Abstract:
Examples disclosed herein involve measuring application performance based on user engagement of the application. In examples herein, an activation of an action item may be detected and a degree of user engagement of the application in response to the activation of the action item may be determined. A threshold time for acceptable performance of the action item is adjusted based on the degree of user engagement.
Abstract:
Error data may be collected. The error data may represent a first plurality of errors of a first type and a second plurality of errors of a second type to occur in a plurality of instances of an application transaction. Visualization data may be generated. The visualization data may represent an error flow diagram to display on an output device. The error flow diagram may comprise a first block having a first visual property based on a first number of the first plurality of errors, a second block having a second visual property based on a second number of the second plurality of errors, and a first linkage between the first block and the second block.
Abstract:
Examples disclosed herein relate to identifying a configuration element value as a potential cause of a testing operation failure. Examples include causing a testing operation to be performed approximately in parallel on each of a plurality of instances of an application executed in respective testing environments, acquiring configuration element values from each of the testing environments, and identifying at least one of the configuration element values as a potential cause of a testing operation failure.
Abstract:
Example embodiments relate to classifying application protocol interfaces (APIs) in terms of their relation to user experience. Example embodiments may determine that a user action occurred and monitor a first thread separate from a user interface (UI) thread of the computing device. The first thread may process a first API in response to the occurrence of the user action. A determination may be made as to whether the first API being processed on the first thread is related to the user action. Responsive to the first API being related to the user action, a determination may be made as to whether the first API causes the first thread to update the UI thread of the computing device. Responsive to the UI thread being updated, the first API may be tagged as affecting user experience.
Abstract:
Evaluating user experience for an application includes collecting, for each of a plurality of sessions of the application, a list of user event data items experienced during that session. The list of user event data items includes any of a device utilization quantifier, user action-response time pairs, and an application fault indicator. For each session, a value is assigned to each collected user event data item, and a session score is derived based on those assigned values. A user experience score is derived based upon a plurality of the derived session scores. The user experience score is reported.
Abstract:
Evaluating user experience for an application includes collecting, for each of a plurality of user sessions, a list of user event data items experienced from a perspective of a user device during that user session. For each user session, a session score is discerned based on an analysis of that user session's list of user event data items. Each session score is associated with a corresponding one of the plurality of users. For each of a plurality of successive time periods, user scores are discerned for each of the plurality of users. Each user score is discerned as a function of all session scores associated with that user where those session scores are for user sessions occurring during that time period. For each of the successive time periods, a period score is discerned as a function of the user scores discerned for that time period. The time period score discerned for a selected one of the successive time periods can be reported.
Abstract:
Examples disclosed herein relate to identifying a configuration element value as a potential cause of a testing operation failure. Examples include causing a testing operation to be performed approximately in parallel on each of a plurality of instances of an application executed in respective testing environments, acquiring configuration element values from each of the testing environments, and identifying at least one of the configuration element values as a potential cause of a testing operation failure.
Abstract:
In one example of the disclosure, a user-defined success criterion for an application change is received. The criterion is provided to a computing system associated with a developer-user of the application. Evaluation code, for evaluating implementation of the change according to the criterion, is received from the computing system. The evaluation code is caused to execute responsive to receipt of a notice of production deployment of the change. A success rating for the change is determined based upon application performance data attained via execution of the evaluation code.
Abstract:
In some examples, a first skeleton of a layout of a first version of an application screen may be compared with a second skeleton of a layout of a second version of the application screen. It may be determined whether the first version of the application screen is malformed based on the comparison.
Abstract:
Example implementations relate to separating verifications from test executions. Some implementations may include a data capture engine that captures data points during test executions of the application under test. The data points may include, for example, application data, test data, and environment data. Additionally, some implementations may include a data correlation engine that correlates each of the data points with a particular test execution state of the application under test based on a sequence of events that occurred during the particular test execution state. Furthermore, some implementations may also include a test verification engine that, based on the correlation of the data points, verifies an actual behavior of the application under test separately from the particular test execution state.