the tool in market0-554 TOTAL1009093

27. 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.

28. Thank U for kind attention…