For the cached load test, see Figure 4. The first part of this
report shows the slowest Avg. page time, which is more than what we saw in the
non cached results. This makes sense when I think that the first time the page
is loading, all the caching is happening. This would explain the differences.
Figure 4: Cached Load Test Summary
When we look a little deeper, this is where we see the
benefits of caching. For instance, if we look at the average test time for
AllCachedReports, the number is 412 sec. For nonCached, the number was 559. This
appears to be a 30+% better performance. When looking how many tests were run,
for AllNonCached, 40 tests were run.
Looking at CustomerCached, the average test time was 96.5
sec. In the non-cached version, it was 87.2 sec. So it appears that for some
reason, caching was not helpful for this report. But the gain in noncached was
around 10% in this case. When looking at how many tests were run, 14 tests were
run for CustomerCached. It appears that the gain from AllCachedReports allowed
CustomerCached to be run more times.
