hwy5j wrote:We've heard of use of Selenium for load testing...how does eValid compare and why is eValid better?
There are
major architectural differences in eValid compared with Selenium and ANY of the JavaScript based test engines.
The main and most important difference is that eValid is built as a browser from the ground up, and as a consequence of this unique architecture when eValid is running it does
NOT interfere with the operation of the JavaScript engine inside the browser.
This may not seem like a big difference, but it turns out that this affects the scaling very significantly. In loading mode, multiple eValid's all run in parallel and the important feature of this is that the footprint of each eValid remains relatively small. This is true because script playback is entirely "local" to the eValid browser process and is not done using up any JavaScript namespace memory.
Keeping the footprint small -- as eValid does -- allows you to run 100+ instances of eValid on a single machine instance. eValid instance counts using images on the "compute cloud" [any of them will do] run go 200, 300, and more...
On the other hand, the rapidly growing footprint of the JavaScript based systems limits them to a rather smaller number of simultaneous instances.
There is another factor that ought to be mentioned here when you are dealing with an AJAX application. The eValid instances that run your scripts all run the JavaScript passages
without interfererence from the eValid playback process. [eValid commands are pre-processed into internal commands that drive the IE-clone browser directly, and do NOT work by invoking JavaScript]. The non-interference aspect of eValid means that your AJAX application playback will be 100% realistic.
-The eValid Team
by hwy5j » Thu Feb 04, 2010 4:42 pm