Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [LoadRunner] Can I use other protocol to test siebel system

Expand Messages
  • Matthew Stephenson
    Please, respectfully, stop begging us to solve this issue for you. The community, made up of people far better at this than me have given you repeatedly the
    Message 1 of 18 , Aug 23 6:04 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Please, respectfully, stop begging us to solve this issue for you. The community, made up of people far better at this than me have given you repeatedly the exact way to go, abet with some advice on management consultation. Since you are not going to have the protocol available to begin the correlation process, the only thing you can do is:

      1. Read the siebel development documentation and the server/component documentation (NOT the HP Loadrunner Documentation). This will tell you exactly what is going on with the client/server implementation and why. (This is how the first correlation rules were developed)
      2. Record the same business logic, exactly the same twice. Data will have to be different.
      3. Compare the differences - what is different will need to be addressed. Using step 1 as the guide on how and why.

      This in all reality should take you a week to figure out the basics. Serious. The time this tread has been alive you should have been heads down and solved this. If what I have outlined above is too much for you to handle, then I am sorry to say you are most likely not in the right role.

      Now getting to the point that you have a script that actually works is great. The next step in your development is leaning how best to test each Siebel view in a way that is realistic. This is true in every performance test, but Siebel makes it exceptionally east to mess things up quickly - and a hint: PDQs are all over the place, they are not optimized in the vanilla code and are very sensitive to data cardinality.

      The basic/general rules for Siebel only really apply to vanilla code or custom code where the developers follow the standards. Once custom code is implemented you will need some skill to get through the correlation process. It is not that hard - but it is also not intuitive.

      Good Luck!




      On Aug 15, 2013, at 11:17 PM, Peter Xu wrote:

      > only have 11.52 web 2.0 license. does this can work with siebel system?
      >
      > ________________________________
      > From: James Pulley <loadrunner-lists@...>
      > To: LoadRunner@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 11:15 AM
      > Subject: RE: [LoadRunner] Can I use other protocol to test siebel system
      >
      >
      > GUI
      > Citrix
      > RDP
      > Winsock
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com] On
      > Behalf Of Peter Xu
      > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 8:39 PM
      > To: mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [LoadRunner] Can I use other protocol to test siebel system
      >
      > Dear Expert,
      >
      > Did you try to using other protocol to test siebel system, does this can
      > work, If anyone know this, please do me a favour to tell me. thanks
      >
      > thanks
      > Peter
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Matthew Stephenson
      Row IDs Form IDs - if you want any chance your scripts will survive across SRFs SWEC counts Session IDs Dynamic data that has to carry across steps and views.
      Message 2 of 18 , Aug 23 6:27 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Row IDs
        Form IDs - if you want any chance your scripts will survive across SRFs
        SWEC counts
        Session IDs
        Dynamic data that has to carry across steps and views.
        Character counts if that is enabled on the server

        That's the bulk, I am sure I forgot something.

        Good Luck!



        On Aug 22, 2013, at 4:43 AM, Peter Xu wrote:

        > I mean the correlation part, want some details about how to correlate siebel 8.1, it is tough to me.
        >
        > Thanks
        > Peter
        >
        > ________________________________
        > From: James Pulley <loadrunner-lists@...>
        > To: LoadRunner@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 1:33 PM
        > Subject: RE: [LoadRunner] Can I use other protocol to test siebel system
        >
        >
        > For mechanical (tool) based item, See VUGEN guide, index and Table of Contents related to Siebel
        >
        > For process and reporting, see standard documentation for reporting against requirements which would be similar to any performance testing project
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Peter Xu
        > Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 9:22 PM
        > To: mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: Re: [LoadRunner] Can I use other protocol to test siebel system
        >
        > Dear Experts,
        >
        > Could you give me some documents about how to use LR 11.5 to test siebel 8.1, the better one is the document you write after a siebel 8.1 project, thanks in advanced
        >
        > thanks
        > Peter
        >
        > ________________________________
        > From: James Pulley <mailto:loadrunner-lists%40jamespulley.com>
        > To: mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 10:23 AM
        > Subject: RE: [LoadRunner] Can I use other protocol to test siebel system
        >
        > To establish value will require a measure of affirmative value, not just a negative statement. Take one business process. Measure how long it takes to achieve the same level of functionality for your existing solution set and one for the proposed solution set. Once you understand the differences in labor for a script which accommodates all best practices then you can make a value judgement as to the benefit or detriment of the existing and proposed solutions.
        >
        > "...not good..." will result in a permanent mark you will not want.
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Peter Xu
        > Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2013 9:48 PM
        > To: mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: Re: [LoadRunner] Can I use other protocol to test siebel system
        >
        > Thanks James,
        >
        > I will tell them it is not good to use this protocol to test siebel.
        > thanks
        > peter
        >
        > ________________________________
        > From: James Pulley <mailto:loadrunner-lists%40jamespulley.com>
        > To: mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 9:42 AM
        > Subject: RE: [LoadRunner] Can I use other protocol to test siebel system
        >
        > Now is the time to communicate the VALUE of this solution to your management so they can make an appropriate decision on whether the VALUE of the retained work product and increased efficiency of a dedicated protocol type is worth the PRICE. If you are not able to establish value with your management on this issue then you would be wise to ask about the level of value that is assigned to your output, for the output is only as good as the inputs...and if the inputs have the perception of no to low value....well, you can see where the writing on the wall heads.
        >
        > 'Pulley
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Peter Xu
        > Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2013 8:36 PM
        > To: mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: Re: [LoadRunner] Can I use other protocol to test siebel system
        >
        > our siebel license will not continue.
        >
        > ________________________________
        > From: Matthew Stephenson <mailto:cneisme%40yahoo.com>
        > To: mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 8:41 PM
        > Subject: Re: [LoadRunner] Can I use other protocol to test siebel system
        >
        > Thick client you could use ODBC, but I would not recommend it. The scripts will be massive and require more correlation's than you would be willing to do.
        >
        > The answer to your question is "yes", but I want to ask why?
        >
        > On Aug 15, 2013, at 11:15 PM, James Pulley wrote:
        >
        > > GUI
        > > Citrix
        > > RDP
        > > Winsock
        > >
        > > -----Original Message-----
        > > From: mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com
        > > [mailto:mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Peter Xu
        > > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 8:39 PM
        > > To: mailto:LoadRunner%40yahoogroups.com
        > > Subject: [LoadRunner] Can I use other protocol to test siebel system
        > >
        > > Dear Expert,
        > >
        > > Did you try to using other protocol to test siebel system, does this
        > > can work, If anyone know this, please do me a favour to tell me.
        > > thanks
        > >
        > > thanks
        > > Peter
        > >
        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > >
        > > ------------------------------------
        > >
        > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > >
        > >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.