Related
What is the preferred (or just a good) pattern for a multi-part Codecept.js scenario, such as this:
Select file to upload.
Clear selection.
Select file to upload after having cleared selection.
I can do this in a single scenario and use I.say to delineate the parts, but it feels like I should be able to write these as independent scenarios and use .only on part 2, for example, and have part 1 run prior to part 2, because it depends on it.
I would also want to skip parts 2 and 3 if part 1 fails when running the whole suite.
I like thinking about behaviour in terms of capabilities. I can see that you have a couple here:
Uploading files
Correcting mistakes while uploading files.
So I would expect these to be in two scenarios:
One where you actually upload the file
One where you correct mistakes you make.
A lot of people say there should only be one "When" in scenarios, but that doesn't take into account interactions with people (including your past mistaken self) or time. In this situation, it's the whole process of correcting the file upload that provides the value. I can't see any value in the intermediate steps, so I'd leave them all in one scenario.
If there's any different behaviour associated with different contexts (eg: you've already got too many files uploaded) or outcomes (eg: your file system doesn't have room) or rules (eg: your status means you qualify for super-fast upload) then I would expect those to be new scenarios. If you start getting to the point where there are a lot of scenarios associated with file uploads and different things that happen to them, that might be a good time to separate this scenario out. Right now I can't see any reason to do that.
Re failing the first part: if you're doing BDD right, you'll be talking through not just the behaviour of your system, but the behaviour of individual bits of code too. That should help produce a good design which minimizes the chances of having bugs. Really good BDD teams produce scenarios that hardly ever catch bugs!
The scenarios act as living documentation, rather than regression tests; helping future devs understand the value of the code and get it right, rather than nailing it down to stop them getting it wrong.
So I wouldn't worry about it failing. If it's doing that a lot, you've got a different problem. Code it as if it's going to be passing most of the time, and make sure it's readable and comprehensible. As long as you can see when it fails and work it out, even if that takes a little bit of time, it'll be fine.
Having said that, I'd be surprised if Codecept doesn't have at least an option to stop on failure. Most BDD tools don't continue a scenario after a failed step; it would be an odd thing to do.
As far as I know, you're not be able to set priority for execution in codeceptjs. Better make one test. it is also will be more flexible if you will need to add or delete some part.
I have an issue with a Flex application, one that I didn't build, so I can provide all my findings but sorry for any lack of clarity.
There is a Flex app with 7 main views. And there is a memory issue when navigating between views.
All these views were in a ViewStack, but due to some involving 3D objects I assumed it was too much to have it all in the display list. I'm now clearing all children from the stack and adding/removing them when needed. This gave a small performance increase, but still becomes unresponsive with use. The strange thing is, with this and the original method, the CPU climbs with use but eventually levels out somewhere. Now I'm creating new instances of each screen when they are navigated to and setting the previous variable to null. Now it looks like CPU is spiking when the view is created, but leveling out to something much much lower than it was. This felt like progress, but now the available memory keeps climbing where it wasn't before....
My understanding was calling remove child or remove all children would mark the object for deletion when the garbage collector next ran. I can't see any other references to the instance. My code is along the lines of
this.parentApplication.viewstack.removeAllChildren();
this.parentApplication.viewstack.addChild(new HomeScreen);
I have a function for each button to add a new instance like the above.
The only thing I can see and feel silly asking but need confirmation, is each view extends a class called "Screen", this class contains a singleton reference to some core components
this.model = PancakeApplication.instance.model;
this.meaModel = MeaApplication.instance.meaModel;
this.meaModel.addEventListener(ScreenChangeEvent.SCREEN_CHANGE, electedScreenChangeHandler);
Would this trick the garbage collector into thinking it was still needed?
General advice on clearing Objects from the memory pool would awesome!!! I've never needed to analyze the Flash Player in such depth.
SOLVED: I think it's an error with sound drivers, removing all sound and shes purring like a kitten. Works on my machine fine with windows XP, but not on the touch pad the application is crashing on with windows 7 (unsure of the drivers looking into them now).
UPDATE: Now I'm thinking its not the drivers, tried 3 different versions, all with no improvement. I did discover the sound was fading in and out with the TweenLite lib. Doesn't look like there are any memory leaks in TweenLite as it works fine on other machines. Just the use of volumeEasingFunction seems to consume increasing amounts of CPU until it freaks out. It is crappy hardware running windows 7, which doesn't help.
The first thing that comes to mind is you should be setting the use weak reference parameter to true in your event listener. It is the fifth parameter, so in your example:
this.meaModel.addEventListener(ScreenChangeEvent.SCREEN_CHANGE, electedScreenChangeHandler, false, 0, true);
Grant Skinner has a great 3 part series on AS3 Resource Management that would probably help you get a better idea of what to look for. You can find the details about weakly references listeners in part 3 or in a standalone article written before part 3 was posted.
I have a bit of a memory leak issue in my Flex application, and the short version of my question is: is there any way (in AcitonScript 3) to find all live references to a given object?
What I have is a number of views with presentation models behind each of them (using Swiz). The views of interest are children of a TabNavigator, so when I close the tab, the view is removed from the stage. When the view is removed from the stage, Swiz sets the model reference in the view to null, as it should. I also removeAllChildren() from the view.
However when profiling the application, when I do this and run a GC, neither the view nor the presentation model are freed (though both set their references to each other to null). One model object used by the view (not a presenter, though) IS freed, so it's not completely broken.
I've only just started profiling today (firmly believing in not optimising too early), so I imagine there's some kind of reference floating around somewhere, but I can't see where, and what would be super helpful would be the ability to debug and see a list of objects that reference the target object. Is this at all possible, and if not natively, is there some light-weight way to code this into future apps for debugging purposes?
Cheers.
Assuming you are using Flex Builder, you could try the Profiler. In my experience, it's not so good for profiling performance, but it's been of great help for finding memory leaks.
It's not the most intuitive tool and it takes a while to get used to it (I mean, to the point where it actually becomes helpful). But, in my opinion, investing some time to at least learn the basics pays off. There's an enormous difference between just seeing how much memory the player is using globally (what System.totalMemory gives you, a very rough, imprecise and often misleading indicator) and actually track how many instances of each object have been created, how many are still alive and where were they allocated (so you can find the potential leak in the code and actually fix it instead of relying in black magic).
I don't know of any good tutorials for the FB profiler, but maybe this'll help to get you started.
First, launch the profiler. Uncheck performance profiling and check everything else (Enable memory profiling, watch live memory data and generate object allocation stack traces).
When the profiler starts, you'll see stats about the app objects, grouped by class. At this point, you might want to tweak filters. You'll see a lot of data and it's very easy to be overwhelmed. For now, ignore everything native to flash and flex stuff, if possible, and concentrate on some object that you think it should be collected.
The most important figures are "cumulative instances" and "instances". The first is the total number of instances created so far; the second, the number of said instances that are still alive. So, a good starting point is get your app to the state where the view you suspect that leaks gets created. You should see 1 for "cumulative instances" and "instances".
Now, do whatever you need to do to get to the point where this view should be cleaned up (navigate to other part of the app, etc) and run a GC (there's a button for that in the profiler UI). A crucial point is that you will be checking the app behaviour against your expectations -if that makes sense-. Finding leaks automatically in a garbarge collected environment is close to impossible by definition; otherwise, there would be no leaks. So, keep that in mind: you test against your expectations; you are the one who knows the life cycle of your objects and can say, "at this point this object should have been collected; if it's not, there's something wrong".
Now, if the "instances" count for you view goes down to 0, there's no leak there. If you think the app leaks, try to find other objects that might not have been disposed properly. If the count remains at 1, it means your view is leaked. Now, you'll have to find why and where.
At this point, you should take a "memory snapshot" (the button next to the Force GC button). Open the snapshot, find the object in the grid and double click on it. This will give you a list of all the objects that have a reference to this object. It's actually a tree, and probably each item will contain in turn a number of backreferences and so on. These are the objects that are preventing your view from being collected. In the right panel, also, you will an allocation trace. This will show how the selected object was created (pretty much like a stack trace).
You'll probably see a hugh number of objects there. But your best bet is to concentrate in those that have a longer life cycle than the object you're examining (your view). What I mean is, look for stage, a parent view, etc; objects on which your view depends on rather than objets that depend on your view, if that makes sense. If your view has a button and you added a listener to it, your button will have a ref to your view. In most cases, this is not a problem, since the button depends on the view and once the view is collect, so is the button. So, the idea is that since there are a lot of objects, you should try to stay focused or you will get nowhere. This method is rather heuristic, but in my experience, it works.
Once you find the source of a leak, go back to the source, change the code accordingly (maybe this requires not just changing code but refactoring a bit). Then repeat the process and check whether your change has caused the desired effect. It might take a while, depending on how big or complex is your app and how much you know about it. But if you go step by step, finding and fixing one problem at the time, you'll eventually get rid of the leaks. Or at least the worst and more evident ones. So, while a bit tedious, it pays off (and as a nice aside, you'll eventually understand what a waste of time is in most cases to use weak refs for every single event handler on the face of this earth, nulling out every single variable, etc, etc; it's an enlightening experience ;).
Hope this helps.
Flash GC uses a mix of ref counting and mark and sweep, so it does detect circular references. It seems rather you're having another reference in you object graph. The most common reason is, that the objects you want disposed still are having event handlers registered on objects that are not disposed. You could try to ensure that handlers are always registered with weak reference. You could also override addEventListener and removeEventListener in all (base) classes, if possible, to look which listeners are registered and whether there are chances for some not to be removed.
Also, you can write destructors for your objects, that for ui components clear graphics and remove all children, and for all objects, removes references to all properties. That way, only your object is kept in RAM, which shouldn't require much memory (a small footprint of 20 B or so, plus 4 B per variable (8 for a Number)).
greetz
back2dos
also a useful heuristics for finding memory leaks: http://www.tikalk.com/flex/solving-memory-leaks-using-flash-builder-4-profiler
I have a ASP.NET web application (.NET 2008) using MS SQL server 2005. I want to increase the performance of the web site. Does anyone know of an article containing steps to do that, step by step, in SQL (indexes, etc.), and in the code?
Performance tuning is a very specific process. I don't know of any articles that discuss directly how to achieve this, but I can give you a brief overview of the steps I follow when I need to improve performance of an application/website.
Profile.
Start by gathering performance data. At the end of the tuning process you will need some numbers to compare to actually prove you have made a difference. This means you need to choose some specific processes that you monitor and record their performance and throughput.
For example, on your site you might record how long a login takes. You need to keep this very narrow. Pick a specific action that you want to record and time it. (Use a tool to do the timing, or put some Stopwatch code in you app to report times. Also, don't just run it once. Run it multiple times. Try to ensure you know all the environment set up so you can duplicate this again at the end.
Try to make this as close to your production environment as possible. Make sure your code is compiled in release mode, and running on real separate servers, not just all on one box etc.
Instrument.
Now you know what action you want to improve, and you have a target time to beat, you can instrument your code. This means injecting (manually or automatically) extra code that times each method call, or each line and records times and or memory usage right down the call stack.
There are lots of tools out their that can help you with this and automate some of it. (Microsoft's CLR profiler (free), Redgate - Ants (commercial), the higher editions of visual studio have stuff built in, and loads more) But you don't have to use automatic tools, it's perfectly acceptable to just use the Stopwatch class to time each block of your code. What you are looking for is a bottle neck. The likely hood is that you will find a high proportion of the overall time is spent in a very small bit of code.
Tune.
Now you have some timing data, you can start tuning.
There are two approaches to consider here. Firstly, take an overall perspective. Consider if you need to re design the whole call stack. Are you repeating something unnecessarily? Or are you just doing something you don't need to?
Secondly, now you have an idea of where your bottle neck is you can try and figure out ways to improve this bit of code. I can't offer much advice here, because it depends on what your bottle neck is, but just look to optimise it. Perhaps you need to cache data so you don't have to loop over it twice. Or batch up SQL calls so you can do just one. Or tighten your query filters so you return less data.
Re-profile.
This is the most important step that people often miss out. Once you have tuned your code, you absolutely must re-profile it in the same environment that you ran your initial profiling in. It is very common to make minor tweaks that you think might improve performance and actually end up degrading it because of some unknown way that the CLR handles something. This is much more common in managed languages because you often don't know exactly what is going on under the covers.
Now just repeat as necessary.
If you are likely to be performance tuning often I find it good to have a whole batch of automated performance tests that I can run that check the performance and throughput of various different activities. This way I can run these with every release and record performance changes each release. It also means that I can check that after a performance tuning session I know I haven't made the performance of some other area any worse.
When you are profiling, don't always just think about the time to run a single action. Also consider profiling under load, with lots of users logged in. Sometimes apps perform great when there's just one user connected, but when they hit a certain number of users suddenly the whole thing grinds to a halt. Perhaps because suddnely they are spending more time context switching or swapping memory in and out to disk. If it's throughput you want to improve you need to be figuring out what is causing the limit on throughput.
Finally. Check out this huge MSDN article on Improving .NET Application Performance and Scalability. Specifically, you might want to look at chapter 6 and chapter 17.
I think the best we can do from here is give you some pointers:
query less data from the sql server (caching, appropriate query filters)
write better queries (indexing, joins, paging, etc)
minimise any inappropriate blockages such as locks between different requests
make sure session-state hasn't exploded in size
use bigger metal / more metal
use appropriate looping code etc
But to stress; from here anything is guesswork. You need to profile to find the general area for the suckage, and then profile more to isolate the specific area(s); but start by looking at:
sql trace between web-server and sql-server
network trace between web-server and client (both directions)
cache / state servers if appropriate
CPU / memory utilisation on the web-server
I think First of all you have to find your Bottlenecks and then try to improve those.
This helps you to perform exactly where you have serios problem.
An in addition you needto improve your Connection to DB. For exampleusing a Lazy , Singletone Pattern and also create Batch request instead of single requests.
It help you to decrease DB connection.
Check your cache and suitable loop structures.
another thing is to use appropriate types, forexample if you need int donot create a long and etc
at the end ypu can use some Profiler (specially in SQL) andcheckif your queries implemented as well as possible.
I have the task of developing an online examination software for a small university, I need to implement measures to prevent cheating...
What are your ideas on how to do this?
I would like to possibly disable all IE / firefox tabs, or some how log internet activity so I know if they are googling anwsers...is there any realistic way to do such things from a flex / web application?
Simply put, no there is no realistic way to accomplish this if it is an online exam (assuming they are using their own computers to take the exam).
Is opening the browser window full screen an option? You could possibly also check for the window losing focus and start a timer that stops the test after some small period of time.
#Chuck - a good idea.
If the test was created in Flash/Flex, you could force the user to make the application fullscreen in order to start the test (fullscreen mode has to be user-initiated). Then, you can listen for the Flash events dispatched when flash exits fullscreen mode and take whatever appropriate action you want (end the test, penalize the user, etc.).
Flash/Flex fullscreen event info.
blog.flexexamples.com has an example fo creating a fullscreen-capable app.
Random questions and large banks of questions help. Randomizing even the same question (say changing the numbers, and calculating the result) helps too. None of these will prevent cheating though.
In the first case, if the pool is large enough, so that no two students get the same question, all that means is that students will compile a list of questions over the course of several semesters. (It is also a ton of work for the professors to come up with so many questions, I've had to do it as a TA it is not fun.)
In the second case, all you need is one smart student to solve the general case, and all the rest just take that answer and plug in the values.
Online review systems work well with either of these strategies (no benefit in cheating.) Online tests? They won't work.
Finally, as for preventing googling... good luck. Even if your application could completely lock down the machine. The user could always run a VM or a second machine and do whatever they want.
My school has always had a download link for the Lockdown browser, but I've never taken a course that required it. You can probably force the student to use it with a user agent check, but it could probably be spoofed with some effort.
Proctored tests are the only way to prevent someone from cheating. All the other methods might make it hard enough to not be worth the effort for most, but don't discount the fact that certain types of people will work twice as hard to cheat than it would have taken them to study honestly.
Since you can't block them from using google, you've got to make sure they don't have time to google. Put the questions in images so they can't copy and paste (randomize the image names each time they are displayed).
Make the question longer (100 words or more) and you will find that people would rather answer the question than retype the whole thing in google.
Give them a very short time. like 30-45 seconds. Time to read the question, think for a moment, and click either A, B, C, D, E,
(having just graduated from CSUN I can tell you scantron tests work.)
For essay questions? do a reverse google lookup (meaning put their answer into google as soon as they click submit) and see if you get exact matches. If so, you know what to do.
Will they always take the test on test machines, or will they be able to take the test from any machine on the network? If it will be specific machines, just use the hosts file to prevent them from getting out to the web.
If it is any machine, then I would look at having the testing backend change the firewall rules for the machine the test is running on so the machine cannot get out to the interwebs.
I'd probably implement a simple winforms (or WPF) app that hosts a browser control in it -- which is locked in to your site. Then you can remove links to browsers and lock down the workstations so that all they can open is your app.
This assumes you have control over the workstations on which the students are taking the tests, of course.
As a teacher, I can tell you the single best way would be to have human review of the answers. A person can sense copy/paste or an answer that doesn't make sense given the context of the course, expected knowledge level of the students, content of the textbook, etc, etc, etc.
A computer can do things like check for statistical similarity of answers, but you really need a person for final review (or, alternatively, build a massive statistical-processing, AI stack that will cost 10x the cost of human review and won't be as good ;-))
No, browsers are designed to limit the amount of damage a website or application can do to the system. You might be able to accomplish your goals through Java, an activex control, or a custom plugin, but other than that you aren't going to be able to 'watch' what they're doing on their system, much less control it. (Think if you could! I could put a spy on this webpage, and if you have it open I get to see what other websites you have open?)
Even if you could do this, using a browser inside a VM would give them the ability to use one computer to browse during the test, and if you could fix that they could simply use a library computer with their laptop next to it, or read things from a book.
The reality is that such unmonitored tests either have to be considered "open book" or "honor" tests. You must design the test questions in such a manner that references won't help solve the problems, which also means that each student needs to get a slightly different test so there is no way for them to collude and generate a key.
You have to develop an application that runs on their computer, but even then you can't solve the VM problem easily, and cannot solve the side by side computers or book problem at all.
-Adam
Randomize questions, ask a random set of questions from a large bank... time the answers...
Unless you mean hacking your site, which is a different question.
Short of having the application run completely on the user's machine, I do not believe there is a way to make sure they are not google-ing the answers. Even then it would be difficult to check for all possible loop-holes.
I have taken classes that used web based quiz software and used to work for a small college as well. For basic cheating prevention I would say randomize the questions.
Try adding SMS messages into the mix.
I agree with Adam, that even with the limitations that I suggested, it would still be trivial to cheat. Those were just "best effort" suggestions.
Your only hopes are a strong school honor code and human proctoring of the room where the test is being given.
As many other posters have said, you can't control the student's computer, and you certainly can't keep them from using a second computer or an iPhone along side the one being used for the test -- note that an iPhone (or other cellular device) can bypass any DNS or firewall on the network, since it uses the cellular provider's network, not the college's.
Good luck; you're going to need it.
Ban them from using any wireless device or laptop and keylog the machines?
You could enforce a small time window during which the test is available. This could reduce the chance that a student who knows the answers will be free to help one who doesn't (since they both need to be taking the test at the same time).
If it's math-related, use different numbers for different students. In general, try to have different questions for different copies of the test.
If you get to design the entire course: try to have some online homeworks as well, so that you can build a profile for each student, such as a statistical analysis of how often they use certain common words and punctuations. Some students use semi-colons often; others never, for example. When they take the test you get a good idea of whether or not it's really them typing.
You could also ask a couple questions you know they don't know. For example, list 10 questions and say they must answer any 6 out of the 10. But make 3 of the questions based on materials not taught in class. If they choose 2 or 3 of these, you have good reason to be suspicious.
Finally, use an algorithm to compare for similar answers. Do a simple hash to get rid of small changes. For example, hash an answer to a list of lower-cased 3-grams (3 words in a row), alphabetize it, and then look for many collisions between different users. This may sound like an obvious technique, but as a teacher I can assure you this will catch a surprising number of cheaters.
Sadly, the real trouble is to actually enforce punishment against cheaters. At the colleges where I have taught, if a student objects to your punishment (such as flunking them on the test in question), the administration will usually give the student something back, such as a positive grade change. I guess this is because the student('s parents) have paid the university a lot of money, but it is still very frustrating as a teacher.
The full screen suggestions are quite limited in their effectiveness as the user can always use a second computer or w/ multi monitor a second screen to perform their lookups. In the end it is probably better to just assume the students are going to cheat and then not count online tests for anything important.
If the tests are helpful for the students they will then do better on the final / mid term exams that are proctored in a controlled setting. Otherwise, why have them in the first place...
Make the questions and answers jpeg images so that you cannot copy and paste blocks of text into a search engine or IDE (if it is a coding test). This combined with a tight time limit to answer each question, say three minutes, makes it much harder to cheat.
I second what Guy said. We also created a Flex based examination system which was hosted in a custom browser built in .NET. The custom browser launched fullscreen, all toolbars were hidden and shortcuts were disabled.
Here is tutorial on how to create a custom browser with C# and VB.NET.
This will solve your problem. http://www.neuber.com/usermonitor/index.html
This will allow you to view the student's browser history during and after the test as well as look in on their screen during the test. Any urls visited during test time will be logged, so you can show them the log when you put a big F on their report card. :)
No one can stop people from cheating, but everyone can receive different questions altogether.
I prefer you buy available online scripts in market as starting point for it. This will save you time, cost and testing efforts.
Below is one of the fine scripts that I worked with and it worked like charm. Using this as base I developed a online testing portal of over 1000 users using computer adaptive test.
http://codecanyon.net/item/online-skills-assessment/9379895
It is a good starting point for people looking to develop Online Exam System.
I customized the script with the help of their support.