Search Results

Search found 22065 results on 883 pages for 'performance testing'.

Page 3/883 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Inspection, code review - is it really testing?

    - by user970696
    ISTQB, Wikipedia or other sources classify verification acitivities (reviews etc.) as a static testing, yet other do not. If we can say that peer reviews and inspections are actually a kind of a testing, then a lot of standards do not make sense (consider e.g. ISO which say that validation is done by testing, while verification by checking of work products) - it should at least say dynamic testing for validation, shouldn't it? I am completing master thesis dealing with QA and I must admit that I have never seen worse and more ambiguous and contradicting literature than in this field :/ Do you think (and if so, why) that static testing is a good and justifiable term or should we stick to testing and static checks/analysis?

    Read the article

  • What are best practices for testing programs with stochastic behavior?

    - by John Doucette
    Doing R&D work, I often find myself writing programs that have some large degree of randomness in their behavior. For example, when I work in Genetic Programming, I often write programs that generate and execute arbitrary random source code. A problem with testing such code is that bugs are often intermittent and can be very hard to reproduce. This goes beyond just setting a random seed to the same value and starting execution over. For instance, code might read a message from the kernal ring buffer, and then make conditional jumps on the message contents. Naturally, the ring buffer's state will have changed when one later attempts to reproduce the issue. Even though this behavior is a feature it can trigger other code in unexpected ways, and thus often reveals bugs that unit tests (or human testers) don't find. Are there established best practices for testing systems of this sort? If so, some references would be very helpful. If not, any other suggestions are welcome!

    Read the article

  • introducing automated testing without steep learning curve

    - by esther h
    We're a group of 4 developers on a ajax/mysql/php web application. 2 of us end up focusing most of our efforts on testing the application, as it is time-consuming, instead of actually coding. When I say testing, I mean opening screens and testing links, making sure nothing is broken and the data is correct. I understand there are test frameworks out there which can automate this kind of testing for you, but I am not familiar with any of them (neither is anyone on the team), or the fancy jargon (is it test-driven? behavior-driven? acceptance testing?) So, we're looking to slowly incorporate automated testing. We're all programmers, so it doesn't have to be super-simple. But we don't want something that will take a week to learn... And it has to match our php/ajax platform... What do you recommend?

    Read the article

  • How to limit disk performance?

    - by DrakeES
    I am load-testing a web application and studying the impact of some config tweaks (related to disk i/o) on the overall app performance, i.e. the amount of users that can be handled simultaneously. But the problem is that I hit 100% CPU before I can see any effect of the disk-related config settings. I am therefore wondering if there is a way I could deliberately limit the disk performance so that it becomes the bottleneck and the tweaks I am trying to play with actually start impacting performance. Should I just make the hard disk busy with something else? What would serve the best for this purpose? More details (probably irrelevant, but anyway): PHP/Magento/Apache, studying the impact of apc.stat. Setting it to 0 makes APC not checking PHP scripts for modification which should increase performance where disk is the bottleneck. Using JMeter for benchmarking.

    Read the article

  • Using BPEL Performance Statistics to Diagnose Performance Bottlenecks

    - by fip
    Tuning performance of Oracle SOA 11G applications could be challenging. Because SOA is a platform for you to build composite applications that connect many applications and "services", when the overall performance is slow, the bottlenecks could be anywhere in the system: the applications/services that SOA connects to, the infrastructure database, or the SOA server itself.How to quickly identify the bottleneck becomes crucial in tuning the overall performance. Fortunately, the BPEL engine in Oracle SOA 11G (and 10G, for that matter) collects BPEL Engine Performance Statistics, which show the latencies of low level BPEL engine activities. The BPEL engine performance statistics can make it a bit easier for you to identify the performance bottleneck. Although the BPEL engine performance statistics are always available, the access to and interpretation of them are somewhat obscure in the early and current (PS5) 11G versions. This blog attempts to offer instructions that help you to enable, retrieve and interpret the performance statistics, before the future versions provides a more pleasant user experience. Overview of BPEL Engine Performance Statistics  SOA BPEL has a feature of collecting some performance statistics and store them in memory. One MBean attribute, StatLastN, configures the size of the memory buffer to store the statistics. This memory buffer is a "moving window", in a way that old statistics will be flushed out by the new if the amount of data exceeds the buffer size. Since the buffer size is limited by StatLastN, impacts of statistics collection on performance is minimal. By default StatLastN=-1, which means no collection of performance data. Once the statistics are collected in the memory buffer, they can be retrieved via another MBean oracle.as.soainfra.bpel:Location=[Server Name],name=BPELEngine,type=BPELEngine.> My friend in Oracle SOA development wrote this simple 'bpelstat' web app that looks up and retrieves the performance data from the MBean and displays it in a human readable form. It does not have beautiful UI but it is fairly useful. Although in Oracle SOA 11.1.1.5 onwards the same statistics can be viewed via a more elegant UI under "request break down" at EM -> SOA Infrastructure -> Service Engines -> BPEL -> Statistics, some unsophisticated minds like mine may still prefer the simplicity of the 'bpelstat' JSP. One thing that simple JSP does do well is that you can save the page and send it to someone to further analyze Follows are the instructions of how to install and invoke the BPEL statistic JSP. My friend in SOA Development will soon blog about interpreting the statistics. Stay tuned. Step1: Enable BPEL Engine Statistics for Each SOA Servers via Enterprise Manager First st you need to set the StatLastN to some number as a way to enable the collection of BPEL Engine Performance Statistics EM Console -> soa-infra(Server Name) -> SOA Infrastructure -> SOA Administration -> BPEL Properties Click on "More BPEL Configuration Properties" Click on attribute "StatLastN", set its value to some integer number. Typically you want to set it 1000 or more. Step 2: Download and Deploy bpelstat.war File to Admin Server, Note: the WAR file contains a JSP that does NOT have any security restriction. You do NOT want to keep in your production server for a long time as it is a security hazard. Deactivate the war once you are done. Download the bpelstat.war to your local PC At WebLogic Console, Go to Deployments -> Install Click on the "upload your file(s)" Click the "Browse" button to upload the deployment to Admin Server Accept the uploaded file as the path, click next Check the default option "Install this deployment as an application" Check "AdminServer" as the target server Finish the rest of the deployment with default settings Console -> Deployments Check the box next to "bpelstat" application Click on the "Start" button. It will change the state of the app from "prepared" to "active" Step 3: Invoke the BPEL Statistic Tool The BPELStat tool merely call the MBean of BPEL server and collects and display the in-memory performance statics. You usually want to do that after some peak loads. Go to http://<admin-server-host>:<admin-server-port>/bpelstat Enter the correct admin hostname, port, username and password Enter the SOA Server Name from which you want to collect the performance statistics. For example, SOA_MS1, etc. Click Submit Keep doing the same for all SOA servers. Step 3: Interpret the BPEL Engine Statistics You will see a few categories of BPEL Statistics from the JSP Page. First it starts with the overall latency of BPEL processes, grouped by synchronous and asynchronous processes. Then it provides the further break down of the measurements through the life time of a BPEL request, which is called the "request break down". 1. Overall latency of BPEL processes The top of the page shows that the elapse time of executing the synchronous process TestSyncBPELProcess from the composite TestComposite averages at about 1543.21ms, while the elapse time of executing the asynchronous process TestAsyncBPELProcess from the composite TestComposite2 averages at about 1765.43ms. The maximum and minimum latency were also shown. Synchronous process statistics <statistics>     <stats key="default/TestComposite!2.0.2-ScopedJMSOSB*soa_bfba2527-a9ba-41a7-95c5-87e49c32f4ff/TestSyncBPELProcess" min="1234" max="4567" average="1543.21" count="1000">     </stats> </statistics> Asynchronous process statistics <statistics>     <stats key="default/TestComposite2!2.0.2-ScopedJMSOSB*soa_bfba2527-a9ba-41a7-95c5-87e49c32f4ff/TestAsyncBPELProcess" min="2234" max="3234" average="1765.43" count="1000">     </stats> </statistics> 2. Request break down Under the overall latency categorized by synchronous and asynchronous processes is the "Request breakdown". Organized by statistic keys, the Request breakdown gives finer grain performance statistics through the life time of the BPEL requests.It uses indention to show the hierarchy of the statistics. Request breakdown <statistics>     <stats key="eng-composite-request" min="0" max="0" average="0.0" count="0">         <stats key="eng-single-request" min="22" max="606" average="258.43" count="277">             <stats key="populate-context" min="0" max="0" average="0.0" count="248"> Please note that in SOA 11.1.1.6, the statistics under Request breakdown is aggregated together cross all the BPEL processes based on statistic keys. It does not differentiate between BPEL processes. If two BPEL processes happen to have the statistic that share same statistic key, the statistics from two BPEL processes will be aggregated together. Keep this in mind when we go through more details below. 2.1 BPEL process activity latencies A very useful measurement in the Request Breakdown is the performance statistics of the BPEL activities you put in your BPEL processes: Assign, Invoke, Receive, etc. The names of the measurement in the JSP page directly come from the names to assign to each BPEL activity. These measurements are under the statistic key "actual-perform" Example 1:  Follows is the measurement for BPEL activity "AssignInvokeCreditProvider_Input", which looks like the Assign activity in a BPEL process that assign an input variable before passing it to the invocation:                                <stats key="AssignInvokeCreditProvider_Input" min="1" max="8" average="1.9" count="153">                                     <stats key="sensor-send-activity-data" min="0" max="1" average="0.0" count="306">                                     </stats>                                     <stats key="sensor-send-variable-data" min="0" max="0" average="0.0" count="153">                                     </stats>                                     <stats key="monitor-send-activity-data" min="0" max="0" average="0.0" count="306">                                     </stats>                                 </stats> Note: because as previously mentioned that the statistics cross all BPEL processes are aggregated together based on statistic keys, if two BPEL processes happen to name their Invoke activity the same name, they will show up at one measurement (i.e. statistic key). Example 2: Follows is the measurement of BPEL activity called "InvokeCreditProvider". You can not only see that by average it takes 3.31ms to finish this call (pretty fast) but also you can see from the further break down that most of this 3.31 ms was spent on the "invoke-service".                                  <stats key="InvokeCreditProvider" min="1" max="13" average="3.31" count="153">                                     <stats key="initiate-correlation-set-again" min="0" max="0" average="0.0" count="153">                                     </stats>                                     <stats key="invoke-service" min="1" max="13" average="3.08" count="153">                                         <stats key="prep-call" min="0" max="1" average="0.04" count="153">                                         </stats>                                     </stats>                                     <stats key="initiate-correlation-set" min="0" max="0" average="0.0" count="153">                                     </stats>                                     <stats key="sensor-send-activity-data" min="0" max="0" average="0.0" count="306">                                     </stats>                                     <stats key="sensor-send-variable-data" min="0" max="0" average="0.0" count="153">                                     </stats>                                     <stats key="monitor-send-activity-data" min="0" max="0" average="0.0" count="306">                                     </stats>                                     <stats key="update-audit-trail" min="0" max="2" average="0.03" count="153">                                     </stats>                                 </stats> 2.2 BPEL engine activity latency Another type of measurements under Request breakdown are the latencies of underlying system level engine activities. These activities are not directly tied to a particular BPEL process or process activity, but they are critical factors in the overall engine performance. These activities include the latency of saving asynchronous requests to database, and latency of process dehydration. My friend Malkit Bhasin is working on providing more information on interpreting the statistics on engine activities on his blog (https://blogs.oracle.com/malkit/). I will update this blog once the information becomes available. Update on 2012-10-02: My friend Malkit Bhasin has published the detail interpretation of the BPEL service engine statistics at his blog http://malkit.blogspot.com/2012/09/oracle-bpel-engine-soa-suite.html.

    Read the article

  • Agile Testing Days 2012 – Day 2 – Learn through disagreement

    - by Chris George
    I think I was in the right place! During Day 1 I kept on reading tweets about Lean Coffee that has happened earlier that morning. It intrigued me and I figured in for a penny in for a pound, and set my alarm for 6:45am. Following the award night the night before, it was _really_ hard getting up when it went off, but I did and after a very early breakfast, set off for the 10 min walk to the Dorint. With Lean Coffee due to start at 07:30, I arrived at the hotel and made my way to one of the hotel bars. I soon realised I was in the right place as although the bar was empty, there was a table with post-it’s and pens! This MUST be the place! The premise of Lean Coffee is to have several small timeboxed discussions. Everyone writes down what they would like to discuss on post-its that are then briefly explained and submitted to the pile. Once everyone is done, the group dot-votes on the topics. The topics are then sorted by the dot vote counts and the discussions begin. Each discussion had 8 mins to start with, which meant it prevented the discussions getting off topic too much. After the time elapsed, the group had a vote whether to extend the discussion by a further 4 mins or move on. Several discussion were had around training, soft skills etc. The conversations were really interesting and there were quite a few good ideas. Overall it was a very enjoyable experience, certainly worth the early start! Make Melly Happy Following Lean Coffee was real coffee, and much needed that was! The first keynote of the day was “Let’s help Melly (Changing Work into Life)”by Jurgen Appelo. Draw lines to track happiness This was a very interesting presentation, and set the day nicely. The theme to the keynote was projects are about the people, more-so than the actual tasks. So he started by showing a photo of an employee ‘Melly’ who looked happy enough. He then stated that she looked happy but actually hated her job. In fact 50% of Americans hate their jobs. He went on to say that the world over 50% of people hate Americans their jobs. Jurgen talked about many ways to reduce the feedback cycle, not only of the project, but of the people management. Ideas such as Happiness doors, happiness tracking (drawing lines on a wall indicating your happiness for that day), kudo boxes (to compliment a colleague for good work). All of these (and more) ideas stimulate conversation amongst the team, lead to early detection of issues and investigation of solutions. I’ve massively simplified Jurgen’s keynote and have certainly not done it justice, so I will post a link to the video once it’s available. Following more coffee, the next talk was “How releasing faster changes testing” by Alexander Schwartz. This is a topic very close to our hearts at the moment, so I was eager to find out any juicy morsels that could help us achieve more frequent releases, and Alex did not disappoint. He started off by confirming something that I have been a firm believer in for a number of years now; adding more people can do more harm than good when trying to release. This is for a number of reasons, but just adding new people to a team at such a critical time can be more of a drain on resources than they add. The alternative is to have the whole team have shared responsibility for faster delivery. So the whole team is responsible for quality and testing. Obviously you will have the test engineers on the project who have the specialist skills, but there is no reason that the entire team cannot do exploratory testing on the product. This links nicely with the Developer Exploratory testing presented by Sigge on Day 1, and certainly something that my team are really striving towards. Focus on cycle time, so what can be done to reduce the time between dev cycles, release cycles. What’s stops a release, what delays a release? all good solid questions that can be answered. Alex suggested that perhaps the product doesn’t need to be fully tested. Doing less testing will reduce the cycle time therefore get the release out faster. He suggested a risk-based approach to planning what testing needs to happen. Reducing testing could have an impact on revenue if it causes harm to customers, so test the ‘right stuff’! Determine a set of tests that are ‘face saving’ or ‘smoke’ tests. These tests cover the core functionality of the product and aim to prevent major embarrassment if these areas were to fail! Amongst many other very good points, Alex suggested that a good approach would be to release after every new feature is added. So do a bit of work -> release, do some more work -> release. By releasing small increments of work, the impact on the customer of bugs being introduced is reduced. Red Pill, Blue Pill The second keynote of the day was “Adaptation and improvisation – but your weakness is not your technique” by Markus Gartner and proved to be another very good presentation. It started off quoting lines from the Matrix which relate to adapting, improvising, realisation and mastery. It has alot of nerds in the room smiling! Markus went on to explain how through deliberate practice ( and a lot of it!) you can achieve mastery, but then you never stop learning. Through methods such as code retreats, testing dojos, workshops you can continually improve and learn. The code retreat idea was one that interested me. It involved pairing to write an automated test for, say, 45 mins, they deleting all the code, finding a different partner and writing the same test again! This is another keynote where the video will speak louder than anything I can write here! Markus did elaborate on something that Lisa and Janet had touched on yesterday whilst busting the myth that “Testers Must Code”. Whilst it is true that to be a tester, you don’t need to code, it is becoming more common that there is this crossover happening where more testers are coding and more programmers are testing. Markus made a special distinction between programmers and developers as testers develop tests code so this helped to make that clear. “Extending Continuous Integration and TDD with Continuous Testing” by Jason Ayers was my next talk after lunch. We already do CI and a bit of TDD on my project team so I was interested to see what this continuous testing thing was all about and whether it would actually work for us. At the start of the presentation I was of the opinion that it just would not work for us because our tests are too slow, and that would be the case for many people. Jason started off by setting the scene and saying that those doing TDD spend between 10-15% of their time waiting for tests to run. This can be reduced by testing less often, reducing the test time but this then increases the risk of introduced bugs not being spotted quickly. Therefore, in comes Continuous Testing (CT). CT systems run your unit tests whenever you save some code and runs them in the background so you can continue working. This is a really nice idea, but to do this, your tests must be fast, independent and reliable. The latter two should be the case anyway, and the first is ideal, but hard! Jason makes several suggestions to make tests fast. Firstly keep the scope of the test small, secondly spin off any expensive tests into a suite which is run, perhaps, overnight or outside of the CT system at any rate. So this started to change my mind, perhaps we could re-engineer our tests, and continuously run the quick ones to give an element of coverage. This talk was very interesting and I’ve already tried a couple of the tools mentioned on our product (Mighty Moose and NCrunch). Sadly due to the way our solution is built, it currently doesn’t work, but we will look at whether we can make this work because this has the potential to be a mini-game-changer for us. Using the wrong data Gojko’s Hierarchy of Quality The final keynote of the day was “Reinventing software quality” by Gojko Adzic. He opened the talk with the statement “We’ve got quality wrong because we are using the wrong data”! Gojko then went on to explain that we should judge a bug by whether the customer cares about it, not by whether we think it’s important. Why spend time fixing issues that the customer just wouldn’t care about and releasing months later because of this? Surely it’s better to release now and get customer feedback? This was another reference to the idea of how it’s better to build the right thing wrong than the wrong thing right. Get feedback early to make sure you’re making the right thing. Gojko then showed something which was very analogous to Maslow’s heirachy of needs. Successful – does it contribute to the business? Useful – does it do what the user wants Usable – does it do what it’s supposed to without breaking Performant/Secure – is it secure/is the performance acceptable Deployable Functionally ok – can it be deployed without breaking? He then explained that User Stories should focus on change. In other words they should focus on the users needs, not the users process. Describe what the change will be, how that change will happen then measure it! Networking and Beer Following the day’s closing keynote, there were drinks and nibble for the ‘Networking’ evening. This was a great opportunity to talk to people. I find approaching strangers very uncomfortable but once again, when in Rome! Pete Walen and I had a long conversation about only fixing issues that the customer cares about versus fixing issues that make you proud of your software! Without saying much, and asking the right questions, Pete made me re-evaluate my thoughts on the matter. Clever, very clever!  Oh and he ‘bought’ me a beer! My Takeaway Triple from Day 2: release small and release often to minimize issues creeping in and get faster feedback from ‘the real world’ Focus on issues that the customers care about, not what we think is important It’s okay to disagree with someone, even if they are well respected agile testing gurus, that’s how discussion and learning happens!  

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Video – Beginning Performance Tuning with SQL Server Execution Plan

    - by pinaldave
    Traveling can be most interesting or most exhausting experience. However, traveling is always the most enlightening experience one can have. While going to long journey one has to prepare a lot of things. Pack necessary travel gears, clothes and medicines. However, the most essential part of travel is the journey to the destination. There are many variations one prefer but the ultimate goal is to have a delightful experience during the journey. Here is the video available which explains how to begin with SQL Server Execution plans. Performance Tuning is a Journey Performance tuning is just like a long journey. The goal of performance tuning is efficient and least resources consuming query execution with accurate results. Just as maps are the most essential aspect of performance tuning the same way, execution plans are essentially maps for SQL Server to reach to the resultset. The goal of the execution plan is to find the most efficient path which translates the least usage of the resources (CPU, memory, IO etc). Execution Plans are like Maps When online maps were invented (e.g. Bing, Google, Mapquests etc) initially it was not possible to customize them. They were given a single route to reach to the destination. As time evolved now it is possible to give various hints to the maps, for example ‘via public transport’, ‘walking’, ‘fastest route’, ‘shortest route’, ‘avoid highway’. There are places where we manually drag the route and make it appropriate to our needs. The same situation is with SQL Server Execution Plans, if we want to tune the queries, we need to understand the execution plans and execution plans internals. We need to understand the smallest details which relate to execution plan when we our destination is optimal queries. Understanding Execution Plans The biggest challenge with maps are figuring out the optimal path. The same way the  most common challenge with execution plans is where to start from and which precise route to take. Here is a quick list of the frequently asked questions related to execution plans: Should I read the execution plans from bottoms up or top down? Is execution plans are left to right or right to left? What is the relational between actual execution plan and estimated execution plan? When I mouse over operator I see CPU and IO but not memory, why? Sometime I ran the query multiple times and I get different execution plan, why? How to cache the query execution plan and data? I created an optimal index but the query is not using it. What should I change – query, index or provide hints? What are the tools available which helps quickly to debug performance problems? Etc… Honestly the list is quite a big and humanly impossible to write everything in the words. SQL Server Performance:  Introduction to Query Tuning My friend Vinod Kumar and I have created for the same a video learning course for beginning performance tuning. We have covered plethora of the subject in the course. Here is the quick list of the same: Execution Plan Basics Essential Indexing Techniques Query Design for Performance Performance Tuning Tools Tips and Tricks Checklist: Performance Tuning We believe we have covered a lot in this four hour course and we encourage you to go over the video course if you are interested in Beginning SQL Server Performance Tuning and Query Tuning. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Optimization, SQL Performance, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology, Video Tagged: Execution Plan

    Read the article

  • SQLAuthority News – SafePeak’s SQL Server Performance Contest – Winners

    - by pinaldave
    SafePeak, the unique automated SQL performance acceleration and performance tuning software vendor, announced the winners of their SQL Performance Contest 2011. The contest quite unique: the writer of the best / most interesting and most community liked “performance story” would win an expensive gadget. The judges were the community DBAs that could participating and Like’ing stories and could also win expensive prizes. Robert Pearl SQL MVP, was the contest supervisor. I liked most of the stories and decided then to contact SafePeak and suggested to participate in the give-away and they have gladly accepted the same. The winner of best story is: Jason Brimhall (USA) with a story about a proc with a fair amount of business logic. Congratulations Jason! The 3 participants won the second prize of $100 gift card on amazon.com are: Michael Corey (USA), Hakim Ali (USA) and Alex Bernal (USA). And 5 participants won a printed copy of a book of mine (Book Reviews of SQL Wait Stats Joes 2 Pros: SQL Performance Tuning Techniques Using Wait Statistics, Types & Queues) are: Patrick Kansa (USA), Wagner Bianchi (USA), Riyas.V.K (India), Farzana Patwa (USA) and Wagner Crivelini (Brazil). The winners are welcome to send safepeak their mail address to receive the prizes (to “info ‘at’ safepeak.com”). Also SafePeak team asked me to welcome you all to continue sending stories, simply because they (and we all) like to read interesting stuff) as well as to send them ideas for future contests. You can do it from here: www.safepeak.com/SQL-Performance-Contest-2011/Submit-Story Congratulations to everybody! I found this very funny video about SafePeak: It looks like someone (maybe the vendor) played with video’s once and created this non-commercial like video: SafePeak dynamic caching is an immediate plug-n-play performance acceleration and scalability solution for cloud, hosted and business SQL server applications. By caching in memory result sets of queries and stored procedures, while keeping all those cache correct and up to date using unique patent pending technology, SafePeak can fix SQL performance problems and bottlenecks of most applications – most importantly: without actual code changes. By the way, I checked their website prior this contest announcement and noticed that they are running these days a special end year promotion giving between 30% to 45% discounts. Since the installation is quick and full testing can be done within couple of days – those have the need (performance problems) and have budget leftovers: I suggest you hurry. A free fully functional trial is here: www.safepeak.com/download, while those that want to start with a quote should ping here www.safepeak.com/quote. Good luck! Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Performance, SQL Puzzle, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • Webcast Replay Available: Performance Tuning E-Business Suite Concurrent Manager (Performance Series Part 2 of 3)

    - by BillSawyer
    I am pleased to release the replay and presentation for the latest ATG Live Webcast: Performance Tuning E-Business Suite Concurrent Manager (Performance Series Part 2 of 3) (Presentation)Andy Tremayne, Senior Architect, Applications Performance, and co-author of Oracle Applications Performance Tuning Handbook from Oracle Press, and Uday Moogala, Senior Principal Engineer, Applications Performance discussed two major components of E-Business Suite performance tuning:  concurrent management and tracing. They dispel some myths surrounding these topics, and shared with you the recommended best practices that you can use on your own E-Business Suite instance.Finding other recorded ATG webcastsThe catalog of ATG Live Webcast replays, presentations, and all ATG training materials is available in this blog's Webcasts and Training section.

    Read the article

  • Point to Taken Care while Microsoft SQL Patching Testing in Production

    - by AbhishekLohani
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/AbhishekLohani/archive/2013/10/29/point-to-taken-care-while-sql-patching-testing--in.aspx Point to Taken Care while Microsoft SQL Patching Testing in Production It very critical testing like Paching testing  1. Build the Test Environment Parrel to Production Environment i.e Staging Environment2 Check the Version of Application deployed is same as Production Environment if Staging Environment not parrel to production environment then risk of defect in production 3.Check End to End Flow of Appliction 4 Check the Eventlog entries 5 Check the performance of the Application . Thanks & RegardsAbhishek

    Read the article

  • Any thoughts on A/B testing in Django based project?

    - by Maddy
    We just now started doing the A/B testing for our Django based project. Can I get some information on best practices or useful insights about this A/B testing. Ideally each new testing page will be differentiated with a single parameter(just like Gmail). mysite.com/?ui=2 should give a different page. So for every view I need to write a decorator to load different templates based on the 'ui' parameter value. And I dont want to hard code any template names in decorators. So how would urls.py url pattern will be?

    Read the article

  • Software or testing pipeline for testing multiple hard drives

    - by lions_leash
    I have a whole bunch of hard drives (maybe 10 or so) from a variety of sources that I'd like to test. If they work, I will put them in use and/or give them away. I was going to simply open up one of my machines and plug each one in, one at a time, and troubleshoot from there. Is there a way (or set of tools) that I can use to make this process easier and/or faster?

    Read the article

  • How to find virtualization performance bottlenecks?

    - by Martin
    We have recently started moving our C++ build server(s) from real machines into VMs. (MS Hyper-V) We have some performance issues that I've currently no idea how to address. We have: Test-Box - this is a piece of desktop workstation hardware my co-worker used to set up the VM before we moved it to the actual server hardware Srv-Box - this is the server hardware Test-Box-Real - This is Windows running directly on the Test-Box HW Test-Box-VM - This is Windows in a Hyper-V VM on the Test-Box HW Srv-Box-Real- This is Server2008R2 running on the Srv-Box HW. Srv-Box-VM- This is Windows running in a Hyper-V VM on the Srv-Box HW, i.e. on Srv-Box-Real. Now, the problem is that we compared Build times between Test-Box-Real and Test-Box-VM and they were basically equal (within about 2%). Then we moved the VM to the Srv-Box machine and what we saw there is that we have a significant performance degradation between Srv-Box-Real and Srv-Box-VM, that is, where we saw no differences on the Test HW we now do see major differences in performance on the actual Server HW. (Builds about ~~ 50% slower inside the VM.) I should add that both the Test-Box and the Srv-Box are only running this one single VM and doing nothing else. I should also note that the "Real" OS is Win2008R2(64bit) and the VM hosted OS is Wind2003R2(32bit). Hardware specs: Srv-Box: Intel XEON E5640 @ 2.67Ghz (This means 8 cores with hyperthreading on the Real system and "only" 4 cores on the VM, since Hyper-V doesn't allow for hyperthreading, but number of cores doesn't seem to explain the problem here.) 16GB RAM (we have 4GB assigned to the VM) Virtual DELL RAID 1 (2x 450GB HUS156045VLS600 Hitachi 15k SAS drives) Test-Box: Intel XEON E31245 @ 3.3GHz 16GB RAM WD VelociRaptor 600GB 10k RPM SATA Note again that I'm only concerned with the differences between Srv-Box-Real and Srv-Box-VM (high) vs. the differences seen btw. Test-Box-Real and Test-Box-VM (low). Why would one machine have parity when comparing VM vs Real performance and the other (server grade HW no less) would have a large disparity? (Both being XEON CPUs ...)

    Read the article

  • Testing tools for Django Project

    - by Bharath
    Can anyone please suggest me some good testing tools for a django project? I need to test the different use case scenarios, unit testing, as well as load testing for my project. Is there any good standard testing suite available?? Any other suggestion(s) for the testing process is greatly appreciated. I use Django, postgresql on Ubuntu server if this information is necessary.

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Activity Monitor and Performance Issue

    - by pinaldave
    We had wonderful SQLAuthority News – Community Tech Days – December 11, 2010 event yesterday. After the event, we had meeting among Jacob Sebastian, Vinod Kumar, Rushabh Mehta and myself. We all were sharing our experience about performance tuning consultations. During the conversation, Jacob has shared wonderful story of his recent observation. The story is very small but the moral of the story is very important. The story is about a client, who had continuously performance issues. Client used Activity Monitor (Read More: SQL SERVER – 2008 – Location of Activity Monitor – Where is SQL Serve Activity Monitor Located) to check the performance issues. The pattern of the performance issues was very much common all the time. Every time, after a while the computer stopped responding. After doing in-depth performance analysis, Jacob realized that client once opened activity monitor never closed it. The same activity monitor itself is very expensive process. The tool, which helped to debug the performance issues, also helped (negatively) to bring down the server. After closing the activity monitor which was open for long time, the server did not have performance issues. Moral of the story: Activity Monitor is great tool but use it with care and close it when not needed. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: Best Practices, Pinal Dave, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Optimization, SQL Performance, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • Unit testing newbie team needs to unit test

    - by Walter
    I'm working with a new team that has historically not done ANY unit testing. My goal is for the team to eventually employ TDD (Test Driven Development) as their natural process. But since TDD is such a radical mind shift for a non-unit testing team I thought I would just start off with writing unit tests after coding. Has anyone been in a similar situation? What's an effective way to get a team to be comfortable with TDD when they've not done any unit testing? Does it make sense to do this in a couple of steps? Or should we dive right in and face all the growing pains at once?? EDIT Just for clarification, there is no one on the team (other than myself) who has ANY unit testing exposure/experience. And we are planning on using the unit testing functionality built into Visual Studio.

    Read the article

  • Should I demand unit-testing from programmers?

    - by Morten
    I work at a place, where we buy a lot of IT-projects. We are currently producing a standard for systems-requirements for the requisition of future projects. In that process, We are discussing whether or not we can demand automated unit testing from our suppliers. I firmly believe, that proper automated unit-testing is the only way to document the quality and stability of the code. Everyone else seems to think that unit-testing is an optional method that concerns the supplier alone. Thus, we will make no demands of automated unit-testing, continous testing, coverage-reports, inspections of unit-tests or any of the kind. I find this policy extremely frustrating. Am I totally out of line here? Please provide me with arguments for any of the oppinions.

    Read the article

  • Unit testing - getting started

    - by higgenkreuz
    I am just getting started with unit testing but I am not sure if I really understand the point of it all. I read tutorials and books on it all, but I just have two quick questions: I thought the purpose of unit testing is to test code we actually wrote. However, to me it seems that in order to just be able to run the test, we have to alter the original code, at which point we are not really testing the code we wrote but rather the code we wrote for testing. Most of our codes rely on external sources. Upon refactoring our code however, even it would break the original code, our tests still would run just fine, since the external sources are just muck-ups inside our test cases. Doesn't it defeat the purpose of unit testing? Sorry if I sound dumb here, but I thought someone could enlighten me a bit. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Do you enjoy 'Unit testing' ? [closed]

    - by jibin
    Possible Duplicate: How have you made unit testing more enjoyable ? i mean we all are developers & we love coding.I love learning new stuff(languages, frameworks, even new domains like mobile/Tablet development). But Testing ? As a newbie to the corporate environment,I just can't digest it.(We follow 'write-then-manually-test pattern').is it unit testing ?.Usually a single developer handles a module(From design to code & unit testing).So is it practical ? Somebody tell me how to make unit testing fun ? Or just How to do it properly?Do we try all possibilities manually.Say unit test for a webpage with lot of 'javascript validations'. PS:projects are all web applications.

    Read the article

  • Linux Server Performance Monitoring

    - by Jon
    I'm looking to monitor performance on my Linux servers (which happen to be Centos). What are the best tools for monitoring things in realtime such as: Disk Performance I/O, swapping etc.. CPU Performance Looking for low level tools, rather than web based tools such as Nagios, Ganglia etc... n.b. I'd like to know exactly what each tool does rather than just having a list of random toolnames if possible please. Why the tool is a better option than others would be good also.

    Read the article

  • Linux Server Performance Monitoring

    - by Jon
    I'm looking to monitor performance on my Linux servers (which happen to be Centos). What are the best tools for monitoring things in realtime such as: Disk Performance I/O, swapping etc.. CPU Performance Looking for low level tools, rather than web based tools such as Nagios, Ganglia etc... n.b. I'd like to know exactly what each tool does rather than just having a list of random toolnames if possible please. Why the tool is a better option than others would be good also.

    Read the article

  • unit level testing, agile, and refactoring

    - by dsollen
    I'm working on a very agile development system, a small number of people with my doing the vast majority of progaming myself. I've gotten to the testing phase and find myself writing mostly functional level testing, which I should in theory be leavning for our tester (in practice I don't entirely...trust our tester to detect and identify defects enough to leave him the sole writter of functional tests). In theory what I should be writing is Unit level tests. However, I'm not sure it's worth the expense. Unit testing takes some time to do, more then functional testing since I have to set up mocks and plugs into smaller units that weren't design to run in issolation. More importantly, I find I refactor and redesign heavily-part of this is due to my inherriting code that needed heavy redesign and is still being cleaned up, but even once I've finished removing parts that need work I'm sure in the act of expanding the code I'll still do a decent amount of refactoring and redesign. It feels as if I will break my unit tests, forcing wasted time to refactor them as well, often due to unit test, by definition, having to be coupled so closely to the code structure. So.is it worth all the wasted time when functional tests, that will never break when I refactor/redesign, should find most defects? Do unit tests really provide that much extra defect detetection over through functional? and how does one create good unit tests that work with very quick and agile code that is modified rapidly? ps, I would be fine/happy with links to anything one considers an excellent resource for how to 'do' unit testing in a highly changing enviroment. edit: to clarify I am doing a bit of very unoffical TDD, I just seem to be writing tests on what would be considered a functional level rather then unit level. I think part of this is becaus I own nearly all of the project I don't feel I need to limit the scope as much; and part of it is that it's daunting to think of trying to go back and retroactively add the unit tests needed to cover enough code that I can feel comfortable testing only a unit without the full functionality and trust that unit still works with the rest of the units.

    Read the article

  • What kind of code would Kent Beck avoid unit testing?

    - by tieTYT
    I've been watching a few of the Is TDD Dead? talks on youtube, and one of the things that surprised me is Kent Beck seems to acknowledge that there are just some kinds of programs that aren't worth unit testing. For example, right here DHH says that Kent Beck is ... very happy to say "Well, TDD doesn't fit in this case, I'm just going to bail" It's frustrating to me that Kent Beck seems to acknowledge this, but nobody asks him to elaborate on it or give concrete examples. I'd like to know the situations where Kent Beck thinks TDD is a bad fit. Nobody can read his mind or speak for him, but I'm hoping he's been transparent enough through his books/tweets/whatever for someone to be able to answer. I'm not necessarily going to take what he says as gospel, but it would be useful to know that the times I've tried TDD and it just felt impossible/useless are situations that he would have bailed on it himself. Or, if it turned out he would have tested that code it'd suggest to me that I was approaching the process very wrong. I also think it would be enlightening to understand why he would bail on such projects. My opinion on why this is not a duplicate of "When is it appropriate to not unit test?" After skimming those answers I'm not satisfied. For example, look at UncleBob's answer. He doesn't even acknowledge that such a situation exists. I really think there's value in understanding Kent Beck's position, not just a general, "What's your opinion?" type of question. After all, he's the father of TDD.

    Read the article

  • ISO 12207 - testing being only validation activity? [closed]

    - by user970696
    Possible Duplicate: How come verification does not include actual testing? ISO norm 12207 states that testing is only validation activity, while all static inspections are verification (that requirement, code.. is complete, correct..). I did found some articles saying its not correct but you know, it is not "official". I would like to understand because there are two different concepts (in books & articles): 1) Verification is all testing except for UAT (because only user can really validate the use). E.g. here OR 2) Verification is everything but testing. All testing is validation. E.g. here Definitions are mostly the same, as Sommerville's: The aim of verification is to check that the software meets its stated functional and non-functional requirements. Validation, however, is a more general process. The aim of validation is to ensure that the software meets the customer’s expectations. It goes beyond simply checking conformance with the specification to demonstrating that the software does what the customer expects it to do It is really bugging me because I tend to agree that functional testing done on a product (SIT) is still verification because I just follow the requirements. But ISO does not agree..

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >