Free Newsletters
Technology & Business Daily

InfoWorld
Log-in | Register

Clean up your SOAP-based Web services

The Test Center inspects five worthy tools for keeping your services squeaky clean


Logging into QEngine ushers you into the suite manager screen. From there, you can either create or import a new test suite, or choose to work with an existing suite. If you choose the latter, a dialog materializes, giving you the option to work on Web functionality, Web performance, Web services functionality, or Web services performance. In other words, a single suite can host up to four categories of tests, and these categories are never really aware of one another. So, for example, if you're doing Web functionality test work, you don't see the Web services performance tests within that same suite. This takes some getting used to.

Adventnet QEngine
Click for larger view.
Scripts perform actual test execution. When you add a new Web service to a test suite, QEngine queries the Web service's WSDL and from that generates a set of basic test scripts – one for each Web method on the service. Select a script from a suite's explorer tree, and the generated source code appears in an editor window. QEngine's scripts are written in Jython, the implementation of the Python language that executes in a Java virtual machine.

The prebuilt test scripts are extremely spartan; you have to flesh them out for them to be useful. This is a two-step process. First, you supply the content of the requests using a pair of menu selections: DataSet Configuration and Parameterization. Dataset Configuration lets you set the sources of your input data as either a database (QEngine supports Oracle, SQL Server, or MySQL) or a CSV file. After you've configured your datasets, choose Parameterization and you can set specific input values to be supplied either by the dataset you just configured or by manually entered values.

Second, you add response analysis to the script. This requires coding, but QEngine helps out with a large selection of built-in response-processing functions. A Function Generator dialog simplifies choosing the right method to call. Select a function from the categorized list, and the dialog provides a description and an input parameter list. In effect, it fills out the function call for you and pastes it into the script.

Even with QEngine's hand-holding, validating a response is not particularly easy, unless you choose a simple processing function. To really get inside the response, you have to pretty much peel apart the XML, so you might want to keep an XPath manual on hand. When you execute a script, the results are gathered into a report summarization screen. It's loaded with links that you can click to drill down into the specifics of the success or failure.

QEngine strikes a good balance between reliance on the UI and raw coding. Through the Parameterization dialog, you can enter test data without having to wrestle with XML. But when XML-wrestling is unavoidable, you can drop into Jython code and wreak whatever havoc you deem necessary. However, QEngine's user interface is not easy to navigate; more than once, I found myself unable to backtrack to a known location. In addition, inactivity for a period of time (which I was unable to deduce) logs you out. You have to log back in and crawl back to where you left off.

Crosscheck Networks SOAPSonar 3.0.5
SOAPSonar offers numerous ways to feed data into SOAP requests. Using the tool’s Automation Data Source, you can input data from an SQL database via ODBC (Open Database Connectivity), an Excel spreadsheet, or a raw file. If you want to reuse data in a previous SOAP request, you can configure the request to use a recalled entry, which propagates data from a previous response into subsequent requests. For the ultimate in data-generation flexibility, you can call upon an automatic data function. Such functions are drawn from an extensive library that ranges from manually entered data series to arbitrarily complex user-defined data generation algorithms.

Rick Grehan is contributing editor of the InfoWorld Test Center.
Continued
« PREVIOUS PAGE | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | NEXT PAGE » 

 The Bottom Line

AdventNet QEngine 6.8
AdventNet, adventnet.com

Good  7.4
criteria score weight
Ease-of-use 7 20%
Features 7 20%
Scalability 8 20%
Setup 8 20%
Documentation 7 10%
Value 7 10%

Cost:
Single-use/installation license, $2,495; additional $795 for performance testing with up to 50 virtual users

Platforms:
Windows 2000 or later, Linux

Bottom Line:
A cross-platform tool, QEngine runs easily on both Windows and Linux. It's hard to beat the solution's programmability; you can extend tests to arbitrary complexity. However, creating test scripts requires coding skills, plus it's easy to get lost in the user interface.

About our Reviews and Scoring Methodology

 The Bottom Line

Crosscheck Networks SOAPSonar 3.0.5
Crosscheck Networks, crosschecknet.com

Very Good  8.2
criteria score weight
Ease-of-use 8 20%
Features 9 20%
Scalability 8 20%
Setup 8 20%
Documentation 8 10%
Value 8 10%

Cost:
Pricing starts at $799 for the Standard versions. Other versions include Automation and Platinum.

Platforms:
Windows 2000 or later

Bottom Line:
SOAPSonar's "four pillars" approach to Web service testing is an excellent testing discipline. Moreover, the product's security testing capabilities are particularly powerful. On the other hand, the different testing "modes" are rather confusing, and automation features cost extra.

About our Reviews and Scoring Methodology

 The Bottom Line

iTKO LISA 3.6e
iTKO, itko.com

Good  7.8
criteria score weight
Ease-of-use 7 20%
Features 8 20%
Scalability 9 20%
Setup 8 20%
Documentation 7 10%
Value 7 10%

Cost:
Starts at $4,000 per license for Web Services Edition. Cost varies based on number of users, load testing, and extensibility needs. Full edition including testing for Web services, ESB, messaging/ESB, databases, Web/RIA apps costs $9,500.

Platforms:
Any Java-compliant platform (Windows, Mac OSX, Linux, Solaris) with at least 1GB of RAM and a 1.6GHz processor

Bottom Line:
LISA tries hard to create a code-free testing environment, quickly embraced by QA engineers that might need help with SOAP intricacies. Moreover, the tool can test both SOAP and REST-based services. Drawbacks include the fact that hard-core developers will miss the ability to write code. Also, the interface is difficult to master.

About our Reviews and Scoring Methodology

 The Bottom Line

Mindreef SOAPscope Server 6.0
Mindreef, mindreef.com

Good  7.8
criteria score weight
Ease-of-use 8 20%
Features 7 20%
Scalability 8 20%
Setup 8 20%
Documentation 9 10%
Value 7 10%

Cost:
Not disclosed

Platforms:
Windows XP/2003 Server/Vista, Linux (Red Hat recommended)

Bottom Line:
Excellent documentation and an easy-to-maneuver interface can't quite make up for SOAPscope's lack of programmability and its inability to address non-SOAP Web services. To its credit, it delivers good support for rule-based message and WSDL governance.

About our Reviews and Scoring Methodology

 The Bottom Line

Parasoft SOAtest 5.1
Parasoft, parasoft.com

Very Good  8.4
criteria score weight
Ease-of-use 8 20%
Features 9 20%
Scalability 9 20%
Setup 8 20%
Documentation 8 10%
Value 8 10%

Cost:
Enterprise Edition, including desktop licenses and training for a team of five, costs around $50,000.

Platforms:
Windows, Linux, Solaris

Bottom Line:
SOAtest does an excellent job jump-starting the test process. Parasoft has done exceptionally well integrating Web-service testing into the company's already robust testing tools. The offering is heavy on Java affinity, which might limit its appeal to .Net developers. Also, project structure is initially confusing.

About our Reviews and Scoring Methodology


Talkback:

commentPost a Comment

 

MOST COMMENTS

 
 





Are you ready for event-driven business?
"Faster than a speeding bullet" doesn't just refer to superheroes anymore, it's the velocity your business needs to compete. In this webcast you will learn strategies you can implement today that will keep your systems ahead of the increased business velocity. Sponsor: Progress Sonic

»  Click here to view this Webcast
  Zombie PCs Are Attacking Your LAN
A recent study showed that malware-infected zombie PCs are now a bigger threat to ISPs and Web infrastructure than DoS attacks. As this brand new IT Strategy Guide explains, an increased use of peer-to-peer techniques by the attackers has made it harder to fight back. Download now, compliments of Verio:

»  Click here to download now

- Special Advertising Partners -
WHITE PAPERS
 

» Technology White Papers Library

Technology White Papers by Topic

Technology White Papers E-mail Alert

Find out when the latest white paper is available:
 
 
INFOWORLD MARKETPLACE
 
» BUY A LINK NOW
 
 

Video

 
 
 

Podcasts

 
 
 

 

Columnists

 
 
 

Resource Center


Ads by techwords beta  [See your link here]
 




Sponsored Technology Links

 
 
 HOME  NEWS  BLOGS  PODCASTS  VIDEOS  TECHNOLOGIES  TEST CENTER  EVENTS  CAREERS   About | Advertise | Awards | RSS | Contact Us 

Copyright © 2008, Reprints, Permissions, Licensing, IDG Network, Privacy Policy, Terms of Service.
All Rights reserved. InfoWorld is a leading publisher of technology information and product reviews on topics including viruses,
phishing, worms, firewalls, security, servers, storage, networking, wireless, databases, and web services.

CIO :: ComputerWorld :: CSO :: Demo :: GamePro :: Games.net :: IDG Connect :: IDG World Expo
Industry Standard :: IT World :: JavaWorld :: LinuxWorld :: MacUser :: Macworld :: Network World :: PC World :: Playlist