Micro Focus Service Test [EOL] Reviews

The most valuable features for us are

• Performance on execution
• Usage, once most of tasks are drag and drop, so you just need to drag the features during script preparation
• Integration with other ALM tools

My team integrated test scripts from HP Service Test into HP QC ALM test management tool. This made it easy for the test team to monitor and measure test execution.

One recommendation would be to enable the HP Service Test tool to connect and store scripts in different service environments like Sub-version (SVN), this would make it easy to share script code.

I used it for four years.

There were no issues encountered.

There were no issues encountered.

There were no issues encountered.

10/10

10/10

My team used previously Parasoft Test, and we decided to change to reduce license costs, enable integration to HP QC, and increase performance execution.

It was easy, as the tool had an installation wizard that was pretty straightforward.

We implemented it in-house and had all support required.

Download the trial version and evaluate.

• Data driven
• Scripting component

It's simplified the automation process for SOA testing, where the support for C-scripting can be fitted and customized according to the client's requirements.

The built-in test cases in Service Test are used in HP LoadRunner for service performance testing.

The WS-security testing can be made a little easier, like working with Certificates, PKIs, Timestamps, etc.

I've used it for two to three years.

There were no issues with the deployment.

`There have been no stability issues.

We've been able to scale it as needed.

Technical Support from HP is very good. They provide us with answers when we need, making our tasks lighter. However, we do need to follow up a bit.

We were using Soap UI (this is also one of the strong base tool for SOA testing), which is limited to the testing of web services. Service Test provides different opportunities in SOA testing, which helps us to provide better SOA solutions to clients.

The set-up was easy.

We implemented it in-house.

Its pricing is a bit high when compared to other SOA testing tools.

It's one of the best SOA testing tools available on the market.

The use of an external DLL is the most valuable feature.

The data validation used to take a lot of time, and now through Service Test it is done within minutes.

They should come up with something like Fiddler to see the service status.

I've used it for one year.

There was no issue with the deployment.

There has been no issue with the stability.

There has been no issue with scaling it.

Customer service is very good.

Technical service is very good.

It is easy to set up.

The ROI is good in the long run.

The licences are costly.

The ability to create the positive and negative scripts for the web services.

It has helped a lot in reducing the time that would be put in for a particular module.

They could provide more utilities that would make coding easier. Also, automation required significant coding and other modifications which wasnt the case in other tools of a similar sort.

I have worked on this service test tool for about a year.

When an entire script is ready in the tool and there is a modification of WSDL at the final point, you need to form the code from the scratch and there will be lot of objects in the tool that wouldn't work post the inclusion of new WSDL. That required significant manual effort to fix.

It's average.

It's average.

This was my first solution and then we had to adopt other better choices which provided even better service (tools that were free).

For someone who lacks knowledge, it might be quite difficult to work on in the initial set up. It requires significant training and practice for one to get equipped in the tool.

The most valuable feature is the graphical workflow. This UI feature allows us to see what's going on.

We've been able to automate several MAT test runs day and night.

Unfortunately, I had to run HP Service Test in a mode where HP license servers were required and I had to set these systems up with IT which was a total pain. 

The version of HP Service Test (and if I remember correctly QTP as well) had to connect to a license server in order to run properly. We had these test heads with HPST/QTP in order to run Json/UI tests plus any java python tests stored in svn.

For example:

If the lic server went down, all the HPST nodes would fail their automation tests. Which would bring down the entire automated test infrastructure and people would think the current build was bad.

If the lic server became over loaded, the ATI above would come down.

If the network blocked the lic server port, then people could not share lic servers across large enterprise networks. We are talking HP here.

We had 100’s of these “test heads” that would run automated tests against a particular version of a product running on a test node, for each new build candidate, 24 hours a day.  

We were trying to sell the rest of the group(s) on setting up their own test rings by using our test framework, and one of the big arguments was having to use HP Service Test and the hassle with lic server registration and set-up.

Most of the groups would just try and point to my groups lic server(s).

This was a few years ago mind you. Maybe things changed since then.

I was on lone to the particular test group because I was a programmer and was very passionate about enterprise class automated test environments and technology. I worked with another guy which was a big advocate for QTP/HPST evangelical.

There were no issues with the deployment.

Our test environment would bog down when HP Service Test could not get a license from a license server which would make test runs fail.

There was no issues with the scalability.

Get the version of Service Test that has JSON payload support if available.

• Service Test is easy to use as it has a rich toolbox with numerous activities that a developer just needs to drag and configure its properties.
• Using latest versions such as Service Test 11, you handle data more flexibly by linking a variety of data sources or storing the data locally while a test is available for these.
• Service Test offer a platform for multiple technologies; REST, Java, .NET, and more thus providing an extensible framework for development of function test systems.

• Functional and performance tests used by Service test uses different protocol which posses a great challenge in implementation of headless system requiring a scalable test.
• Service Test technology is primarily meant to test applications without user interface therefore falling short of helping in the test of UI applications unlike QTP.

Service Test is user friendly and requires QTP developers a relatively minimal learning curve to catch up with any changes in features that may get introduced by newer versions. This is a great asset as it allows quick end-to-end tests to be carried on applications. I personally find great comfort while using its drag and drop interface as well as the ability to control the flow of the test by programming the program code at any point of the test.