# New Model for Defining and Implementing Performance Tests
## 4 Experiment and Discussion
### Scenario 2
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Features** & **Classical Approach** & **Proposed Approach** \\ \hline (1) Standardization of the performance & Lack of standardization & Possibility of full standardization \\ testing process & & Limited \\ \hline (2) Support for test preparation by & Limited & Limited \\ inexperienced teams & & \\ \hline (3) Support the preparation of objective, & Limited & Full support \\ comparable and reproducible tests & & \\ \hline (4) Support for a large variety of tests & \begin{tabular}{c} Labor-intensive, lengthy \\ process with limited \\ repeatability in other projects \\ \end{tabular} & Full support \\ \hline (5) A precise and detailed description of the & Limited & Full process description \\ performance testing process & & \\ \hline Flexibility and adaptability & Limited & High flexibility of the model \\ \hline Simplicity of deployment & \begin{tabular}{c} Easy implementation of \\ simple models \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} Complicated at the initial stage of the \\ model implementation process \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline The possibility of dividing the work in the & \multirow{2}{*}{Very difficult} & Regarding the dependency matrix, the \\ preparation of a single test scenario & & possibility of horizontal and vertical \\ \hline Speed of implementation & Fast for simple tests & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Time-consuming at the test definition \\ stage, fast in subsequent stages \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Result Analysis} &
\begin{tabular}{c} Difficult, complex process of \\ analyzing and \\ interpreting the results \\ \end{tabular} & Extensive opportunities to compare and \\  & & & analyze results \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Comparison of the Proposed Layered Model and the Classical Approach to Performance Testing. Figure 28: Dependence graph of resource load of the virtual machine with the database on time for test \(t_{1}\) in Scenario 2. The comparative areas were selected on the basis of the literature analysis conducted in chapter 2 with particular emphasis on the areas of concern identified in that analysis ((1)-(5)). As can be read from the table above, the new approach is distinguished from the classic approach by several features. Firstly, in the new model presented, tests are organized in layers corresponding to different stages of preparation and execution, allowing a clear separation of tasks. In contrast, the classical approach is typically linear and handled by a single team, which limits efficiency. Additionally, we use a precise objectives-tests matrix that aligns specific goals with appropriate tests, ensuring better coverage and focus. The classical approach relies more on general practices and experience, which may result in less targeted testing. The layered model is also more modular, allowing easy adjustments to meet the unique needs of each system. The classical approach is less adaptable, making it harder to adjust during different project phases. By isolating tasks, the layered model enables different teams to work concurrently on separate layers, optimizing both time and cost. Moreover, the clear steps and structure of our method make it easier to replicate across various projects, while the classical approach relies heavily on team experience, which makes replication more challenging. In terms of cost efficiency, the layered specialization of the model and targeted task assignment help optimize resource usage, leading to potential cost savings. Of course, the initial stage related to model definition can be costly for simple tests, but in the long run it has a cost-reducing effect. However, the classical model holds an advantage in simplicity and faster deployment for straightforward projects. In cases where the system is less complex and testing requirements are standard, the classical approach may be more intuitive and easier to implement, as it relies on well-established and proven practices.