You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 25 Next »

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Touchstone Performance Test Plan  

Abstract

This test plan is intended to prescribe the scope, approach, types of performance testing, resources and high-level schedule of the testing activities to be performed in the Touchstone project.  This plan will identify the use cases, data, and related systems to be included in the testing process.

1.0 Document identifiers

1.1 References

The following documents were used as sources of information for this test plan:

  • Questcon Technologies, The Questcon Test Management Methodology; 01/07/2005; (Test Management Methodology Release 4.0.doc).
  • Questcon Technologies, MIT SOW Testing Touchstone.

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Purpose

The objective of this test plan is to outline the performance testing effort to be undertaken for the Touchstone project.

2.1.1 Project Description

MIT Touchstone is a new suite of technologies for authenticating a variety of web applications, being introduced by IS&T. MIT Touchstone does provide a single sign-on solution for applications that have been coded and configured to use the system. Within the context of Touchstone enabled applications, users will be able to seamlessly transition between systems without being prompted for additional authentication information.
The intended audience of this document includes all IT personnel involved in the development, testing, and support of Touchstone.

2.1.2 Project Technologies

MIT Touchstone utilizes/integrates with the following technologies:

  • Stanford's WebAuth
  • Internet 2's Shibboleth
  • SAML (the Security Assertion Markup Language)
  • A new account management system for some users outside of the traditional MIT community
  • HTTP/S (extensive redirects)
  • SSL
  • MIT X.509 certificates
  • Kerberos (via the HTTP/SPNEGO protocol)
  • TLS
  • OpenID
  • Web Services
  • MySQL (including replication)
  • Apache
  • Tomcat
  • IDP High Availability Package
  • LDAP
  • KDC
  • DNS load balancing

2.2 Scope

2.2.1 Items To Be Tested

Each of the following business processes (user flows) will be tested under load:

  • CAMS Account Creation
  • CAMS Account Authentication
  • CAMS Account Association (OpenID)
  • Authenticated Kerberos user access
  • Kerberos user id and password authentication
  • Authenticated OpenID user access

2.2.2 Items Not To Be Tested

The following modules and types of tests are considered to be outside the scope of this test effort and will not be tested by Questcon:

  • MIT X.509 certificate access
  • Kerberos (HTTP/SPNEGO) access
  • CAMS Account Association (Kerberos (HTTP/SPNEGO))

2.3 Risks & Contingencies

The following risks have been identified, which may impact the testing effort.

Risk

Contingency

Production-like test environment not available

Utilize development or production environment.  Results may not be indicative of production and therefore cannot be used as a benchmark.  Production performance issues may not be identified during testing.

Production-like setup and settings not available.

Use the closest setup and settings we can.  Results may not be indicative of production and therefore cannot be used as a benchmark.  Production performance issues may not be identified during testing.

Fully operational test tools not available.

Wait until the test tools are availalbe or find and use another test tool(s).  This will extend the time required to perform testing.

Test time increases due to changes in scope requiring additional test analysis and/or test case creation

If test time cannot be increased, reduce/cut performance testing scenarios and execute highest priority scenarios initially followed by lower priority tests until test time runs out

Involvement of subject matter experts (SMEs) for all stages of the testing effort not sufficient.

If test time cannot be increased, reduce/cut performance testing scenarios and execute highest priority scenarios initially followed by lower priority tests until test time runs out

Inadequate Non-functional Requirements

Missing pass/fail criteria invalidates benchmarking.  Missing load modeling invalidates all scenarios.  Perform only a brute stress test to try and flush out major bottlenecks and functionality under load issues.  Additionally an endurance tet can be run to attempt to identify memory leaks.  All tests will be less indicative of real world usage scenarios.

Insufficient access to systems in order monitor (This includes any necessary server side scripts which may need to be developed in order to capture desired metrics.)

Root cause analysis will be difficult is possible.  Testing time will most likely need to be extended and scenarios may be abbreviated due to time constraints.

Substantial issue(s) which requires significant modifications to the application or re-configuration of the system are encountered.

Some testing may need to be re-done, possibly including re-scripting etc.  This would extend testing time.

Excessive number of bottlenecks encountered and/or issue correction time.

Extend testing time.

Test time increases due to changes in scope requiring additional test analysis and/or test script/scenario creation

If test time cannot be increased, reevaluate priorities and risk and test according to new priorities.

3.0 Approach

3.1 Testing Strategy

The overall strategy for performance testing the Touchstone project is goal based.  There are four main goals whe hope to acheive:

  1. Performance - Benchmark the system to ensure it meets all non-functional requirements related to performance.
  2. Stress - Push the system to it breaking point and beyond to identify how and under what level of load the system fails as well as the ramifications of such a failure.
  3. Endurance - Place the system under a heavy, yet manageable, load for a protracted period of time to identify any performance degradation and/or memory leaks.
  4. Fail-over - Place the system under a heavy, yet manageable, load, wait for it to stabilize and then disconnect the servers from their network connections to identify how the system handles the sudden loss of a server.  This will help satiate any up-time SLAs or non-functional requirements.

Scripts will be designed to model various user interactions with the system.  While most of the user interactions will be scripted, some may be omitted according to the 80/20 rule and/or any time constraints which may exist.

3.2 Tools

The tools we will employ are yet to be determined.

3.3 Environmental Needs

We will need the following:

  • Stable production like system to test against.
  • Stable hardware and software to use to generate load.
  • Adequate rights and privileges to capture server side metrics (monitoring) as well as any server side scripts necessary to accomplish any needed monitoring.

4.0 Scripts

The following scripts will be used during the performance testing effort. When the design steps have been provided by MIT all of the to be determined (TBD) values will be replaced with the actual values.

4.1 CAMS Account Creation

Precondition: TBD

Data Needed: TBD

Transaction Name

Step(s)

Expected Result

95th % Response Time

TBD

 

 

 

4.2 CAMS Association - OpenID

Precondition: TBD

Data Needed: TBD

Transaction Name

Step(s)

Expected Result

95th % Response Time

TBD

 

 

 

4.3 CAMS Association - Kerberos

Precondition: TBD

Data Needed: TBD

Transaction Name

Step(s)

Expected Result

95th % Response Time

TBD

 

 

 

4.4 Site Access - Kerberos w/ticket

Precondition: TBD

Data Needed: TBD

Transaction Name

Step(s)

Expected Result

95th % Response Time

TBD

 

 

 

4.5 Site Access - Web Auth

Precondition: TBD

Data Needed: TBD

Transaction Name

Step(s)

Expected Result

95th % Response Time

TBD

 

 

 

4.6 Site Access - CAMS Account

Precondition: TBD

Data Needed: TBD

Transaction Name

Step(s)

Expected Result

95th % Response Time

TBD

 

 

 

4.7 Site Access - OpenID

Precondition: TBD

Data Needed: TBD

Transaction Name

Step(s)

Expected Result

95th % Response Time

TBD

 

 

 

4.8 Password Reset

Precondition: TBD

Data Needed: TBD

Transaction Name

Step(s)

Expected Result

95th % Response Time

TBD

 

 

 

4.9 Admin - Password Reset

Precondition: TBD

Data Needed: TBD

Transaction Name

Step(s)

Expected Result

95th % Response Time

TBD

 

 

 

4.10 Admin - De-Activate Account

Precondition: TBD

Data Needed: TBD

Transaction Name

Step(s)

Expected Result

95th % Response Time

TBD

 

 

 

4.11 Admin - Delete Account

Precondition: TBD

Data Needed: TBD

Transaction Name

Step(s)

Expected Result

95th % Response Time

TBD

 

 

 

4.12 Admin - Activate Account

Precondition: TBD

Data Needed: TBD

Transaction Name

Step(s)

Expected Result

95th % Response Time

TBD

 

 

 

5.0 Scenarios

5.1 Performance Testing Scenarios

A performance test is designed to benchmark the system under test under a realistic load scenario that mimics what we anticipate real world usage will be at its peak.

5.1.1 IDPi Only

The objective of this scenario is to benchmark just the internal IDP. 

5.1.1.1 Load Model

Desired Transaction Rate:  TBD

Script

% of Load

Site Access - Kerberos w/ticket

TBD

Site Access - Web Auth

TBD

5.1.2 IDPe Only

The objective of this scenario is to benchmark just the exzternal IDP. 

5.1.2.1 Load Model

Desired Transaction Rate:  TBD

Script

% of Load

CAMS Account Creation

TBD

CAMS Association - OpenID

TBD

CAMS Association - Kerberos

TBD

Site Access - CAMS Account

TBD

Site Access - OpenID

TBD

5.1.3 Integrated IDP External & Internal

The objective of this scenario is to benchmark both IDPs concurrently.

5.1.3.1 Load Model

Desired Transaction Rate:  TBD

Script

% of Load

CAMS Account Creation

TBD

CAMS Association - OpenID

TBD

CAMS Association - Kerberos

TBD

Site Access - CAMS Account

TBD

Site Access - OpenID

TBD

Site Access - Kerberos w/ticket

TBD

Site Access - Web Auth

TBD

5.2 Stress Testing Scenarios

5.2.1 IDPi Only

The objective of this scenario is to stress only the internal IDP.  We plan to push it gradually up to its breaking point and then beyond to determine how and at what load it fails.

5.1.3.1 Load Model

Desired Transaction Rate:  OPEN

Script

% of Load

Site Access - Kerberos w/ticket

TBD

Site Access - Web Auth

TBD

5.2.2 IDPe Only

The objective of this scenario is to stress only the external IDP.  We plan to push it gradually up to its breaking point and then beyond to determine how and at what load it fails.

5.1.3.1 Load Model

Desired Transaction Rate:  OPEN

Script

% of Load

CAMS Account Creation

TBD

CAMS Association - OpenID

TBD

CAMS Association - Kerberos

TBD

Site Access - CAMS Account

TBD

Site Access - OpenID

TBD

5.2.3 Integrated IDP External & Internal

The objective of this scenario is to stress both IDPs concurrently.  We plan to push it gradually up to its breaking point and then beyond to determine how and at what load it fails.

5.1.3.1 Load Model

Desired Transaction Rate:  OPEN

Script

% of Load

CAMS Account Creation

TBD

CAMS Association - OpenID

TBD

CAMS Association - Kerberos

TBD

Site Access - CAMS Account

TBD

Site Access - OpenID

TBD

Site Access - Kerberos w/ticket

TBD

Site Access - Web Auth

TBD

5.3 Endurance Testing Scenarios

5.3.1 Integrated IDP External & Internal

The objective of this scenario is to run both IDPs concurrently for a protracted period of time (multiple days) to determine stbility and check for memory leaks.

5.3.1.1 Load Model

Desired Transaction Rate:  TBD

Script

% of Load

CAMS Account Creation

TBD

CAMS Association - OpenID

TBD

CAMS Association - Kerberos

TBD

Site Access - CAMS Account

TBD

Site Access - OpenID

TBD

Site Access - Kerberos w/ticket

TBD

Site Access - Web Auth

TBD

5.4 Fail-over Testing Scenarios

5.4.1 Integrated IDP External & Internal

The objective of this scenario is to check how both IDPs handle a sudden iteruption in connectivity by pulling the network plug from 1 of the servers (at a time)

5.4.1.1 Load Model

Desired Transaction Rate:  TBD

Script

% of Load

CAMS Account Creation

TBD

CAMS Association - OpenID

TBD

CAMS Association - Kerberos

TBD

Site Access - CAMS Account

TBD

Site Access - OpenID

TBD

Site Access - Kerberos w/ticket

TBD

Site Access - Web Auth

TBD

6.0 Monitoring

The following metrics will be collected from each Touchstone server during the performance tests to assit in diagnostics

  • CPU %
  • System Load
  • System Memory
  • JVM Memory (For each JVM)
  • JVM Processor % (Hopefully we can get this through JMX)  (For each JVM)
  • JVM Garbage Collections (For each JVM)
  • Apache httpd processes (memory, CPU, and open files for each process)
  • Number of open files.
  • Network Connections
  • LDAP Connections (This would be applicable to Core IdP testing only)
  • DB Connections (This would be applicable to CAMS testing only)

7.0 Non-functional Requirements

Touchstone Non-functional Requirements

8.0 Architectures

8.1 Physical

Touchstone Production Physical Architecture

8.2 IdPi Logical

Touchstone Production IdPi Logical Architecture

8.2 IdPe Logical

Touchstone Production IdPe Logical Architecture

  • No labels