performance testing scalability report version1

8/3/2019 Performance Testing Scalability Report Version1

1/14

SugarCRM

Performance TestReport

DOCUMENT INFORMATION :

Title : Performance Testing Report Scalability Test

1


2/14

Remarks : Draft version

Version : 1.0

Author :

Date of creation : 26 Nov 2010

DOCUMENT HISTORY :

Version Prepared Checked Authorized

By Date By Date By Date

1.0 26Nov2010

INDEXPurpose.......................................................................................................................................................3

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 4

1.1. Objective...............................................................................................................................................4

2


3/14

1.2. Application...........................................................................................................................................5

1.3. Reference Documents..........................................................................................................................5

2. Test Setup ................................................................................................................................................6

2.1. Hardware.............................................................................................................................................6

2.2 Software................................................................................................................................................6

3. Test Scenario ..........................................................................................................................................7

3.1. Description...........................................................................................................................................7

3.2. Scenario Deployment...........................................................................................................................7

3.3. Results..................................................................................................................................................7

4. Recommendations .................................................................................................................................14

4.1. Recommendations..............................................................................................................................14

Executive SummaryPurpose

The purpose of this document is to report the execution results of 22 scenarios of Sugar CRMApplication when subjected to Scalability testing.

Objective

3


4/14

The objective of the test is to verify the performance of SugarCRM application when a concurrent userload of 220 Vusers are accessing the application and to see the response times for specific scenario atthe client side and the utilization(CPU, Memory etc..) on the server side.

Software Under Test

SugarCRM 4.5.1G (Build 1003)

1. Introduction

1.1. Objective

The objective of the project is to verify the performance of the SugarCRM application for 10concurrent users and to check the response times, Hits per second, Throughput for differenttransactions and resource usage of server on which the Sugar CRM application is deployed.

4


5/14

1.2. Application

SugarCRM is an open source CRM application. The application uses Apache as web serverand MySQL as backend database.

1.3. Reference DocumentsThe below mentioned are the referred documents,

Business flow_SugarCRM Document

5


6/14

2. Test Setup

Below mentioned are the Hardware and Software components used during the test execution

2.1. Hardware

The hardware that was used for testing including machine names, configuration, and role of themachine (application server/web server/ DB server) is detailed in following tables

SI.No Machine name Configuration Purpose

1IP Address

10.188.144.75 CPU 2140 @1.60GHZWeb server ,DB

server

RAM 2GB

2.2 Software

Below mentioned are the lists of softwares used including the major and minor versions

Machine Name S/W Installed Version

IP Address10.188.144.75

SugarCRM,

ApacheServer,MySQL

SugarCRM Version:4.5.1g(Build 1003)

Apache Server Version: 5.5.17MQSQL: 5.1

IP Address10.188.144.75

Load Runner 9.5

6


7/14

3. Test Scenario

3.1. DescriptionThe testing scenario consist of two business process in the CRM application as given below,

Scenario - Calendar Navigation

Specific details about the business process can be found in the Performance Requirementsdocument.

3.2. Scenario Deployment

Scenario ID ScenarioName Business Flow % of totalload TotalLoad

1 Calendar Navigation

1) User Log into the Sugar CRM application.100 102) Click on Calendar tab in

SugarCRM homepage.

3) In the Shortcuts menu of the Calendarmodule,click Schedule Meeting.

4) You will get the next page enter the detailsand click on Save button.

5) User Logs out the application.

3.3. Results

The performance test results of Sugar CRM application can be divided into Client side monitorsand Server side monitors.The client side monitors are End-to-end transaction monitors - Provide end-user responsetimes, hits per second, transactions per second.The server side monitors provide hardware, network and operating system performancemetrics, such as CPU, memory and network throughput.Both the client side and server side monitors are discussed in the result analysis.

7


8/14

Client side monitors:

Load Vs Response Time

Transaction Response Time:

The Transaction Response time graph can be shown as the response time of transactions inmilliseconds (y-axis) as a function of the total average time taken in the scenario (x-axis). The graph wehave shown is bar chart to show the average response time per web page in sorted descending order.The pages at the left hand side are the pages taking more response time and pages towards right arethe ones with low response time.

The below graph represents the Maximum, Minimum & Average response times for each transaction,

8


9/14

Observations:

The above graph represents that the transactions Login and Log out has more responsetime i.e. approx 82.379 sec & 59.802 sec.

The transaction Schedule_meeting is having less response time of 18.578 sec.

Load Vs Hits per Second

Hits per Second

The Hits per Second graph shows the rate at which web pages are being retrieved from theWeb server (y-axis) as a function of the elapsed time in the scenario (x-axis).

The below graph represents the number of hits per sec when maximum load of 10 Vusersapplied during the test execution.

9


10/14

Observations:

The above graph represents that during the test execution when load of 10 vusers isapplied the hits/sec is very low.

Hits per second for the 10 Vusers load is more when the absolute time is between21:02:00 to 21:05:00.

Load Vs Time

The Load Vs Time graph will show the number of users which are active and load is appliedthen gradually decreases with absolute time.

Observations:

10


11/14

The above graph shows that 10 Vuser steady load is applied between the time intervalsfrom 0 to 21:03:50 and gradually it is decreasing.

Load Vs Success & Failed Transactions:

The below graph represents the total number of transaction passed and failed for the load of

10 Vusers.

Observation:

The graph shows the transactions Login_Transaction & vuser_init transaction failed formaximum of 32 times.

11


12/14

Transaction Name Fail Pass

Action_Transaction 8 2

Trans_Calendar_Navigation 0 10Trans_Login 32 10

Trans_Logout 0 2

Trans_Schedule_meeting 8 2

vuser_end_Transaction 0 2

vuser_init_Transaction 32 10

Server side monitors:

Load Vs Processor utilization (% Processor Time)

The below graph represents Load against the resource usage (%Processor Time & %User Time) for

SugarCRM application.

Load Vs Processor utilization (%Processor Time)

0

50

100

150

200

250

8:50

:25PM

8:51

:55PM

8:53

:25PM

8:54

:55PM

8:56

:25PM

8:57

:55PM

8:59

:25PM

9:00:55PM

9:02:25PM

9:03:55PM

9:05:25PM

9:06:55PM

9:08:25PM

9:09:55PM

Absolute time (sec)

NumberofVusers

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

ProcessorTime(%)

vusers

% Processor Time

12


13/14

Observations:

The above graph represents that the CPU utilization was very less in the initial state when thereis no load applied.

The CPU utilization was maximum i.e. 100% when the application was subjected to 220 users.

Load Vs Memory

The below graph represents the Memory Usage against Load.

Load Vs Memory

0

50

100

150

200

250

8:50:25PM

8:51:25PM

8:52:25PM

8:53:25PM

8:54:25PM

8:55:25PM

8:56:25PM

8:57:25PM

8:58:25PM

8:59:25PM

9:00:25PM

9:01:25PM

9:02:25PM

9:03:25PM

9:04:25PM

9:05:25PM

9:06:25PM

9:07:25PM

9:08:25PM

9:09:25PM

Absolute time (sec)

NumberofVusers

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ResourceUsage

(Megabytes)

vusers Available MBytes Committed Bytes

Observations:

The graph represents in the initial state when the Vuser load is zero the committed & availablebytes are in steady state and its stable over the period of time.

The available Mbytes starts decreasing and Committed Bytes starts increasing when the Vusersstarts hitting the server.

Throughout the test execution 400 MB memory was available.

13


14/14

4. Recommendations

4.1. Recommendations

The test should be run for a more number of Business flows.

14