|
Author
|
Topic: Looking for tool to simulate min. 60 users
|
Tianna Jackson
Member
Posts: 37
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 02-05-2002 07:54 AM
    
I'm looking for a tool to simulate at least 60 users running a client/server application. We have limited machines and our product is used in schools and we're looking to see how it performs. Any suggestions? ------------------
|
FiveNine
New Member
Posts: 5
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 02-05-2002 05:47 PM
Check out our RemoteCog product. Please send me more details on the app you are testing or you can get a demo of the product from our site (www.fiveninesolutions.com)------------------
Jonathan Sass
VP Business
Development
Five Nine Solutions
www.fiveninesolutions.
com
|
mgiac76
Member
Posts: 62
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 02-06-2002 08:10 AM
LoadRunner is working great for us. We have about 5 machines that are simulating about 250 users with various amounts of load between each computer. I know SilkPerformer does the same thing, but I haven't used it in years. ------------------
|
Trader
Member
Posts: 31
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 02-07-2002 08:49 AM
How does your client talk to the sever ?
Load test tools work on a protocol level, TCP, HTTP, ODBC, etc...
------------------
|
Tianna Jackson
Member
Posts: 37
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 02-08-2002 10:49 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Trader:
How does your client talk to the sever ?
Load test tools work on a protocol level, TCP, HTTP, ODBC, etc...
tcp/ip ------------------
|
alanark
Guru
Posts: 369
Registered: Dec 2000
|
posted 02-08-2002 10:55 AM
Try some of the links over here on the left.------------------
It Depends.
|
AutoTestGuru
Member
Posts: 70
Registered: May 2001
|
posted 02-11-2002 01:51 PM
I have used Rational's Performance Studio, Rational's SiteLoad, Cyrano's OpenSTA and Microsoft's WAS. Siteload is rather limited and I did not find it that appealing. Microsoft WAS is quite a good (especially as its free) tool. OpenSTA (open source) is a crackingly good tool and is also FREE (you don't get tools like OpenSTA for FREE very often) Rationals Peformance Studio was at times, hard to get your head around, but is still a good tool for the job. Expensive for even a small amount of licenses(virtual users) though. IMHO
|
Vishal Malhotra
Member
Posts: 6
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 02-12-2002 03:37 AM
I have used Silk to run simultaneously Several client. It works Fine with me, only one has to do is to run Agent on each of the machine u want silk to run.Thanks
Vishal ------------------
|
Vishal Malhotra
Member
Posts: 6
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 02-12-2002 03:38 AM
I have used Silk to run simultaneously Several clients. It works Fine with me, only one has to do is to run Agent on each of the machine u want silk to run.Thanks
Vishal ------------------
|
GAVA
unregistered
|
posted 02-12-2002 10:42 PM
Try Web Roller:
http://webapplicationstesting.com ------------------
|
Trader
Member
Posts: 31
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 02-13-2002 09:54 AM
You can use silk to run multiple agents, keep in mind SILK TEST is GUI test tool so you can only run one user per box.
You can record TCP protocol With most of the tools: SILK PERFORMER, LOADRUNNER, RATIONAL, COMPUWARE.
------------------
|
t_d_yu
New Member
Posts: 1
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 02-17-2002 10:09 PM
Hello, You had said:'Microsoft WAS is quite a good (especially as its free) tool.' How can I get Microsoft WAS for free?I have search WAS in Microsoft's site,but find nothing.
Thanks. ------------------
tdyu
|
Ian
Advanced
Posts: 175
Registered: Sep 2001
|
posted 02-19-2002 09:55 AM
WAS link..
http://webtool.rte.microsoft.com/ ------------------
|
QAGirl
Moderator
Posts: 2424
Registered: Aug 2001
|
posted 02-19-2002 10:39 AM
quote:
Originally posted by AutoTestGuru:
Microsoft WAS is quite a good (especially as its free) tool.
But does not support 60 users or SSL, if either of those are required for you. ------------------
~ Annemarie Martin ~
annemarie[dot]martin2[at]verizon[dot]net ~Those who dream walk in stardust, and dance to the rythm of the heart~
|
Ian
Advanced
Posts: 175
Registered: Sep 2001
|
posted 02-19-2002 11:28 AM
QAgirl,What is your point of reference for stating that 'WAS' will not support 60 users?
Is this documented anywhere? My experience is in line with website's statements on this:-
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 1999 12:24 PM
To: Matt Odhner; Homer Discussion; Web Application Stress Tool
"First off, Web application Stress can handle more than 100 threads on today's hardware. The 100 number was a ball-park figure given about a year and a half ago to help prevent folks from putting 100,000 in the threads edit box. The number of threads is indicative of the number of concurrent connections, unless you use bandwidth throttling. So, 100 threads will generate 100 concurrent connections - but generally the sockets close too quickly to reach the 100 simultaneous connections mark in perf mon. Depending on the complexity of the web pages, 100 threads in the tool can generate between 100 and 500 simultaneous connections to the web server when bandwidth throttling is used because sockets are kept open longer. Now, when you say you want to generate 40,000 users that could mean several things: 1. If you are saying you want to simulate 40,000 simultaneous connections to the web server, then yes it will take quite a few client machines to do this. However, there isn't a web server on the Internet today that experiences, or can handle, that kind of load. 2. If you are saying 40,000 unique users, then we need to define the time period. If it is 40,000 unique users per day, then all you need to do is generate enough load to experience .46 requests per second. To give you a baseline: MSN search is getting 10 million hits/day, and Yahoo is getting 5 times more. So for MSN search it will be 115 req/sec, for yahoo 578 req/sec - assuming that these requests arrive in an even distribution throughout the day - which is never the case." ------------------
|
