anyone ?
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 9:07 PM, Shmuel Krakower <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > The conclusions are not clear to me. > > Would you mind explaining / adding to the wiki: > > > - No significant improvement between 2.6 and 2.5.1 > - Significant improvement between 2.7 and 2.6 > - Better memory behaviour > - More accurate response times with High Load > > 1. What is measured as improvement? > 2. I think memory behavior is missing for 2.6? > 3. What is more accurate about the response times? > > btw- I was looking for a way to have a discussion on the wiki itself, but > couldn't find one. > > Best, > Shmuel. > -- Shay Ginsbourg Regulatory & Testing Affairs Consultant WWW.GINSBOURG.COM Providing Regulatory, Medical & Performance Testing services since 2008: * IEC 62304 Medical Device Software Life Cycle * IEEE 829 Software Test Documentation * ISO 14971 Medical Device Risk Management * FDA 21 CFR Part 11 Software Validation * IEC 60601-1:2005 3rd ED PEMS - Medical Electrical Equipment * End-to-end verification, validation, and testing (VV&T) * FDA and CE submissions * Open source free testing tools implementation * Functionality and regression testing * Software Performance & Load testing * Software Testing Advanced Automation * Medical Software Verification & Validation * Medical Device Verification & Validation * Medical Device Regulatory Submission * Organizational Regulatory Qualification Formerly QA Manager of LoadRunner at Mercury Interactive M.Sc. cum laude in Bio-Medical Engineering M.Sc. in Mechanical Engineering Work: +972(0)3-5185873 Mobile: +972(0)54-6690915 Email: [email protected] Visit my personal page on LinkedIn at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/shayginsbourg Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing this e-mail.
