Jay Harris is Cpt. LoadTest

a .net developers blog on improving user experience of humans and coders
Home | About | Speaking | Contact | Archives | RSS
Filed under: Mush | Tools

Must Have Tools

  • Notepad2: A vital, essential, notepad replacement. Color-codes your text using syntax schemes identified by the file’s extention. I followed Scott Hanselman and “renamed ‘Notepad2.exe’ to ‘n.exe’ which saves me a few dozen ‘otepad’s a day.”
  • PsExec: [blog entry] Execute remote applications, remotely. Great for installing an MSI on a remote box without resorting to Remote Desktop. Also great for launching solitaire on your buddy’s machine and harrassing him for slacking at work.

Testing Tools

  • Screen Hunter 4.0 Free: [blog entry] Free screen capture tool that is a requirement in any tester’s toolbelt.
  • Watir: [blog entry] Web Application Testing In Ruby. An automated functional testing tool for automated browser tests in IE. Scripts are written in Ruby.

Continuous Integration Tools

  • CruiseControl.Net: Monitor your source. Can be used to manage automated builds, build status, and reports from NUnit, FXCop, etc.
  • NAnt: Free build tool for .Net. Use with CruiseControl.net to automatically build nightlies or whenever a code change occurs.
  • NantContrib: An extention for NAnt. Adds some useful tasks that NAnt does not include, such as integration with VSS.
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 2:07:10 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #    Comments [0] - Trackback

Filed under: Programming | Testing | Tools | Watir

Scott Hanselman is my new hero. He is filling the hole—the one thing preventing Watir from becoming real competitor in the automated functional test market: script recording. Watch out Mercury; by creating WatirMaker, Scott is opening the flood gates, and Watir is going to come pouring through.

This changes everything.

I started out my career as a developer, but as I noted in an earlier blog, I get much more enjoyment from breaking things than I do building things, so I jumped ship. With my development experience I can delve in to making some rather wicked scripts for QTP, LoadRunner, and lately, Watir. However, my testers don’t share my skill set. My biggest hurdle in ousting QTP and making Watir our standard is the lack of recording; I can not expect every tester to start coding away in Ruby. It should come as no surprise that when I opened Scott’s blog this morning, I was so excited that I nearly wet myself.

It is a work in progress, but soon Scott hopes to have a fully functional recording tool for Watir. With WatirMaker, my testers can hit a button and start clicking away in IE; the tool will happily watch like a little kid on the sidelines, learning every move. My testers can all adopt Watir with open arms, and we can wave goodbye to that Mercury maintenance contract.

The only thing left to say is: “Scott…thanks!”

Wednesday, July 27, 2005 1:55:50 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #    Comments [2] - Trackback

Filed under: ASP.Net | Tools

In code deployment, it is often necessary to perform tasks that must be executed locally on the destination box, such as installing through an MSI or installing assemblies to the GAC through GACUtils. Thankfully, there is a way that this can all be done remotely, with any process, as long as it can be accessed through a command prompt. The destination computer will think that you are working on it directly, though it may just be your NAnt script doing the work for you.

SysInternals publishes a tool called PsExec. It allows you to execute a program remotely on a remote machine. To the remote machine the process is running locally. Because of this, you can use traditional command line tools to run programs and utilities, such as GACUtil to install a new assembly to the GAC on a remote box–a feature that most other options don’t support.

PSExec \MyServer "C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.1.4322\GACUtil.exe" "C:\bin\MyAssembly.dll"

Note: the paths are all ‘local’ paths on \\MyServer, just as you would enter from a command prompt in an RDP session to MyServer. You will also need to customize the paths to include whatever location and framework version your remote machine uses.

As for me, because our web applications make thorough use of the GAC, our only deployment method is a VS.Net Deployment project to create a MSI. We have NAnt scripts that upload the MSI to remote machines then execute PsExec run the installation (MSIExec) in unattended mode. It has brought our deployment time down from a manual 30-45 minutes to an automated 15 minutes, and allows code managers to spend those 30-45 minutes doing something else. We save even more time when we deploy to production, which contains an 8-server web farm.

Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:39:49 AM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #    Comments [0] - Trackback

Filed under: Testing | Tools

If you are anything like me, you probably have the latest version of Internet Explorer and/or Firefox on your machine.
If you are anything like me, you have clients that don’t. They are often still supporting Internet Explorer 5, or some archaic version of Netscape.

Though it is a little dated, I found a rather helpful post on semicolon, today. The post on multiple Internet Explorer versions in Windows discusses stand-alone versions of Internet Explorer available through an Internet Explorer browser archive from evolt.com. The post goes one step further, identifying a defect in IE where every version uses common registry settings causing it to always identify itself as v6, even if you are using a different version. The post contains a workaround; drag this Version bookmarklet to your links toolbar, and when you click it, it will show your actual version.

I would also like to take his post one step further. The full browser archive, which semicolon does not mention. Not only does evolt include Internet Explorer, but seemingly every browser ever available, such as Netscape Navigator, Opera, and Lynx.

Monday, July 25, 2005 1:59:37 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #    Comments [0] - Trackback

Filed under: ASP.Net | Programming

Scott Hanselman has a good post today about the HttpOnly cookie attribute. It secures the cookie from access via the DOM. “The value of this property is questionable since any sniffer or Fiddler could easily remove it. That said, it could slow down the average script kiddie for 15 seconds.”

Read Scott’s full blog entry.

Here’s the meat-and-potatoes of what Scott came up with; it’s for your global.asax:

protected void Application_EndRequest(Object sender, EventArgs e)
    foreach(string cookie in Response.Cookies)
        const string HTTPONLY = ";HttpOnly";
        string path = Response.Cookies[cookie].Path;
        if (path.EndsWith(HTTPONLY) == false)
            //force HttpOnly to be added to the cookie
            Response.Cookies[cookie].Path += HTTPONLY;
Friday, July 22, 2005 2:01:58 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #    Comments [0] - Trackback

Filed under: Programming | Usability

Years ago, way back when the web first started to become universally popular–and I’m talking about popular with all demographics and not just geeks like me–there was the 30KB rule, and it was a cardinal sin to break it. The entire request, including your HTML, your images, and everything else your page contained, had to come in under 30 kilobytes. Most homes were surfing through the web on a 28.8kbps modem, which pulled 30KB in about 10 seconds. Beyond that 10 seconds, and your users were too bored, frustrated, or confused to wait another moment, and were off to pursue the next site in your WebRing. 30KB. That was the limit. It was universally accepted. And, save a few ransom notes on GeoCities, everyone followed it.

Whatever happened to the 30KB rule?

Today constantly see pages that are 100KB or more, and those are even compressed responses. Everyone is so caught up in broadband, and developing on their 100mbps LAN, that they forget about the little guy. What about grandma? My poor grandma still surfs the internet with a good ol’ 57.6kbps modem. And even if she could pull off that speed (US restrictions limit to 53, max) it would still take 20 seconds to yank that monster through the pipe. My poor grandma shouldn’t have to wait that long.

Often times if I wade through the muck that makes up the offending request, I see 60KB style sheets, references to JS files that contain functions not even used in this page, big honkin’ j-pegs, useless JavaScript comment blocks that easily pile on a few K, and my nemesis: ViewState. (I hate ViewState. ViewState hates me. It’s a good relationship.)

My company is making an application, and the primary audience is a bunch o’ satellite offices stuck in the 20th century. They plug in to a whopping dual ISDN which maxes out at a whopping 128kbps. That’s 16KB/sec for you young folk. That 100KB page will take 7 seconds to pull across the wire. Toss that fact in to the 10-second rule, and you only have 3 seconds to process the request. I have visions of little ones and zeros flying towards the light screaming “We’re not gonna make it!!”

Get a haircut. Trim those bushes. Bring that response size down a few K. Here’s a few ways to tame the beast:

Reduce ViewState

“Remember that ViewState is evil.”

It adds a big, encrypted string to a hidden form variable in your HTML. However, this beast gets bigger with every web control that you have. Explicitly turn off viewstate on every control that does not use it, or better yet, turn of viewstate for the entire page. Of course, realize that the not-dot-net crowd is laughing at you while you do it.

Eliminate Comments in Release Code

“keep your comments to yourself.”

It is great to comment your code. It is fabulous. Every developer should bow to you if you comment your code, because not enough do it themselves. However, unless it is compiled code or in code-behind that isn’t sent to the client, it has to go. You can keep your comments in the version stored in SVN, VSS, or whatever your favorite source control tool is, but your release code should contain no client-side comments. Your client doesn’t read them, their browser doesn’t care about them, and all it does is slow everything down, so give them the axe. Your network administrator will love you for it, too.

Optimize Images

“Phenomenal, Artistic Imagery, Itty-Bitty Living Space.”

Compress your images. Get them as small as your image editor can get them (small: file size, not small: pixel size) without degrading the image beyond acceptable levels. And if you use a GIF, lower the number of colors (which will lower the number of bytes). When your images get smaller, people get happy.

Eliminate Whitespace

“One Program: One Line of Code.”

This is a cheap trick to squeeze out those last few bytes. If you have a news article that’s 9 pages long, open it up in notepad and turn off word-wrap, it becomes one big long line that stretches out forever and is impossible to read. But, your browser could care less. Take out all of the horizontal white space that you use to make your code readable, and then take out all the line breaks to make your HTML one big line, and your browser couldn’t tell the difference. However, you just chopped a few more bits.

Enable Compression

“GZip it, and GZip it good.”

If all else fails, and you’ve gotten your pages as whittled down as you can, and they are still big, compress it. Then again, even if they are small, compress it. It will add a few more CPU cycles on both ends to compress and decompress the response, but the time lost is greatly countered by the time saved in data transfer. Typical compression is around 40%, which takes that 100KB file down to 60KB, and saves my grandma nearly 8 seconds. She’ll give you a kiss and squeeze your cheeks for that one.

Monday, July 18, 2005 2:10:35 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #    Comments [0] - Trackback

Filed under: Programming | Testing | Tools | Watir

In case you haven’t heard of it yet, Watir is the greatest thing to hit automated functional testing since…well…ever. Watir (pronounced “water”), or Web Application Testing In Ruby, is an open source automated functional testing tool powered by Ruby. My company has been living off QuickTest Pro, and it is not much of a leap to Watir. Much like QTP, it automates an instance of Internet Explorer and navigates its way around your web site, however unlike QTP, it doesn’t hijack your computer when you do it; with Watir, the IE window doesn’t have to be the foreground window, so you can get something else done while your test is executing. Watir also allows various checks much like QTP, but though programming includes the capability of checking much more, such as object hierarchy or object style. (Yes, Watir can make sure that your validation messages are red!)

Your money manager will love Watir, too. Our switch from QTP will save us thousands of dollars per year from Mercury’s annual support costs. For a moment, I think our company president’s pupils turned to dollar signs like a cartoon.

If you are like me, and spend your QTP days in ‘Expert’ view (Source code), you will pick Watir up quickly. I even find it better than QTP. Additionally, since it is just a source code file, edited in Notepad if you like, it can be stored in your favorite source control application AND (this is a big ‘and’) your developers can execute the automated tests themselves without proprietary software like QTP. Its easy integration with NUnit will also tie your automated functional tests in with applications like Nant and CruiseControl.

More Information

Read all about Watir.
Read Bret Pettichord’s (a Watir creator) blog entry about Watir.

Friday, July 15, 2005 2:19:59 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #    Comments [0] - Trackback

Filed under: Programming

I like to think that my development team is full of competent and capable people, and not one of them was aware of this: Internet Explorer has a limitation on the number of cookies per domain (MSDN Reference).

From: “Number and size limits of a cookie in Internet Explorer”

Microsoft Internet Explorer complies with the following RFC 2109 recommended minimum limitations:

  • at least 300 cookies
  • at least 4096 bytes per cookie (as measured by the size of the characters that comprise the cookie non-terminal in the syntax description of the Set-Cookie header)
  • at least 20 cookies per unique host or domain name

We recently started having random authentication problems with our eLearning platform. It turns out that our application, plus everyones favorite Single-Sign On, plus SCORM, plus courseware created by third-party vendors created enough cookies to blow the top off the cookie jar. IE can only handle 20 cookies. Create a 21st cookie, and the oldest cookie is given the axe, which is generally an authentication cookie, a session ID, or some other very important cookie (as the ‘elders’ usually are).

So, be aware of your cookie jar. Monitor the number of existing client-side cookies in use when testing that new application. Harass other developers if they start using too many. Keep yours hands out of the cookie jar!

Oh, and don’t forget to encrypt them (but that’s a different post topic).

Friday, July 1, 2005 2:21:40 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #    Comments [0] - Trackback