Scribd
Upload
25 views2 pages

UI Performance Test Analysis

The document analyzes UI performance testing using Playwright .NET and JMeter. While Playwright can simulate concurrent users and identify client-side bottlenecks, it struggles with scalability and can lead to false failures. JMeter is recommended for API-level performance testing of UI workflows, effectively handling HTTP requests but lacking browser rendering capabilities.

Uploaded by

Praveen Kumar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
25 views2 pages

UI Performance Test Analysis

The document analyzes UI performance testing using Playwright .NET and JMeter. While Playwright can simulate concurrent users and identify client-side bottlenecks, it struggles with scalability and can lead to false failures. JMeter is recommended for API-level performance testing of UI workflows, effectively handling HTTP requests but lacking browser rendering capabilities.

Uploaded by

Praveen Kumar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

UI Performance Test Analysis

High Level

1. Using existing Playwright .NET test cases for performance test


2. Using Jmeter for UI Performance test

Using existing Playwright .NET test cases for performance test

 This gets closer to simulating concurrent users, but only a very small number. Each
parallel test run will typically launch its own browser instance via Playwright.
 Tracing: Generate detailed traces (timeline, network requests, console logs,
screenshots) to analyze what happens during a test.
 Reports: Generating consolidated reports with this approach is complex, we
might not get all the detailed performance metrics like K6 or Jmeter
 Use Case: Useful for identifying client-side bottlenecks (slow JavaScript,
large images, rendering issues) for a 1-10 user, but not server-side load
capacity.
Limitations

 Playwright drives real browsers. Running even tens, let alone 100+, browser
instances concurrently requires massive amounts of CPU, RAM, and network
bandwidth on the machine(s) running the tests. Our test runner machine quickly
becomes the bottleneck, not our application server. True load testing tools simulate
traffic at the protocol level (HTTP/S) which is far more lightweight.
 Cannot Scale this approach to simulate hundreds or thousands of concurrent users
realistically. Not suitable for simulating high-volume concurrent user load
 UI tests are inherently more prone to flakiness than API tests due to timing issues,
animations, pop-ups, etc. Running them under load or repeatedly increases the
chance of false failures.

Using Jmeter for UI Performance test

1. HTTP Request Sampling: Use JMeter to send HTTP requests (e.g., GET/POST)
mimicking UI actions like login, order, and logout. Record browser interactions
with JMeter’s HTTP(S) Test Script Recorder or BlazeMeter to capture traffic.
2. Simulating UI Scenarios: Create HTTP requests for login (pass credentials,
capture tokens), ordering (chain requests for cart and submission), and logout
(clear session). Use Thread Groups for multiple users and Transaction
Controllers to group actions.
3. Handling UI Challenges: Manage dynamic data (e.g., product IDs) with post-
processors, capture API calls for JavaScript/AJAX (JMeter doesn’t run
JavaScript), and use HTTP Cookie Manager for session handling.

Limitations

● No Browser Rendering: JMeter doesn’t render UI or execute client-side JavaScript,


so it can’t measure front-end performance (e.g., page load times, DOM rendering).

Best Approach

● Using JMeter for API-level performance testing of UI workflows by focusing on


HTTP requests.
● Example: Test backend APIs with JMeter for load and scalability.

You might also like