Case study: QTP to Selenium migration

Case study: QTP to Selenium migration

• 1.
  Case Study -QTP/UFT to Selenium Migration - 80% reduced execution By Tarun Lalwani © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 1
• 2.
  About the Speaker Founder at TARLABS™ Author of 3 books on Test Automation using QTP/UFT Sold over 25000 copies world wide till date Won various award by Infosys, HP, ATI Worked with Infosys for 8 years as knowledge expert in areas of Telecom, Automation, Testing Prime blogger at KnowledgeInbox.com Helping SauceLabs Support on Directly.com 18000+ post on various forums 20K Regular followers Education background – B.Engg from NSIT (Affiliate of Delhi College of Engineering) © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 2
• 3.
  About TARLABS™ Foundedin June 2013 Prime area of focus – Automation, API, Scripting, Product building We provide automated testing solution using QTP & Selenium Custom automation for different type of tasks, areas of works We have executed large projects in areas of Data mining, scraping, Automated bots © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 3
• 4.
  Agenda About theApplication Under Test Existing Testing Suite Existing Challenges Why Migrate? QTP v/s Selenium Result © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 4
• 5.
  AUT Web appfor hospitals Managing patients, doctors, medications, diagnosis Back End: ASP.NET, MS SQL Front End: HTML, jQuery 75% AJAX autocomplete fields © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 5
• 6.
  Existing Testing Suite Tool: QTP Test Cases: 30 Machine(s): 1 Run time: ~3 hours Reporting: Native QTP Execution Frequency: twice a day Execution Tool: HP QC 11.00 Browsers: IE (primarily) & Firefox Inconsistency Failure rate: 10% © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 6
• 7.
  Existing Challenges 2long test with 15-25 min execution time 2 long test - 40% failure chance because of inconsistent app/AJAX behavior Most failures re-attempted without re-testing Extra debugging efforts as QTP native reports don't show error/exception stack trace © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 7
• 8.
  Idea of Migration Created a single test proof of concept using Selenium and C# Selenium test with no framework and hard coded values executed in 2.75 min against QTP's 4.5 min © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 8
• 9.
  QTP v/s Selenium QTP Selenium Identifies browser at UI level Can connect to existing browsers IE, Firefox, Chrome Identifies each object as its own type – WebEdit, WebTable, WebList Identifies browser launched using Selenium Cannot connect to existing browser Identifies only WebElement. Has only support for Select © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 9
• 10.
  Initial challenges Nofunctions for tables or specific object types No method to check existence of object (in QTP, Browser().Page().WebEdit().Exist(0)) No straight forward method to wait for object wait (in QTP, Browser().Page().WebEdit().Exist(10)) No Object Repository management, DataTables Lot of re-usable classes to be written © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 10
• 11.
  Framework in C# Inspired by Python RobotFramework Aimed at below Reduce logging effort Easy to use Object Repository HTML reporting Less code Parameterization Debugging from existing failures © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 11
• 12.
  Key features Automatedreporting [HandlerDocumentation("Take the screen shot of the page {screenshotName}")] public static string TakeScreenshot(string screenshotName) Verify and assert Call,Click Link,${HomePage.tabAddProvider} Assert,VerifyExists,${AddProvider.btnAddNew} ${rowLocation}=,RowWithText, ${TabBilling.tblBilling}, ${BillingCode} Verify,HasValue,${rowLocation} Object Repository ${Login.txtUserName}=name=username ${Login.txtPassword}=name=password ${Login.btnLogin}=name=submit ${PatientList.txtLastName}=id=txtLast © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 12
• 13.
  Key features Built-injQuery and Sizzle selector support Sizzle=, $$=, sz= jquery=, $=, jq= Injects jQuery or Sizzle libraries if not already present Built-in label selector support label= <label for="User">Click me</label> <input type="text" id="User" name="Name" /> Connect to existing firefox while testing LaunchBrowser, firefoxexisting © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 13
• 14.
  Key features Supportfor AJAX sites AJAXClick Works only if AJAX is done using jQuery Counts the expected AJAX calls completed after clicking the button Doesn't work for sites like Facebook which continuously poll data using AJAX HTML Reports Demo © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 14
• 15.
  Execution Suite ©TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 15 Excel Based (browser + script run time optimized)
• 16.
  Addon tools ©TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 16 Sharp developer add-on (Intellisense + Syntax coloring)
• 17.
  Comparison © TARLABS™Ltd, 2013 - 14 17 Selenium v/s QTP Run-time: 19 min /165 min (-88%) Selenium v/s QTP Development: 4 months /2 months (+100%)
• 18.
  Add on CustomPerformance Test © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 18
• 19.
  Thank you! Q&A? © TARLABS™ Ltd, 2013 - 14 19 http://www.tarlabs.com http://www.knowledgeinbox.com tarun@tarlabs.com