Re: [Webunitproj-users] Issues with child webclients

[Doron <dg...@sh...>]

Hi Brian,

	See comments below:

On Fri, 2003-05-09 at 19:18, Brian Knorr wrote:
> We are having issues with child webclients… some of our web
> application’s workflows require many browsers windows to be popped up,
> so in our tests we have to keep track of all the child webclients. 
> One thing we have noticed is that all the child webclients stay open,
> even if the javascript executed on the browser closes it. 
->> The web browser used by web unit (Internet Explorer) is actually the
COM GUI component container inside a Java window. Hence the close
javascript command may be ignored in this situation. You may need to
investigate the Internet Explorer API (callbacks) to see if there is an
even for this and if so call dispose() on the "Frame" object in java to
close the browser window for that client.
>  Is this a bug?  A work around we tried to conduct in our tests was to
> close the child webclient with WebClient.close(), but instead of
> closing just the child webclient, all the open webclients are closed
> and the test stops. 
>  Is this a bug too? 
->> This is probably a bug. Check the close method and see what it does.
It should just do a dispose one the java Frame object.

>  Also, with all these child webclients open (sometimes around 10) the
> process begins to eat up 100% of the cpu and then it starts to take
> about 10 seconds just to enter one value on the screen… sounds like a
> threading/memory issue - thoughts?
->> Internet explorer will start consuming a good amount of CPU when
there are a lot of windows open and active. It is hard to say what is
causing it without actually profiling the app under your test scenario.
I suggest you look at the task manager and see where the CPU cycles are
spent (Internet explorer or Java). Also check the memory available to
see if that is the issue (although this is not likely).

You could also profile the app using something like optimize it to find
out where it slow.
> 
>  
> 
> Please advise… thanks,
> 
>  
> 
> Brian