Hi Lance, 

Using the Flex Stress Testing Framework you will probably be able to 
run around 10 browser instances per client machine. This is going to 
depend though on the size of your test application and what the test 
application is doing as well as the specs of the client machines you 
are using. You may be able to get higher than this. . . say 20 
browser instances per client machine but you'd need to test this 
out. You could do a simple test where you run the framework with a 
single client machine and see what the CPU and memory usage on the 
machine is. You can keep increasing the number of browser instances 
on the machine until the CPU and memory usage is close to being 
maxed out or the number of requests per second you are getting 
starts to decrease. I think with 20 - 30 client machines you are 
probably only going to be able to create a few hundred browser 
instances. Using test tool lingo, I'll call each browser instance a 
virtual user. If the test application you are running in the browser 
is just looping over requests this is going to put more load on the 
server than an actual user of the system. We usually multipy the 
number of virtual users by a factor of 10 to get a rough estimate of 
the number of actual users the system could support. With the Flex 
Stress test tool, you can probably simulate load of a few thousand 
users but probably not as much load as it sounds like you are trying 
to create. As for the test server, the client machines are really 
doing most of the work so you shouldn't really need a fast machine 
for this although I guess it would need to meet the minimum system 
requirements for Flex Data Services.

I think you are probably right that LoadRunner is better suited to 
the type of testing you are doing. I think the Flex Stress Testing 
Framework is more suited to more complex test scenarios where you 
are using the Messaging or Data Management Services features of Flex 
or where you need to do load testing using the RTMP protocol. Hope 
that helps.

-Alex  

--- In [email protected], "Lance Linder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Matt, Jun,
> 
> Thanks for the information/heads up. There seems to be little too 
no information on this subject so it is good news to hear things are 
on a forward track!
> 
> This week I am going to be in a web seminar that Mercury is 
putting on and I am sure I will get lots of info about QT Pro. 
Depending on the out come of that I will get in touch about the beta 
QT Pro/Flex testing framework.
> 
> So far Mercury's products seem the best fit at this time given 
there is work towards both functional GUI testing and possible AMF3 
support from one vendor.
> 
> Since the services we need to load test are rather simple I am 
going to look at down grading them to AMF0 so that I can use 
LoadRunner with them today. I really do like the Flex Stress Testing 
frame work as well which I took a look at this last Friday and 
Saturday, however I never did get it to fully work but the idea 
looks promissing :) I think my biggest concern with it (besides 
getting it to work) is how many machines I would need to perform a 
large scale load test (7,000 to 10,000 users with 30-40 small AMF 
requests each over 3-10 minutes). I am not totally sure if I even 
have enough machines available to do a test of that size with 
LoadRunner but I figured it would probably be better suited for a 
larger scale test like this than Flex Stress Testing Framework. Can 
anyone from Adobe comment on the performance of the Flex Stress 
Testing Framework and whether it will scale that high on a dual 
3.4ghz 3GB ram box as the test server with 20-30 client machines 
running as many instances of the test as physically possible? The 
system it is testing against is a IIS web farm with multiple back 
end load balanced MS SQL 2005 databases. Since the web farm doesn't 
have FDS installed it isn't an option to use a portion of it as the 
Flex Stress Testing server so I will have to rely on other high end 
workstation for this alone.
> 
> Thanks!
> Lance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] on behalf of Matt Chotin
> Sent: Mon 12/4/2006 8:37 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [flexcoders] Re: Mercury QT Pro - LoaderRunner + Flex
>  
> We have a beta running for the QTP plugin.  You can mail me to get 
on it
> (I need first/last/email) but it will actually be closing down 
pretty
> soon as the release is in early 2007 and that's coming right 
around the
> corner :-)  
> 
>  
> 
> Mercury is working to get LoadRunner to support AMF3 but I don't 
know
> the timeframe of when that might be available.  In the meantime we 
just
> posted the load-testing tool that we use internally on Labs:
> http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/Flex_Stress_Testing_Framework
> 
>  
> 
> Matt
> 
>  
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of coderjun
> Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 4:19 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Mercury QT Pro - LoaderRunner + Flex
> 
>  
> 
> Lance,
> 
> From what I've heard through the grapevine, you can request the 
Quick
> Test Pro Flex plugin from Adobe.  However I'm not exactly sure who 
to
> contact for it. Maybe someone else in the group has this info or 
has
> received the plugin before?
> 
> In regard to LoadRunner and AMF3 support, I have been working with 
a
> client that had this same question.  Basically, the answer from 
Mercury
> tech support was that AMF3 encoding was not supported and the 
workaround
> was for them to  downgrade to the AMF0 encoding...which of course 
is not
> an option if your using AMF3-only supported features:
> 
> "AMF3 supports sending int and uint  objects as integers and 
supports
> data types that are available only in ActionScript 3.0, such as
> ByteArray, XML, and IExternalizable."*
> 
> * Taken from:
> 
http://livedocs.macromedia.com/labs/as3preview/langref/flash/net/Obje
ctE
> ncoding.html
> 
> Here's a link if you! decide to go the AMF0 route:
> 
http://livedocs.macromedia.com/flex/2/docs/wwhelp/wwhimpl/common/html
/ww
> help.htm?context=LiveDocs_Parts&file=00001105.html
> 
> Also, you can run "AMF" and "object encoding" searches on the Flex 
2
> livedocs site for more info.
> 
> Hope that helps some,
> Jun
> 
> --- In [email protected], "Lance Linder" <llinder@> wrote:
> >
> > Anyone using or had success with trying Quick Test Pro with 
Flex? This
> > was something I wanted to evaluate ever since Macromedia/Adobe
> announced
> > they were working with Mercury back in October of 2005. Since 
the beta
> > release of Flex I really haven't heard anything more about this 
other
> > than some info that there might be better support between the 
two once
> > Flex 2.1 is released. Can anyone comment on this that has tried 
to use
> > Quick Test Pro with Flex 2.0?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> &! gt; Also I really really need a good load testing tool and Loa!
> dRunner looks
> > like the ticket especially since I am already interested in 
Quick Test
> > Pro. Has anyone used LoadRunner with AMF3 or does LoadRunner 
even work
> > with AMF3? Right now I am not so concerned about RTMP but AMF3 
is a
> > must. It seems that SilkTest from Borland supports AMF3 but I 
would
> > rather stick with a vendor that has both functional GUI test 
tools and
> > load test tools that meet my requirements.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > 
> > Lance
> >
>


Reply via email to