I was looking for the complete or at least the mechanics of different profiles that can be created in WebSphere Profiles Management Tool (i'm not talking about different DISTRIBUTIONS like "express"/"for developer"/"ND" etc).
I could not find any relevant information about Developer profile, that is what I'm focusing. The only thing I found is in this link.
Can someone tell me more about the differences (provide links plz) between then? (standard x developer x production)
This article breaks down the differences in performance settings per tuning template. One of the larger differences between development and the other tuning profiles is that the server is configured in development mode which starts the server faster by disabling some settings that improve production performance.
Related
Can anyone please compare all the features of MS-Visual Studio Load Test tool and JMeter tool?
Here I already got few comparions with both,
Price
JMeter: free and open source
MSVS: Test Professional costs around $2000 per developer.
OS supported
JMeter: any
MSVS: Windows only
Protocols supported
JMeter: HTTP, FTP, JDBC, SOAP, TCP, JMS, SMTP, POP3, IMSP
MSVS: HTTP
But I need a comparison rather than this, Also I need to prove JMeter is worthy and better than MS-VisualStudio Load Test.
The main reason of choosing JMeter is that JMeter is being actively developed and supported and Visual Studio 2019 is the last version to support Coded UI and Load Testing features, they will be removed from the next releases.
So if you are looking for a load testing tool which will live at least several years - go for JMeter.
You're being disingenuous on the protocols supported. MSVSLT supports any protocol supported in Visual Studio, which includes all standard protocols for client server, web, even raw sockets mode.
Both are developer tools built for use by Developers.
It is true that Microsoft is abandoning the performance testing market with their tools. This should be eye opening on how Microsoft views the importance of performance testing in their developer community.
Price is the absolutely last criteria you should be looking at for a delivery item on performance testing. Why? Because you can get a lot of cheap tools/free tools which may not exercise your interface, may not support your monitoring needs, will not support your analysis and reporting needs, and are flat out unusable on your reference platform and by your intended user population.
Start with your analysis and reporting. This is where the value is added. Running the load test is simply a controlled model for the production of timing records and resource measurements This will provide a subset of tools that meet your business mission goals.
Next, look at your environment, for a list of tools which will collect resource measurements while your test is running.
Once you have a subset of tools that meet your business mission needs and your technical environment needs, then take a very keen look at your intended user population. You may have the most effective tool on the planet, but if your team isn't capable of delivering high value, then you as well be deploying the least effective tool. Your return on effort will be about the same.
Lastly, look at license model. If you have no authority to authorize based upon price, then you should also lack the authority to reject based upon price. Pass or reject on technical and mission capabilities.
Is there any document which provide information about difference between Liberty Core, Liberty Base, Liberty Network Deployment versions?
I want to use Liberty and deploy my application in Docker Data Center. But I am not sure which version of Liberty should I use. Also what is the main difference between these versions? My applications will have different technology stacks like REST, SOAP, EJB, RPC, Caching, JPA etc.
Is there any document which provide information about difference between Liberty Core,Liberty Base,Liberty Network Deployment versions.
These are called "editions" and each edition includes a set of features. The smallest edition is "core" and it contains the most minimal set of features. Each successive edition adds a few more features, with ND basically including everything (except the zOS specific features).
Here is a chart to help you visualize how the editions relate to one another.
Note that this image is already out of date, because more features have been delivered since it was created.
To see the official table of what features are included in each edition, see Liberty Features.
Microsoft are pushing their ALM (Application Lifecycle Management) tools such as TFS very hard but often gloss over the fact that major features are only available for managed (.Net) code. eg: Intellitrace is c# and VB-only
Are there any benefits to using Lab Management with a pure native application?
We have two major apps, one with a Java UI and the other MFC. There have been suggestions that the Lab Manager will be broadly rolled-out in the company but I have strong doubts that we will gain anything.
According to this March 2011 table of test automation support, Java is not supported and MFC only for basic controls.
[edit] Prior to the latest vNext release, we couldn't use their TestManager for unit tests unless we wrap our C++ code in .Net layers with C++/CLI unit tests.
So it seems that none of the various ways of testing code can be used for our apps.
Absolutely! Lab Management could help out quite a bit for all sorts of non-.NET applications. It's great for setting up development or test environments made up of multiple machines. You can use the data collectors with Microsoft Test Managers to collect rich data from each of the machines in your environments when you are running test cases or performing exploratory testing. Whenever you find a bug, you can file a bug and each of the data collectors on each of the machines in the environment under test will be queried and attached to a pretty nice bug report for you. You can snapshot, rollback, etc. You can automate test runs and deployments of builds to environments.
You can use Lab Management even with shared or dedicated environments per testers. If your environments require it, you could even use network isolation between the environments to make sure clones of the environments don't cause problems with other clones.
Lab Management also helps if you need to test your apps against multiple configurations. Imagine you need to test your MFC or Java app on Windows XP, Vista, Server 2003, etc. You could spin up individual environments with the different configurations and test against each of them appropriately. Microsoft Test Manager can keep track of pass/fail results for your test cases in each of those configurations as well.
You're absolutely right though. Certain data collectors that come out of the box won't work well or not at all with non-.NET applications. However, the data collector system is completely extensible. If there is something you want to automatically gather, you can create your own custom data collector for use in Lab Management.
There's a lot you can take advantage in Lab Management with testing against non-.NET applications.
Unit tests for native C++ are supported in Visual Studio 11 so there is no need for wrappers. see this article. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh270864(v=VS.110).aspx
I am mainly interested in the 'integration features' between the IDE and the application server.
One example would be GUI editors for various server specific deployment descriptors.
Another example, from the NetBeans IDE integration with GlassFish, is the ability to:
edit a java file that is part of a
web application,
save the file and
see the effect of the change that you
just saved in the browser (without a
bunch of reloading).
Please include a link to any reference to the feature in user docs, if you have it at the tips of your fingers.
Over my years using RAD, the feature I'd recommend everybody to use would be its uninstaller...
Seriously though, RAD's advantage used to be IBM's plugins for Web / J2EE development; over the years, though, the Eclipse community has been making great progress with WTP and JST, so for most J2EE development you should do fine using Eclipse+WTP+JST... which are free (comparing RAD with 5-10K USD licensing fees. Per machine, that is).
One person suggested that the 'Web site navigation' tooling was useful.
The question says it all, we know most of the hosted web-based UI prototyping tools out there, but we would like to have ours hosted on our own internal servers, preferably with on-line multi-user collaboration functionality (i.e. users modifying the prototype, making comments, etc. in parallel).
Any suggestions will be appreciated.
Sketchflow (in the top-end version of Expression Blend from Microsoft) meets almost all your criteria. It ain't cheap, but it is very powerful.
The deployment package of a Sketchflow build can just be placed on an internal server (no IIS required to deploy).
Multiple users can overlay their comments and pen drawings over the top of the screens. Their feedback is packaged as a unit and sent back. All feedback can then be loaded back into the Expression Blend project and the feedback from 1 or more users viewed overlaid on the correct screens.
It does not meet your multiple-user authoring requirement though, but as they say "too many cooks...".
Most tools are either desktop based or hosted. Seen very few which offer a downloadble multi user version. iRise is one choice with the editor as a desktop product and a centralized server for sharing among users. The budget is typically from $50K to $250K. A similar option exists for Serena composer as well, not sure of the price though.
Both iRise and Serena are not real collaborative tools, the central server is only for sharing the finished prototypes and getting feedback.
If the requirement is for a completely web based multi user tool then 10screens can be an option - http://www.10screens.com. The same product available on the site in a hosted mode can be downloaded and installed on your own servers.