Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Web Platform Assessment Tools: An Experimental Evaluation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Web Information Systems and Technologies (WEBIST 2017)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 322))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Web search engines are used daily to find information, helping the user to surf the web. Web searching is the most popular online activity and although search engines regularly use updated indexes to run quickly and efficiently, they sometimes fail to keep the user on their page for a long time. As such, it is important to have the lowest delay in response time. Therefore, it is essential to understand what load is supported by each search engine by conducting load testing. These tests have the objective of optimizing the performance of the application being tested, thus verifying the maximum amount of data that is processed. In this paper we conduct a comparative analysis of the four most popular web platform assessment tools, Apache JMeter, Apache Flood, The Grinder and Gatling. As important as the search engine response time is the accuracy of returned results, that is, the amount of correct links related to what was searched for. For that reason, the accuracy of results returned by web search engines are also evaluated. In the experimental evaluation we use two tools: Apache jMeter and The Grinder, to compare with the web search engines: Google, Bing, Ask and Aol Search.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Avritzer, A., Weyuker, E.R.: The automatic generation of load test suites and the assessment of the resulting software. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 21(9), 705–716 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1109/32.464549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Avritzer, A., Larson, B.: Load testing software using deterministic state testing. In: Ostrand, T., Weyuker, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1993 ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, ISSTA 1993, pp. 82–88. ACM, New York (1993). https://doi.org/10.1145/154183.154244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Avritzer, A., Weyuker, E.J.: Generating test suites for software load testing. In: Ostrand, T. (ed.) Proceedings of the 1994 ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, ISSTA 1994, pp. 44–57. ACM, New York (1994). https://doi.org/10.1145/186258.186507

  4. Apache Flood. https://httpd.apache.org/test/flood/. Accessed 11 Nov 2016

  5. Apache JMeter. http://jmeter.apache.org. Accessed 11 Nov 2016

  6. Difference Between Performance Testing, Load Testing and Stress Testing – With Examples. http://www.softwaretestinghelp.com/what-is-performance-testing-load-testing-stress-testing/. Accessed 15 July 2017

  7. Wang, F., Du, W.: A test automaton framework based on WEB. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 11th International Conference on Computer and Information, ACIS 2012. IEEE Press (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gatling Project, Stress Tool. http://gatling.io. Accessed 11 Nov 2016

  9. Banga, G., Druschel, P.: Measuring the capacity of a web server under realistic loads. World Wide Web 2(1–2), 69–83 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019292504731

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Information about Yahoo Error 999. http://www.scrapebox.com/yahoo-999-error. Accessed 11 Nov 2016

  11. Zhang, J., Cheung, S.C.: Automated test case generation for the stress testing of multimedia systems. Softw. Pract. Experience J. 32(15), 1411–1435 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.487

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Curran, K., Duffy, C.: Understanding and reducing web delays. Int. J. Netw. Manag. 15(2), 89–102 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Lohr: For Impatient Web Users, an Eye Blink Is Just Too Long to Wait (2012). http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/01/technology/impatient-web-users-flee-slow-loading-sites.html?_r=2

  14. Bayan, M.S., Cangussu, J.W.: Automatic stress and load testing for embedded systems. In: 30th Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC 2006), Chicago, IL, pp. 229–233 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1109/COMPSAC.2006.119

  15. Sharma, M., Angmo, R.: Web based automation testing and tools. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Inf. Technol. (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sharma, M., Iyer, V.S., Subramanian, S., Shetty, A.: A comparative study on load testing tools. Int. J. Innovative Res. Comput. Commun. Eng. (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Barford, P., Crovella, M.: Measuring web performance in the wide area. SIGMETRICS Perform. Eval. Rev. 27(2), 37–48 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1145/332944.332953

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Paz, S., Bernardino, J.: Comparative analysis of web platform assessment tools. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1: WEBIST, pp. 116–125 (2017). ISBN 978-989-758-246-2. https://doi.org/10.5220/0006308101160125

  19. Pressman, R.: Engenharia de Software, 6th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ratcliff (2016). https://searchenginewatch.com/2016/08/08/what-are-the-top-10-most-popular-search-engines/. Accessed 11 Nov 2016

  21. Khan, R.: Comparative Study of Performance Testing Tools: Apache JMeter and HP LoadRunner (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hussain, S., Wang, Z., Toure, I.K., Diop, A.: Web Service Testing Tools: A Comparative Study (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  23. The Grinder, a Java Load Testing Framework. http://grinder.sourceforge.net/. Accessed 11 Nov 2016

  24. Tikhanski: Open Source Load Testing Tools: Which One Should You Use? (2015). https://www.blazemeter.com/blog/open-source-load-testing-tools-which-one-should-you-use

  25. Garousi, V., Briand, L.C., Labiche, Y.: Traffic-aware stress testing of distributed systems based on UML models. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2006), 391–400. ACM, New York (2006). https://doi.org/10.1145/1134285.1134340

  26. Wang, X., Zhou, B., Li, W.: Model based load testing of web applications. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing with Applications (ISPA 2010). IEEE Press (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Jiang, Z.M., Hassan, A.E., Hamann, G., Flora, P.: Automatic identification of load testing problems. In: Proceedings of the 24th IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM), Beijing, pp. 307–316 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSM.2008.4658079

  28. Jiang, Z.M.: Automated analysis of load testing results. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA 2010), pp. 143–146. ACM, New York (2010). https://doi.org/10.1145/1831708.1831726

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Polytechnic of Coimbra, ISEC, Rua Pedro Nunes, Quinta da Nora, 3030-190, Coimbra, Portugal

    Solange Paz & Jorge Bernardino

  2. Centre of Informatics and Systems, University of Coimbra, Pinhal de Marrocos, 3030-290, Coimbra, Portugal

    Jorge Bernardino

Authors
  1. Solange Paz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jorge Bernardino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jorge Bernardino .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Agder, Kristiansand, Vest-Agder Fylke, Norway

    Tim A. Majchrzak

  2. Center for Information Technology, FBK-ICT irst, Trento, Italy

    Paolo Traverso

  3. RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

    Karl-Heinz Krempels

  4. University of Paris 1, Paris, France

    Valérie Monfort

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Paz, S., Bernardino, J. (2018). Web Platform Assessment Tools: An Experimental Evaluation. In: Majchrzak, T., Traverso, P., Krempels, KH., Monfort, V. (eds) Web Information Systems and Technologies. WEBIST 2017. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 322. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93527-0_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93527-0_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-93526-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-93527-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation