6

I want to understand what is the difference for the above mentioned scenario in Load testing.

How different would the results be?

Also another scenario would be wherein I'm having the same user listed 1000 times (users) and executing a scenario.

I am using LR 12.53 and am relatively new. So want to clear my basic understanding.

Kindly help

7

1 user doing 1000 iterations is not load testing assuming the user only does one at a time.

However 1000 users doing one iteration concurrently is load testing

  • I don't really disagree in practical terms but just for the sake of discussion... I'd suggest 1 user/1000 tests each could be called "load testing with a very low concurrency and high number of repetitions" and 1000 users/1 test each could be "load testing with a high concurrency and very low number of repetitions". – Cherree May 21 at 18:50
2

That depends on what you are testing. assuming you want to test a servers ability to serve static webpages to different users, having only one user would make no sense. The first iteration might give a reasonable result but further iterations might be much faster because of e.g. caching or not having the overhead of establishing a secure connection.

I don't know about loadrunner specifics but i would assume one user only makes request sequentially while 1000 users would send request parallel

2

In most cases, whether LoadRunner is simulating 1 user and having them do 1k actions at the same time or 1k users and having them do just 1 thing, won’t make a difference. Because generally the question of scale is really about number of simultaneous connections. But it can make a difference due to caching and state changes.

Simple example, suppose you want to tell the user something the first time they take an action on a per day basis, suppose that determining what to say takes a long time. If you have 1k different users being used, then the message is definitely going to be composed 1k times. If on the other hand, you have 1 user repeating the same action 1k times, then at least some of them can be expected to skip composing the message, with the corresponding reduction in effort.

  • Would it be useful to have 10 simulated users with 100 iterations each so that if load-balancing was in use then it would catch incorrect server-side state cache configuration? – Andrew Morton May 19 at 12:48
  • @AndrewMorton: when testing for incorrect server side caching, you don’t need multiple users, one is fine. What you need is multiple iterations. Unfortunately, it’s generally something you have to be looking for under a specific test plan, and not something you can casually add to a load test. – jmoreno May 19 at 13:19
2

Let’s say that the action under test takes one second. Then one user doing that 1k times would spread out the test over 1k seconds. 1k users doing it once would try and the same work in one second I.e. at the same time.

So while they do basically the same amount of work, since the time scales are significantly different, then the load is significantly different.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.