Performance Paper - OpenText Documentum XCP 20.4

Product: OpenText™ Documentum xCP
Version: 20.4
Task/Topic Performance
Audience: Administrators, Decision Makers
Platform: Windows
Document ID: 100031
Updated: October 29, 2020
Performance Paper
OpenText™ Documentum xCP 20.4
OpenText Performance Team
OpenText™ Documentum xCP 20.4 Performance
Contents
Audience ...................................................................................................................... 3
Disclaimer .................................................................................................................... 3
Executive Summary .................................................................................................... 4
Assessment Overview ................................................................................................ 5
Objectives ............................................................................................................... 5
Testing Methodology .................................................................................................. 6
Test Setup ............................................................................................................... 6
Test Strategy........................................................................................................... 6
Test Data Composition ........................................................................................... 7
Test Results ................................................................................................................. 8
Designer Test .......................................................................................................... 8
Designer Operation .......................................................................................... 8
Application Deployment ................................................................................. 10
Runtime Test with CAPINS ................................................................................... 10
CAPINS Low Load Test ................................................................................. 10
CAPINS Gauging Test ................................................................................... 14
CAPINS Standard Load Test ......................................................................... 14
CAPINS Endurance Test ................................................................................ 18
Runtime Test with Clinical..................................................................................... 21
Clinical Low Load Test ................................................................................... 21
Clinical Gauging Test ..................................................................................... 25
Clinical Standard Load Test ........................................................................... 25
Clinical Endurance Test ................................................................................. 28
Conclusion................................................................................................................. 33
Appendices ................................................................................................................ 34
Appendix A - Test Environment ............................................................................ 34
Appendix B - Application and System Tuning Guide ............................................ 35
Appendix C - Detailed Test Scenarios .................................................................. 37
Designer Test Cases ...................................................................................... 37
CAPINS Test Cases ....................................................................................... 38
Clinical Test Cases ......................................................................................... 42
Appendix D - Glossary.......................................................................................... 44
The Information Company™ 2

Audience
The document is intended for a technical audience that is planning an implementation
of OpenText™ products. OpenText recommends consulting with OpenText
Professional Services who can assist with the specific details of individual
implementation architectures.
Disclaimer
The tests and results described in this document apply only to the OpenText
configuration described herein. For testing or certification of other configurations,
contact OpenText Corporation for more information.
All tests described in this document were run on equipment located in the OpenText
Performance Laboratory and were performed by the OpenText Performance
Engineering Group. Note that using a configuration similar to that described in this
document, or any other certified configuration, does not guarantee the results
documented herein. There may be parameters or variables that were not contemplated
during these performance tests that could affect results in other test environments.
For any OpenText production deployment, OpenText recommends a rigorous
performance evaluation of the specific environment and applications to ensure that
there are no configuration or custom development bottlenecks present that hinder
overall performance.
All load test results in this paper are based on server–side measurements and do not
capture browser rendering of results. Actual timings including client side (e.g.
browsers) timings may vary significantly depending on the client machine
specifications, the client network, browser variations and other conditions of the user’s
environment.

Executive Summary
OpenText™ Documentum xCP is a key part of the Documentum product and solutions
portfolio. It’s a flexible development platform that brings together document and data
capture, ECM, BPM, Search and Analytics, Collaboration, Customer Communications,
and Records management for automating complex, information-intensive processes to
drive better business decisions.
This report describes the testing efforts undertaken by the OpenText Performance
Engineering Group to analyze the performance of the xCP 20.4 when running on a
given hardware environment.
The performance test focused on xCP designer performance and run-time
performance with reference applications. The tests established a performance
baseline for CAPINS application with common xCP features and the Clinical
Application with new Case Management features introduced in xCP 20.4.
Major findings from the assessment are:
1. The xCP 20.4 Designer operations and application deployment response times
varied depending on application size. With a medium size refapp like CAPINS, the
normal Designer operations response times were all under 3 seconds, and the first
deployment time was under 10 minutes, second time deployment time was around
3 minutes.
2. With the given hardware, the gauging point was 250 concurrent users for CAPINS
refapp running on xCP 20.4 with acceptable SLA (response time < 3 seconds), the
major limiting factor was Documentum Server CPU usage.
3. For the Clinical Application with new Case Management features introduced in xCP
20.4 and Process Management features, the gauging point was determined to be
250 users with the given hardware, and the response times for all the transactions
were less than 2 seconds.
4. No memory/session leaks were observed during the 48-hour endurance testing for
both CAPINS refapp and Clinical (Enhanced Process Management) Application.

Assessment Overview
Objectives
This assessment strives to test the stability, resource consumption and responsiveness
of OpenText Documentum xCP 20.4 on a typical hardware architecture deployment.
1. Conduct various Designer operations and application deployment testing using

reference application CAPINS.
2. Performance baseline of xCP 20.4 Runtime with refapp CAPINS
a. Conduct low load tests to check the transactions' response times with CAPINS
Application.
b. Conduct gauging tests to determine the optimal load level of xCP 20.4 runtime
with CAPINS refapp on given hardware configuration.
c. Conduct endurance tests for CAPINS refpp over 48 hours to know the stability
of xCP 20.4.
3. Performance baseline of xCP 20.4 Runtime with Clinical Application
a. Conduct low load tests to check the transactions' response times with Clinical
Application.
b. Conduct gauging tests to determine the optimal load level of xCP 20.4 runtime
with Clinical Application on given hardware configuration.
c. Conduct endurance tests for Clinical Application over 48 hours to know the
stability of xCP 20.4.

Testing Methodology
Test Setup
The performance test was conducted in a distributed system using VMWare virtual
machines. Refer to Appendix A for the details of the configuration. The diagram below
illustrates the infrastructure of the testing environment.
Figure 1
- Test Environment
Architecture
Test Strategy
All the load tests were using LoadRunner to simulate the user transactions and
performance scenarios. And the test strategy for each type of test is described below.
For details of the test cases and scenario settings, refer to Appendix C.
• Gauging Tests
This test was designed to increase the number of virtual users (workload) until
hardware resources such as CPU, RAM, network bandwidth, or I/O were at or near
saturation while the response time for individual transactions was still satisfactory.
The gauging point is the maximum load that the system can support without
compromising the end-user performance experience. Response time and various
server-side metrics were collected during the test.

• Standard load tests

This test was executed to confirm that the system could run at the gauging point
(which was previously determined during the gauging test) for 1 hour. Client-side
and server-side metrics would be collected.
• Low load tests

This test was executed to characterize the response time of individual transactions
under a low load to establish a response time baseline.
• Endurance Test
This test was executed to confirm that the system could run a specific user load
over a long period (48 hours) without any performance degradation or resource
leakage.
• Designer Test
This test was executed manually to verify performance of various operations and
application deployment with xCP 20.4 designer using CAPINS refapp.
Test Data Composition

Below data was pre-populated for this performance assessment.
Table 1 - Test Data
Type Number
Named Users 6000
Reference Documents 5000
Insurance Customer 15000
Customer Documents 45000
Car Insurance 15000
Car Objects 30000
Workflow Refdoc Manager Review 5000
Workflow Insurance Process 15000

Test Results
Designer Test
Designer Operation
Response Time
The table below shows the transactions' response times for various of designer
operations. With auto building function turned off, the Designer would not rebuild the
project for each creation/update operation, so that the response times were much
better for operations like “creation” and “update”
Table 2 – Designer Operation Response Time

xCP 20.4 Designer Response Time (s) with CAPINS
Auto Building OFF ON
End Point 0.6
Object Models 1.2
Process 1.2
Data Service 1.0
Open Artifact
Page 3.3
Permission Set 0.6
Alias set 0.5
Cabinet 1.1
Business Objects 2.7 5.8
Process 2.1 2.4
Data Services 1.2 2.6
Page 3.5 4.8
Create Artifact
Cabinet 2.4 4.0
Permission Set 1.7 2.8
Alias set 1.6 2.1
Java Module 1.4 1.7
Business Objects 1.7 2.8
Content 1.5 2.4
Folder 1.5 2.5
Save Artifact Process 1.3 1.7

Data Services 0.8 1.9
Action Flow 0.5 0.7
Page 1.0 1.9
Cabinet 1.4 1.9

xCP 20.4 Designer Response Time (s) with CAPINS

Auto Building OFF ON
Java Module 0.7 1.6
Save Artifact Permission Set 0.6 1.2

Alias set 0.6 1.0
resize result list 0.9
delete a column 0.8
insert a column 0.8
add a comment widget 0.9
delete comment widget 0.9
Resize Designer window 0.6
add an Accordion 0.7
Page Modification
delete an Accordion 0.7
add a Border layout 0.7
delete a Border layout 0.8
add a Google map 1.3
delete a Google map 0.6
Pasted simple widget 0.8
Pasted complex widget (With data service) 1.5
Open preview RTQ 0.6
Execute RTQ 1.7
Query Preview
Open preview FTQ 0.6
Execute FTQ 1.7
Open an Application 24.5 55.7
Refresh Workspace 5.2 11.7
Show Data Service Instances 0.7
Delete duplicates of artifact 0.8 4.5
Saving BO when 20 pages opened 1.1 2.5
Bind data service for 5 existed pages 2.3 6.3
Others
Bind data service for 5 existed fragments 3.0 8.2
Open Online Help 2.2
Switch Artifacts in Dynamic Help 1.5
Import an existing Application 37.2

Application Deployment
Response Time
For reference application deployment, the time would be depending on the application
size and platform. The table below shows the detailed response times for CAPINS
application deployment in xCP 20.4 on given hardware, the longest part would be the
Documentum repository deployment, which depends on the complexity of the
application.
Table 3 – Application Deployment Response Time
xCP 20.4 CAPINS Deploy Response Time(s) -Windows 2019/Oracle 19/Java 11
Designer validating, generating source, compiling, packaging 53
Invoking xDA 46
Deploy validation 17
First time Repository deployment 221

deploy xPlore deployment 7
BAM deployment 69
app war deployment 88
TOTAL TIME (seconds) 501
Designer validating, generating source, compiling, packaging 41
Invoking xDA 38
Deploy validation 10
Pre deploy 4
Redeploy Repository deployment 8
xPlore deployment 3
BAM deployment 12
app war deployment 66
TOTAL TIME (seconds) 182
Runtime Test with CAPINS
CAPINS Low Load Test

Test Summary
The CAPINS low load test used 100 concurrent users running 1 hour to check all the
normal xCP transactions’ response times.

Table 4 – CAPINS Low Load Test Client Metrics

Test Duration 1 hour
Concurrent Users 100
Throughput
Total Number of Transactions 36219
Transactions per Second 10.06
Total number of HTTP Hits 113513
HTTP Hits per Second 31.53
Client-Side Metrics
The table below shows the key transactions' response times for CAPINS during the
test, all transactions' average response times were under 3 seconds except the
transaction "Show Cars Without Range Last Page", it was expected to be slower and
shown for comparison with transaction "Show Cars With Range Last Page". In xCP, it
is recommended to always use return range in advanced repository query for better
performance.
Table 5 - CAPINS Low Load Test Client-Side Metrics
Std. 90
Feature to Cover Test Transaction Minimum Average Maximum Count
Dev Percent
Get Signing page 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.02 895
Login
Login 0.08 0.12 0.30 0.03 0.16 892
Create Customer - Page
0.07 0.15 2.16 0.15 0.19 892
Load
Create Insurance
0.96 1.38 3.23 0.27 1.66 890
Customer
View Customer Details 0.13 0.50 1.40 0.16 0.64 1759
Submit Car Insurance
0.31 0.56 1.22 0.15 0.72 1758
Request
Admin Create City 0.08 0.13 0.25 0.04 0.18 120
Attach Telematic (Type
0.13 0.24 1.61 0.13 0.31 880
Fragment)
Business Object Edit Partner Set Gold
0.08 0.14 0.29 0.07 0.27 50
(Type Fragment)
List Alerts (Alert Query) 0.06 0.10 0.38 0.06 0.13 110
Create a Cabinet 0.09 0.16 0.28 0.06 0.25 118
Click on Manager Cars
0.07 0.11 0.19 0.03 0.16 118
(Editable Grid)
Click to Update Car

0.15 0.30 0.69 0.12 0.50 118
(Editable Grid)
Add a New Car (Editable
0.16 0.25 0.79 0.13 0.34 116
Grid)

Std. 90
Dev Percent
Update Address
Relationship (Context- 0.09 0.16 1.35 0.12 0.25 890
menus)
Add Comment on
0.20 0.38 0.92 0.13 0.56 886
Customer (Comments)
Search for all Customers 0.61 0.75 2.71 0.13 0.83 1755
Search for Particular
0.29 0.40 2.66 0.19 0.47 1756
Customer
Full Text Search Facet filter on Car Brand 0.36 0.47 2.11 0.17 0.56 1760
Reference Document
0.44 0.62 3.06 0.35 0.70 380
Search
Facet filter on Last Month 0.30 0.37 0.87 0.08 0.46 378
Click Agent Inbox 0.18 0.29 1.98 0.15 0.36 1758
Agent Acquire Task 0.12 0.22 0.66 0.08 0.29 1756
Agent View Task 0.53 1.11 4.08 0.28 1.28 1748
Complete Task - Finish
0.17 0.32 0.83 0.11 0.44 1410
Task
BPM
Get Next Task 0.39 0.61 1.14 0.16 0.81 104
Click on Accordion inbox
0.47 0.54 0.65 0.04 0.60 108
(Accordion)
Manager View Refdoc

0.75 1.14 1.83 0.21 1.37 148
Task (Lifecycle)
View Reference Folder 0.04 0.07 0.28 0.04 0.10 148
Click on Application Folder
0.12 0.14 0.22 0.02 0.15 146
(Level 2)
Click on Propose New

0.04 0.08 0.45 0.05 0.11 380
(Menu bar)

0.06 0.09 0.59 0.06 0.11 381
(Content Tree)
Import Reference
Navigation 0.54 0.78 3.22 0.29 0.93 380
document
Click Image View
0.51 0.84 3.01 0.26 0.95 886
Customer (Image type)
Click Search for Car 0.12 0.16 0.24 0.03 0.22 104
Click on Download
Document List (excel 0.43 0.52 1.05 0.07 0.59 380
export)
Show List of Users
0.01 0.02 0.06 0.01 0.03 195
(session parameter)
Customer Document
0.05 0.11 0.44 0.07 0.16 148
BAM Reports
View Agent Home Page 0.21 0.31 1.05 0.08 0.38 892
View PDF File
Viewer 0.34 0.57 1.48 0.19 0.83 376
(ContentViewer)

Std. 90
Dev Percent
View PDF File (Advanced

0.22 0.39 1.60 0.15 0.51 375
Viewer)
Advanced Viewer Add

0.11 0.22 0.89 0.11 0.32 372
Annotation
Show Cabinet Without

0.07 0.12 0.59 0.08 0.17 192
Permission meta Fetch Perm
data Show Cabinet with Fetch
0.05 0.10 0.33 0.06 0.16 190
Perm
Create Employee by
0.28 0.52 1.19 0.18 0.69 192
Inline BO creation Process
Create Employee InlineBO 0.42 0.69 2.78 0.33 0.94 192
Show Cars with Range 0.13 0.18 0.36 0.04 0.23 191
Show Cars with Range
0.14 0.16 0.29 0.03 0.19 192
Advanced Last Page
Repository query Show Cars Without Range 0.08 0.10 0.25 0.03 0.13 192
Show Cars Without Range
2.64 3.19 3.89 0.24 3.55 191
Last Page
Create Shareable Object 0.16 0.26 0.98 0.15 0.37 144
RTQ for Shareable Objects 0.06 0.09 0.19 0.03 0.13 144
RTQ for Shareable Objects
0.06 0.10 0.17 0.03 0.12 145
without LWSO
Create LWSO Object 0.18 0.28 0.58 0.09 0.40 144
Create LWSO Objects
0.34 0.55 1.38 0.19 0.75 146
using Batch
View Shareable Object 0.28 0.51 0.94 0.15 0.68 146
LWSO RTQ for LWSO Objects 0.10 0.19 1.91 0.27 0.19 148
Materialize LWSO Object 0.06 0.12 0.38 0.05 0.15 148
Dematerialize LWSO
0.05 0.09 0.21 0.04 0.15 150
Object
0.06 0.12 0.91 0.13 0.16 150
with LWSO
Reparent LWSO Object 0.06 0.10 0.17 0.02 0.12 148
Delete LWSO Object 0.29 0.40 0.56 0.06 0.46 145
Delete Shareable Object 0.09 0.15 0.24 0.04 0.21 144
Sign Out Sign Out 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 862

CAPINS Gauging Test

Test Summary
The CAPINS gauging test ran up to 300 concurrent users performing xCP normal
transactions by adding 50 users every 30 minutes. The purpose was to determine the
gauging point and identify performance bottlenecks, if any.
The chart below shows that the server CPU usage and server throughput were
increased linearly with the user load growth before 250 concurrent users. From 250 to
300 users, the Documentum Server CPU usage was over 90% which was clearly
stressed, and the server throughput started dropping, also the transactions’ response
times were increased quickly. So, 250 was considered as the gauging point for
CAPINS/xCP 20.4 on given hardware.
Figure 2
- CAPINS Gauging Test
Result
CAPINS Standard Load Test

Test Summary
The CAPINS standard load test used 250 concurrent users running 1 hour.
Table 6 - CAPINS Standard Load Test Summary
Throughput

Client-Side Metrics
The table below shows the detailed CAPINS key transactions' response times during
the test.
Table 7 - CAPINS Standard Load Test Client Metrics
Std. 90
Dev Percent
Get Signing page 0.02 0.02 0.09 0.01 0.02 1204
Login
Login 0.09 0.21 3.66 0.15 0.28 1204
Create Customer - Page
0.04 0.16 1.15 0.08 0.22 1200
Load
Create Insurance Customer 1.12 1.73 4.74 0.39 2.18 1193
Submit Car Insurance
0.40 0.71 3.00 0.20 0.91 2416
Request
0.19 0.38 3.82 0.20 0.49 1195
Fragment)
Edit Partner Set Gold (Type
0.10 0.19 0.76 0.10 0.30 72
Fragment)
Business Object List Alerts (Alert Query) 0.07 0.18 3.59 0.30 0.26 147
Create a Cabinet 0.12 0.25 1.87 0.20 0.32 169
Click on Manager Cars
0.09 0.21 1.34 0.16 0.28 168
(Editable Grid)
Click to Update Car
0.19 0.37 2.15 0.18 0.50 169
(Editable Grid)
Add a New Car (Editable
0.17 0.34 1.09 0.16 0.47 169
Grid)
Update Address
Relationship (Context- 0.11 0.34 4.19 0.28 0.50 1205
menus)
Add Comment on
0.14 0.34 3.01 0.18 0.48 1206
Customer (Comments)
Search for Particular
0.30 0.49 4.47 0.22 0.63 2427
Customer
Reference Document
0.51 0.70 2.19 0.16 0.84 506
Search
Agent View Task 0.63 1.47 6.12 0.47 1.80 2412
BPM
Complete Task - Finish
0.21 0.58 5.93 0.45 0.51 1943
Task
Get Next Task 0.52 0.85 2.79 0.24 1.06 139
0.66 0.87 2.27 0.18 1.04 147
(Accordion)

Std. 90
Dev Percent
BPM Manager View Refdoc Task
0.98 1.48 3.75 0.37 1.92 202
(Lifecycle)
0.12 0.17 0.30 0.04 0.23 200
(Level 2)
0.04 0.13 1.01 0.08 0.18 518
(Menu bar)
0.09 0.14 0.96 0.07 0.19 515
(Content Tree)
Import Reference
0.60 1.01 5.14 0.40 1.24 504
Navigation document
Click Image View Customer
0.76 1.17 7.62 0.44 1.46 1198
(Image type)
Click on Download
Document List (excel 0.49 0.70 3.58 0.24 0.84 507
export)
Show List of Users (session
0.02 0.07 0.29 0.06 0.15 251
parameter)
Customer Document
0.06 0.13 1.09 0.09 0.19 204
BAM Reports
View PDF File
0.43 0.83 5.30 0.39 1.06 495
(ContentViewer)
Viewer 0.31 0.77 5.90 0.42 1.04 496
Viewer)
Advanced Viewer Add
0.08 0.21 3.32 0.19 0.29 496
Annotation
Show Cabinet Without
0.08 0.17 0.72 0.08 0.24 242
Permission meta Fetch Perm
data Show Cabinet with Fetch
0.19 0.35 1.35 0.12 0.44 243
Perm
Create Employee by
0.34 0.57 1.39 0.16 0.77 249
Inline BO creation Process
Create Employee InlineBO 0.51 0.76 1.72 0.16 0.95 248
Show Cars with Range Last
0.15 0.19 0.44 0.04 0.22 247
Advanced Page
Show Cars Without Range
3.14 3.91 5.52 0.45 4.56 249
Last Page
0.08 0.20 1.43 0.12 0.27 204
LWSO without LWSO
Create LWSO Objects
0.36 0.71 4.42 0.39 0.94 208
using Batch

Std. 90
Dev Percent
RTQ for LWSO Objects 0.13 0.26 1.22 0.11 0.37 210
Dematerialize LWSO
0.06 0.12 0.43 0.05 0.18 211
Object
LWSO RTQ for Shareable Objects
0.07 0.21 3.51 0.25 0.31 211
with LWSO
Sign Out Sign Out 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 1195
Server-Side Metrics
The table below shows the server metrics during the load test, the Documentum
server's CPU usage was around 87% which was the major limiting factor, no other
resource usage saturated.
Table 8 - CAPINS Standard Load Test Server-Side Metrics
Servers Documentum Oracle App CTS CIS xPlore BAM
CPU
Avg. CPU Usage (%) 86.79 65.43 18.95 18.92 19.52 31.57 8.18
Avg Processer Queue
7.49 1.30 0.05 0.02 0.17 0.25 0.13
Length
Memory Usage
Avg. Available Memory 2.84 3.73 3.78 0.61 of 0.48
0.89 of 8 0.82 of 8
(GB) of 8 of 8 of 4 8 of 4
Avg. Committed
10.32 10.76 6.39 4.22 4.69 8.56 4.11
Memory(GB)
Disk Usage
DATA: 0.74
Avg. Disk Queue Length 0.83 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.35 0.00
LOG: 1.95
DATA: 0.61
Avg. Read Rate (MB/s) 0.32 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.65 0.00
LOG: 0.06
DATA: 2.05
Avg. Write Rate (MB/s) 1.16 0.14 0.19 0.06 1.24 0.00
LOG: 41.75
DATA: 38.85
Avg. Disk Reads/sec 41.57 0.25 0.49 0.26 17.59 0.01
LOG: 0.65
DATA: 98.50
Avg. Disk Writes/sec 144.86 4.18 2.61 4.20 44.01 0.55
LOG: 127.59
Network Usage
Avg. Received Rate
11.62 8.72 1.30 0.47 0.16 0.19 0.44
(MB/s)
Avg. Sent Rate (MB/s) 10.53 10.64 0.59 0.45 0.12 0.17 0.12

CAPINS Endurance Test

Test Summary
In the CAPINS endurance test, 200 concurrent users were used to perform normal xCP
transactions over a 48-hour period to evaluate the system stability.
Table 9 - CAPINS Endurance Test Summary

Test Duration 48 hours
Throughput
Client-Side Metrics
The chart below shows all the transactions' average response times were steady
during the endurance test.
Figure 3
- CAPINS Endurance Test
Response Time Trends
The table below shows the detailed transactions response times during the endurance
test, no noticeable performance degradation observed.
Table 10 - CAPINS Endurance Test Client-Side Metrics
Std. 90
Dev Percent
Get Signing page 0.01 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.02 46880
Login
Login 0.08 0.18 12.05 0.30 0.23 46945
Business Object Create Customer - Page Load 0.04 0.14 15.63 0.33 0.17 46776

Std. 90
Dev Percent
Create Insurance Customer 1.01 1.53 18.46 0.49 1.79 46792
Submit Car Insurance Request 0.33 0.63 2.91 0.15 0.76 93072
0.14 0.30 5.47 0.19 0.39 46728
Fragment)
Edit Partner Set Gold (Type
0.09 0.18 1.11 0.09 0.25 3224
Fragment)
List Alerts (Alert Query) 0.06 0.14 1.48 0.12 0.20 5608
Create a Cabinet 0.09 0.19 1.43 0.09 0.26 6344
Click on Manager Cars (Editable
0.08 0.17 1.46 0.10 0.23 6336
Grid)
Click to Update Car (Editable
0.17 0.34 3.93 0.28 0.44 6353
Grid)
Add a New Car (Editable Grid) 0.14 0.29 1.39 0.12 0.39 6368
Update Address Relationship
0.09 0.33 14.08 0.43 0.45 46816
(Context-menus)
Add Comment on Customer
0.12 0.29 13.92 0.28 0.38 46784
(Comments)
Search for Particular Customer 0.30 0.43 18.94 0.35 0.52 93041
Reference Document Search 0.48 0.69 17.32 0.48 0.79 19816
Agent View Task 0.51 1.27 17.27 0.51 1.51 92984
Complete Task - Finish Task 0.17 0.37 16.75 0.46 0.45 74512
BPM
Get Next Task 0.44 0.78 2.81 0.22 1.02 5568
0.62 0.85 2.86 0.19 1.00 5568
(Accordion)
Manager View Refdoc Task
0.81 1.35 6.29 0.42 1.68 6080
(Lifecycle)
0.11 0.16 1.00 0.06 0.21 7784
(Level 2)
Click on Propose New (Menu
0.03 0.10 1.70 0.05 0.14 19977
bar)
Navigation Click on Propose New (Content
0.09 0.16 13.21 0.52 0.17 19968
Tree)
Import Reference document 0.52 0.91 17.65 0.72 1.09 19880
Click Image View Customer
0.58 1.12 18.54 0.62 1.34 46881
(Image type)

Std. 90
Dev Percent
Click on Download Document
0.48 0.67 15.16 0.51 0.78 19760
List (excel export)
Show List of Users (session
0.01 0.05 0.44 0.05 0.10 10224
parameter)
Customer Document Reports 0.05 0.10 1.41 0.06 0.14 7856
BAM
View PDF File (ContentViewer) 0.34 0.74 5.74 0.31 0.98 19568
Viewer 0.26 0.67 5.34 0.31 0.94 19393
Viewer)
Advanced Viewer Add
0.07 0.19 4.45 0.17 0.28 19328
Annotation
Show Cabinet Without Fetch
Permission meta 0.07 0.14 2.14 0.13 0.19 10184
Perm
data
Show Cabinet with Fetch Perm 0.16 0.34 14.88 0.60 0.40 10184
Inline BO Create Employee by Process 0.30 0.55 17.19 0.69 0.70 10048
creation Create Employee InlineBO 0.41 0.70 2.43 0.19 0.88 10056
Show Cars with Range Last
0.15 0.19 0.67 0.04 0.23 10192
Advanced Page
Show Cars Without Range Last
2.97 3.93 7.65 0.55 4.58 10152
Page
0.07 0.18 2.23 0.15 0.25 7752
without LWSO
Create LWSO Objects using
0.34 0.62 14.86 0.70 0.74 7840
Batch
LWSO RTQ for LWSO Objects 0.11 0.23 6.35 0.31 0.29 7808
Dematerialize LWSO Object 0.06 0.13 13.73 0.62 0.14 7816
RTQ for Shareable Objects with
0.06 0.19 16.33 0.74 0.24 7848
LWSO
Sign Out Sign Out 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 46488

Server-Side Metrics
The charts below show the servers' CPU usage and Memory usage was stable
during the 48 hours endurance test, no resource leakage observed.
Figure 4
Server CPU Usage Trends
Figure 5
Server Memory Usage
Trends
Runtime Test with Clinical
Clinical Low Load Test

Test Summary
The Clinical low load test used 100 concurrent users running 1 hour to check the case
management/process management transactions’ response times.

Table 11 - Clinical Low Load Test Client Metrics

Throughput
Client-Side Metrics
The table below shows the transactions' response times during the test, all the
transactions' average response times were under 2 seconds.
Table 12 - Clinical Low Load Test Client-Side Metrics
Minimum Average Maximum 90
Test Transaction Std. Dev Count
Percent
Get_Signin_Page 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.00 0.02 3852
Login 0.10 0.21 3.33 0.10 0.25 3844
Navigate_01_Goto_RepoBrowser 0.05 0.10 1.89 0.10 0.12 1221
Navigate_02_Expand_Cabinet 0.02 0.05 2.17 0.09 0.07 1223
Navigate_03_Open_Cabinet 0.03 0.06 1.95 0.06 0.08 1222
Navigate_04_Open_Folder 0.25 0.32 9.43 0.30 0.33 1220
Navigate_05_Switch_Cabinet 0.06 0.11 2.61 0.10 0.13 1223
Navigate_06_Click_CreateFolder 0.03 0.06 1.66 0.05 0.08 1223
Navigate_07_Create_NewFolder 0.11 0.19 1.63 0.07 0.23 1226
Navigate_08_Goto_NewFolder 0.03 0.05 2.42 0.07 0.07 1232
Navigate_09_Click_Import 0.02 0.03 1.76 0.07 0.05 1234
Navigate_10_Choose_Document 0.04 0.06 0.60 0.03 0.08 1238
Navigate_11_Finish_Import 0.10 0.18 2.26 0.10 0.22 1237
Navigate_12_View_Document 0.20 0.34 2.67 0.12 0.40 1230
Navigate_13_Delete_Document 0.05 0.11 1.08 0.04 0.13 1224
Navigate_14_Delete_Folder 0.05 0.09 0.57 0.04 0.11 1226
Navigate_15_Goto_Search 1.34 1.44 3.27 0.08 1.49 1221
Navigate_16_Search_Document 0.49 0.55 2.21 0.08 0.58 1217
Navigate_17_Search_Folder 0.53 0.59 2.55 0.07 0.62 1213
Navigate_18_View_SearchedFolder 0.14 0.19 1.75 0.10 0.21 1215
Navigate_19_Search_Cabinet 0.06 0.11 1.48 0.05 0.13 1212
Navigate_20_View_SearchedCabinet 0.15 0.20 2.26 0.07 0.22 1214


Percent
Signout 0.00 0.01 1.05 0.03 0.01 3833
xCPCase_01_Navigate_Cabinet 0.05 0.08 2.30 0.07 0.11 1012
xCPCase_02_Click_Create_Case 0.03 0.05 0.38 0.03 0.07 1017
xCPCase_03_Finish_Case_Creation 0.79 1.17 5.44 0.34 1.43 1017
xCPCase_04_Select_Case 0.05 0.58 4.68 0.99 1.56 1017
xCPCase_05_Aucquire_State_Plan 0.19 0.31 1.31 0.08 0.37 1018
xCPCase_06_Select_Data_Node 0.05 0.09 2.03 0.09 0.12 1023
xCPCase_07_Click_New_Data_Node 0.03 0.05 1.48 0.05 0.07 1022
xCPCase_08_Select_Node_Type 0.01 0.02 1.14 0.04 0.03 1022
xCPCase_09_Create_Data_Node 0.11 0.20 1.41 0.07 0.25 1019
xCPCase_10_Complete_Stats_Plan 0.23 0.37 1.14 0.08 0.44 1019
xCPCase_11_Backto_Case_1 0.05 0.65 4.10 1.03 1.58 1021
xCPCase_12_Aucquire_State_Deploy 0.19 0.29 3.01 0.14 0.35 1017
xCPCase_14_Click_Edit_Node 0.01 0.03 0.90 0.03 0.04 1025
xCPCase_15_Save_Data_Node 0.07 0.12 1.17 0.05 0.15 1025
xCPCase_16_Complete_Stats_Deploy 0.24 0.39 1.87 0.10 0.47 1022
xCPCase_18_Aucquire_State_Analysis 0.20 0.30 0.83 0.08 0.38 1030
xCPCase_19_Goto_Data_Node 0.04 0.07 0.46 0.03 0.10 1026
xCPCase_20_Click_New_Object 0.03 0.05 1.59 0.05 0.07 1024
xCPCase_21_Create_New_Object 0.09 0.15 0.85 0.05 0.19 1026
xCPCase_23_Complete_Stats_Analysis 0.22 0.36 2.92 0.11 0.44 1025
xCPCase_25_Acquire_State_Submission 0.19 0.29 2.22 0.09 0.35 1024
xCPCase_26_Init_Approval 0.23 0.33 2.65 0.13 0.36 1021
xCPCase_27_Search_Approval_Task 0.07 0.13 1.93 0.09 0.16 1011
xCPCase_28_Acquire_Approval_Task 0.16 0.24 3.08 0.11 0.28 1016
xCPCase_29_View_Approval_Task 0.25 0.36 3.07 0.11 0.41 1011
xCPCase_30_Complete_Approval_Task 0.39 0.60 3.29 0.15 0.68 1009
xCPCase_31_Complete_Stats_Submission 0.26 0.44 3.02 0.12 0.51 1012
xCPCase_32_Delete_Case 0.72 0.97 1.77 0.13 1.10 1015
xCPProc_01_Goto_Inboox 0.12 0.18 1.50 0.06 0.20 1612
xCPProc_02_TaskList_SearchwithStatus 0.10 0.16 1.63 0.06 0.19 1611
xCPProc_03_Tasklist_SearchwithName 0.06 0.11 2.43 0.07 0.13 1615
xCPProc_04_Tasklist_SearchwithNameSender 0.06 0.11 1.05 0.04 0.13 1612


Percent
xCPProc_05_Tasklist_SearchwithNameDate 0.06 0.11 2.67 0.09 0.14 1614
xCPProc_06_Tasklist_SortByPriorty 0.11 0.17 2.40 0.08 0.20 1612
xCPProc_07_View_ProcessTemplates 0.01 0.03 1.59 0.05 0.04 1609
xCPProc_08_Goto_ProcessInstances 0.05 0.07 2.00 0.05 0.08 1612
xCPProc_09_Search_ProcessInstance 0.03 0.05 1.29 0.04 0.07 1609
xCPProc_10_Halt_Process 0.07 0.10 2.70 0.11 0.12 1610
xCPProc_11_Search_HaltedProcess 0.03 0.05 1.85 0.05 0.07 1612
xCPProc_12_Resume_HaltedProcess 0.07 0.10 0.76 0.03 0.12 1609
xCPProc_13_Click_ChangeSupervisor 0.04 0.07 1.90 0.05 0.08 1603
xCPProc_14_Filter_UserName 0.01 0.02 0.50 0.02 0.03 1603
xCPProc_15_Finish_ChangeSupervisor 0.07 0.10 1.76 0.05 0.11 1607

Clinical Gauging Test

Test Summary
The Clinical gauging test ran up to 300 concurrent users performing case
management/process management operations by adding 50 users every 30 minutes.
The purpose was to determine the gauging point and identify performance bottlenecks,
if any.
The chart below shows that from 250 to 300 concurrent users, the server throughput
started dropping and the average response time was doubled. While the number of
concurrent users increased to 300, the Documentum server's CPU usage reached
more than 90% which was the major limiting factor. So, 250 was considered as the
gauging point for Clinical/xCP 20.4 on given hardware.
Figure 6
- Clinical Gauging Test
Result
Clinical Standard Load Test

Test Summary
The Clinical standard load test used 250 concurrent users running 1 hour.
Table 13 - Clinical Standard Load Test Summary
Throughput

Client-Side Metrics
The table below shows the detailed transactions' response times during the test, the
response times were consistent.
Table 14 - Clinical Standard Load Test Client Metrics
Percent
Get_Signin_Page 0.01 0.02 0.16 0.01 0.02 9279
Login 0.26 0.55 4.51 0.49 1.04 9290
Signout 0.00 0.01 0.08 0.01 0.01 9173


Percent

Server-Side Metrics
The table below shows the major server metrics during the load test, the Documentum
server's CPU usage was around 79% which was the major limiting factor, no other
resource usage saturated.
Table 15 - Clinical Standard Load Test Server-Side Metrics
Servers Documentum Oracle Apphost CTS xPlore
CPU
Avg. CPU Usage (%) 78.77 51.37 38.60 8.93 12.81
Avg Processer Queue Length 4.43 0.25 0.35 0.01 0.04
Memory Usage
3.68 0.79 of
Avg. Available Memory (GB) 0.56 of 8 0.36 of 8 2.47 of 8
of 8 8
Avg. Committed Memory (GB) 10.45 9.84 6.28 4.19 8.29
Disk Usage
DATA: 0.18
Avg. Disk Queue Length 1.38 0.13 0.01 0.02
LOG: 0.96
DATA: 0.16
Avg. Read Rate (MB/s) 0.19 0.01 0.02 0.03
LOG: 0.36
DATA: 1.84
Avg. Write Rate (MB/s) 1.47 0.10 0.09 0.15
LOG: 9.36
DATA: 15.87
Avg. Disk Reads/sec 51.07 0.09 0.33 0.27
LOG: 9.70
DATA: 30.52
Avg. Disk Writes/sec 272.20 1.94 2.32 7.91
LOG: 84.35
Network Usage
Avg. Received Rate (MB/s) 12.50 9.30 1.82 0.21 0.04
Avg. Sent Rate (MB/s) 11.01 11.11 1.26 0.15 0.02
Clinical Endurance Test

Test Summary
In the Clinical endurance test, 200 concurrent users were used to perform case
management/process management transactions over a 48-hour period to evaluate the
system stability.
Table 16 - Clinical Endurance Test Summary
Test Duration 48 hours
Throughput

Client-Side Metrics
The chart below shows all the Clinical transactions' average response times were
steady during the endurance test.
Figure 7
- Clinical Endurance Test
Response Time Trends
The table below shows the detailed transactions response times during the endurance
test, no noticeable performance degradation observed.
Table 17 – Clinical Endurance Test Client-Side Metrics
90
Std.
Test Transaction Minimum Average Maximum Percent Count
Dev
Get_Signin_Page 0.01 0.02 3.02 0.03 0.03 366882
Login 0.14 0.36 5.60 0.19 0.40 366942

90
Std.
Dev
Signout 0.00 0.01 3.01 0.02 0.01 365334

90
Std.
Dev
Server-Side Metrics
The charts below show the servers' CPU usage and Memory usage was stable during
the endurance test, no resource leakage observed.
Figure 8
Server CPU Usage Trends

Figure 9
Server Memory Usage
Trends

Conclusion
• xCP 20.4 provided consistent response times for both CAPINS application with
most normal xCP transactions and Clinical application with case
management/process management transactions at the supported load level.
(Detailed test scenario functions are provided in the Appendix C)
• The resource usage growth was linear with the user load increase in xCP 20.4,
and the major performance limiting factor was the Documentum server CPU
usage.
• At Designer side, the operation time would be depending on application size, with
a medium size application like CAPINS, all the operations’ response times were
acceptable, using Auto Build OFF would get better user experience.
• No performance degradation or resource leakages was observed during the
endurance test for 48 hours in xCP 20.4.
• All the test results and analysis are intended to offer high-level guidance of how
xCP 20.4 performs on a given environment that is representative of a typical user
profile. It reflects lab-based test results.

Appendices
Appendix A - Test Environment

The components and hardware configurations are outlined in the table below.
Table 18 - Detailed Environment

Server OS CPU NO. Memory Storage Network Software
Intel Xeon Open JDK 11

Application Windows E5-2620 Tomcat 9.0.26
8 GB 80 GB VM Disk 10 Gbps
Server 2019 2.0GHz * xDA 20.4
4 cores xCP Designer 20.4
Intel Xeon
Windows E5-2620 Open JDK 11
CTS Server 8 GB 50 GB VM Disk 10 Gbps
2019 2.0GHz * CTS 20.4
8 cores
Intel Xeon
Windows E5-2699 100 GB SAN
Database 8 GB 10 Gbps Oracle 19.3
2019 2.2GHz * 50 GB VM Disk
8 cores
Intel Xeon Documentum Content

Documentu Windows E5-2620 250 GB SAN Server 20.4
8 GB 10 Gbps
m Server 2019 2.0GHz * 50 GB VM Disk BPM 20.4
8 cores James Mail Server2.3
Intel Xeon
Windows E5-2620 Open JDK 11
CIS Server 4 GB 50 GB VM Disk 10 Gbps
2019 2.0GHz * CIS 20.2
4 cores
Intel Xeon
xPlore Windows E5-2695 100 GB SAN Open JDK 11
8 GB 10 Gbps
Server 2019 2.4GHz * 50 GB VM Disk xPlore 20.2
4 cores
Intel Xeon
Open JDK 11
Windows E5-2620
BAM Server 4 GB 50 GB VM Disk 10 Gbps Tomcat 9.0.26
2019 2.0GHz *
BAM 20.4
4 cores
Intel Xeon Open JDK 11

BPS/DA Windows E5-2620 Tomcat 9.0.26
8 GB 50 GB VM Disk 10 Gbps
Server 2019 2.0GHz * BPS 20.4
4 cores DA 20.4
Intel Xeon
Windows E5-2670
Test Client 8 GB 50 GB VM Disk 10 Gbps HPC 12.55
2012 2.6GHz *
4 cores

Appendix B - Application and System Tuning Guide

Some tuning options were applied to the system during the test to achieve better
performance outlined in the table below.
Table 19 - Tuning Configurations
Server/Module Parameter Name Description Default Modified Value
Value
Documentum concurrent_sessions Number of concurrent sessions 100 1000
Server.ini
mail_notification Flag for email notifications N/A F
ip_mode Flag for IP modes N/A V4ONLY
Documentum wf_agent_worker_thread Number of concurrent workflow 3 10
dm_docbase_config s agents
wf_agent_notify_newtask Flag to notify new task N/A F
WF_SKIP_PARALLEL_T Flag for workflow parallel task N/A 0
ASK_EXECUTION execution
Oracle Pfile cursor_sharing Cursor sharing mode N/A FORCE
memory_target Oracle total memory target N/A 6G
open_cursors Number of concurrent cursors 300 500
processes Max number of processes N/A 1000

session_cached_cursors Max number of session cached 50 1000
cursors
optimizer_index_caching Percentage of the index blocks 0 95
which assumed in the cache
optimizer_index_cost_adj Cost of executing an index for Cost- 100 5

based optimization
commit_logging Control how redo log is batched by N/A BATCH
log writer
audit_trail Audit trail level DB NONE
CTS JVM Setting CTS JVM Parameter JVM parameters for CTS N/A -Xms4096m -
Xmx4096m -XX:
+DisableExplicitGC
CTS queueInterval Queue interval for CTS 10 5

CTSServerService.xml maxThreads Max thread number of CTS 20 30
maxQueueItemsToSignO Max number of queue items for 10 8
ff signoff
thresholdForQueueItems Threshold of queue items for signoff 10 8
ToSignOff
CTS MaxParallelDecoding Number of threads for parallel 3 8
pdfstoryboard.xml decoding
AppServer DFC dfc.search.docbase.brok Number of fulltext search broker 300 100
er_count count
AppServer Tomcat App JVM Parameter JVM parameters for tomcat N/A -Xms4096m -
Xmx4096m -Xss1024k
xPlore Index Server CPS-requests-max-size Max request size for CPS 1000 5000
Config index-requests-batch- Index batch size 500 1000
size
index-thread-wait-time Index threads wait time 5000 10000

query-facet-max-result- Facets result max size 10000 5000

size
xPlore IndexAgent queue_size Index queue size 1000 5000
Config thread_count Indexer thread count 3 8
runaway_timeout Indexer runaway timeout 600000 1800000
CIS Config wrapper.app. Interval for CIS JVM health check 30 300
parameter.3
cis.server.execution.thre Number of CIS execution threads 1 4
ads
cis.entity.luxid.annotation Number of CPUs configured for 1 4
_server.cpu annotation server
Some indexes were added in the database to achieve better performance as below, in
xCP, it’s recommended to add indexes for the attributes which used in RTQ query for
better performance.
"DM_SYSOBJECT_S" ("R_MODIFY_DATE" DESC , "R_OBJECT_ID")

"DM_SYSOBJECT_S" ("OBJECT_NAME","R_OBJECT_ID")
"DM_SYSOBJECT_S" ("TITLE","R_OBJECT_ID")
"DM_SYSOBJECT_S" ("R_LINK_CNT","R_OBJECT_ID")
"DM_SYSOBJECT_S" ("I_HAS_FOLDER","I_IS_DELETED","R_OBJECT_ID")
"DM_SYSOBJECT_S" ("R_CREATOR_NAME","I_HAS_FOLDER","I_IS_DELETED")
"DMI_WORKITEM_S" ("R_QUEUE_ITEM_ID", "R_OBJECT_ID")
"DMI_WORKITEM_S" ("R_AUTO_METHOD_ID")
"DMI_QUEUE_ITEM_S" ("DATE_SENT" DESC , "R_OBJECT_ID")
"DMI_QUEUE_ITEM_S" ("R_OBJECT_ID", "TASK_STATE")
"DMI_QUEUE_ITEM_S" ("NAME", "TASK_NAME", "DELETE_FLAG",
"DEPENDENCY_TYPE") TABLESPACE "DM_REPO164_INDEX";
"DM_ACTIVITY_S" ("EXEC_SUBTYPE", "EXEC_TYPE")
"DM_RELATION_S" ("RELATION_NAME", "CHILD_ID", "PARENT_ID")
"DM_ACL_S" ("OBJECT_NAME")
"DM_ACL_R" ("R_OBJECT_ID","R_PERMIT_TYPE")
"DMC_XCP_EVENT_CONFIG_S" ("EVENT_TRIGGER_TYPE","ARTIFACT_URN")
"CR_VEHICLE_S" ("BRAND","R_OBJECT_ID") TABLESPACE "DM_REPO164_INDEX";
"DM_DOCSTATUS" ("ST_MODE","ST_OBJECT_ID") TABLESPACE "DM_REPO164_INDEX";
"DMI_QUEUE_ITEM_S" ("NAME","DEQUEUED_BY") TABLESPACE "DM_REPO164_INDEX";
"DMI_QUEUE_ITEM_S"
("DELETE_FLAG","NAME","DEPENDENCY_TYPE","R_OBJECT_ID","ROUTER_ID")
TABLESPACE "DM_REPO164_INDEX";
"DM_WORKFLOW_S" ("PROCESS_ID","R_OBJECT_ID") TABLESPACE
"DM_REPO164_INDEX";
"DMI_PACKAGE_S" ("R_PACKAGE_TYPE","R_PACKAGE_NAME","R_OBJECT_ID")
"DM_ACL_R" ("R_OBJECT_ID","R_ACCESSOR_NAME")
"DMI_PACKAGE_S"("R_PACKAGE_TYPE","R_PACKAGE_NAME","R_OBJECT_ID","R_WORKFL
OW_ID") TABLESPACE "DM_REPO164_INDEX";
"DMI_PACKAGE_R"("R_COMPONENT_ID") TABLESPACE "DM_REPO164_INDEX";
"DMC_WFSD_ELEMENT_S" ("WORKFLOW_ID","OBJECT_NAME")
"RD_REFERENCE_DOCUMENT_S" ("REFDOC_TYPE")
"CUS_PERSON_S" ("FIRST_NAME","R_OBJECT_ID")

Appendix C - Detailed Test Scenarios
Designer Test Cases

The table below shows various of operations in xCP Designer tested in this
assessment.
Table 20 - Designer Test Cases
xCP 20.4 Designer Operations with CAPINS
End Point
Object Models
Process
Data Service
Open Artifact
Page
Permission Set
Alias set
Cabinet
Business Objects
Process
Data Services
Page
Create Artifact
Cabinet
Permission Set
Alias set
Java Module
Business Objects
Content
Folder
Process
Data Services
Save Artifact Action Flow
Page
Cabinet
Java Module
Permission Set
Alias set
resize result list
delete a column
insert a column
Page Modification
add a comment widget
delete comment widget
Resize Designer window

add an Accordion
delete an Accordion
add a Border layout
Page Modification
delete a Border layout
add a Google map
delete a Google map
Pasted simple widget
Pasted complex widget (With data service)
Open preview RTQ
Execute RTQ
Query Preview
Open preview FTQ
Execute FTQ
Open an Application
Refresh Workspace
Show Data Service Instances
Delete duplicates of artifact
Saving BO when 20 pages opened
Bind data service for 5 existed pages
Others
Bind data service for 5 existed fragments
Open Online Help
Switch Artifacts in Dynamic Help
Import an existing Application
CAPINS Test Cases

The below table describes the xCP 20.4 runtime performance test cases with CAPINS,
each operation is defined as a transaction in Loadrunner script, and a random think
time (3-5 seconds) is added before each transaction.
Table 21 - CAPINS Test Transactions
Feature to Cover Test Transaction LR Script Transaction
Get Signing page VIP_01_Get_Signin_Page
Login
Login VIP_02_Agent_Login
Create Customer - Page Load VIP_03_Click_On_Create_Customer
Create Insurance Customer VIP_04_Save_Customer
Business Object View Customer Details VIP_05_View_Insurance_Customer
Submit Car Insurance Request VIP_06_Submit_Car_Insurance_Request
Admin Create City VIP_07_Save_City

Attach Telematic (Type Fragment) VIP_08_Save_Edited_Telematic

Edit Partner Set Gold (Type Fragment) VIP_09_Update_Partner
List Alerts (Alert Query) VIP_10_Search_Alerts
Create a Cabinet VIP_11_Click_Finish_Creating_Cabinet
Click on Manager Cars (Editable Grid) VIP_12_Click_Update_Car
Click to Update Car (Editable Grid) VIP_13_Update_Car_Info
Add a New Car (Editable Grid) VIP_14_Add_New_Car
Update Address Relationship (Context-menus) VIP_15_Update_Address_Relationship
Add Comment on Customer (Comments) VIP_16_Add_Customer_Comments
Search for all Customers VIP_17_FT_Click_On_Customer_Search
Search for Particular Customer VIP_18_FT_Customer_Enter_Search_Value
Full Text Search Facet filter on Car Brand VIP_19_Facet_Filter_On_Car_Brand
Reference Document Search VIP_20_FT_Click_On_Document_Search
Facet filter on Last Month VIP_21_FT_Facet_Filter_On_This_Month
Click Agent Inbox VIP_22_Click_Agent_Inbox
Agent Acquire Task VIP_23_Acquire_Task
Agent View Task VIP_24_View_Acquired_Task
BPM Complete Task - Finish Task VIP_25_Complete_Task_Finish
Get Next Task VIP_26_Get_Next_Task
Click on Accordion inbox (Accordion) VIP_27_Accordion_Inbox
Manager View Refdoc Task (Lifecycle) VIP_28_View_Acquired_Task
View Reference Folder VIP_29_Click_On_Reference_Folder
Click on Application Folder (Level 2) VIP_30_Click_Folder_Level_2
Click on Propose New (Menu bar) VIP_31_Click_On_Documents_Propose_New
Click on Propose New (Content Tree) VIP_32_Click_On_Folder_ProposeNewDocuments
Navigation Import Reference document VIP_33_Click_Finish_To_Import_File
Click Image View Customer (Image type) VIP_34_Click_Pic_View_Customer
Click Search for Car VIP_35_Click_Search_for_Car
Click on Download Document List (excel export) VIP_36_FT_Click_Download_CSV
Show List of Users (session parameter) VIP_37_Performance_Show_User
Customer Document Reports VIP_38_View_BAM_Report_DocPerState
BAM
View Agent Home Page VIP_39_View_Agent_Home
View PDF File (ContentViewer) VIP_40_View_Document_ContentViewer
Viewer View PDF File (Advanced Viewer) VIP_41_View_Document_AdvancedViewer
Advanced Viewer Add Annotation VIP_42_AdvancedViewer_Annotation
Show Cabinet Without Fetch Perm VIP_51_Show_Cabinet_Without_Fetch_Perm
Permission meta data
Show Cabinet with Fetch Perm VIP_52_Show_Cabinet_Fetch_Perm
Inline BO creation Create Employee by Process VIP_53_Save_Employee_By_Process

Create Employee InlineBO VIP_54_Save_Employee_InlineBO

Show Cars with Range VIP_55_Show_Cars_With_Range
Advanced Repository Show Cars with Range Last Page VIP_56_Show_Cars_With_Range_Last_Page
query Show Cars Without Range VIP_57_Show_Cars_Without_Range
Show Cars Without Range Last Page VIP_58_Show_Cars_Without_Range_Last_Page
Create Shareable Object VIP_59_Click_Finish_Create_Org_Doc
RTQ for Shareable Objects VIP_60_Click_Manage_Org_Doc
RTQ for Shareable Objects without LWSO VIP_61_Search_Org_Doc
Create LWSO Object VIP_62_Click_Finish_Create_Chapter_Doc
Create LWSO Objects using Batch VIP_63_Batch_Create_Chapter_Doc
View Shareable Object VIP_64_View_Parent_Doc
LWSO RTQ for LWSO Objects VIP_65_Search_Chapter_Doc
Materialize LWSO Object VIP_66_Materialize_Chapter_Doc
Dematerialize LWSO Object VIP_67_Dematerialize_Chapter_Doc
RTQ for Shareable Objects with LWSO VIP_68_Search_Parent
Reparent LWSO Object VIP_69_Reparent_Chapter_Doc
Delete LWSO Object VIP_70_Delete_Chapter_Doc
Delete Shareable Object VIP_71_Delete_Org_Doc
Sign Out Sign Out VIP_72_Signout
The table below describes the performance scenarios and user distribution used in
xCP 20.4 runtime test for CAPINS refapp, a pace time (3-5 minutes) is added in the
end of each scenario.
Table 22 - CAPINS Test Scenario
Scenario Detailed Steps User
Distribution
Scenario 1: Request Car Insurance
1. Agent user login to the system.
2. View its home page.
3. View customer details from home page and
edit customer (address and comment)
4. Click "Create Customer", input necessary
info and click "Save"
Customer service agent creates new 5. Search customer and create Insurance
customer and car insurance request, Request for the customer
reviews the new task and sends it to 6. Goto "Inbox" and search agent review task,
his/her manager for review, if needed, then acquire the task and view task details. 54%
search tasks with a signed contract and 7. Complete the task with (20%) or without
complete it, search insurance request and (80%) expert review.
attach telematic.
8. Search signed contract task, acquire the
task and view task details, complete the task.
9. Search insurance request and attach
telematic.
10. The user then logs out

1. Legal user login to the system

2. Search for Car
3. Click Inbox.
Customer service expert reviews the 4. Click on GetNextTask. 4%
application and completes the task
5. View Acquired Task
6. Complete the task.
Scenario 2: Reference Document Submission Scenario
1. Legal user login to the system.
2. Views its home page.
3. Click on Document -> Propose New
4. Click on Cabinet -> Propose New
Documents and import file.
Customer service expert submits the 5. Click on Document -> Search
16%
reference document for review 6. Facet filter on “Last Changed”, “Last Month”
7. View document content.
8. View document through advanced viewer.
9. Add annotations to document through
advanced viewer.
1. Manager user login to the system.
2. Views it home page.
3. View the BAM report per state by selecting
any state randomly.
4. Goto Inbox Acquire Task
5. View acquired task.
6. Set audience for task (Permission on the
document) and complete task.
7. Complete the task, with next steps as
“Approve and Publish”
Reference document manager reviews the
document, and approves the content for 8. The user clicks on Browse, select the folder
as the document was published to and view 8%
viewers, create shared document and
LWSO, and related operations for LWSO. the document.
9. Goto Org document to create shared
document.
10. Search Org document and import LWSO.
11. Import LWSO using batch.
12. Search LWSO and choose one LWSO to
"Materialize", "DeMaterialize" and "Reparent".
13. View parent document for LWSO.
14. Delete LWSO.
Scenario 3: Supervisor Scenario
1. Supervisor user login to the system.
2. Views it home page. Review all BAM
Reports.
Customer service supervisor supervises 3. Goto Inbox, click Accordion inbox and 4%
the system expand.
4. Goto Alert, search alert and close the alert.
5. Click on Reports (BAM Crystal Reports)

6. The user then logs out.

Scenario 4: Admin Scenario
1. Admin user login to the system.
2. Goto City to create a new city object.
3. Goto Agent, create a new agent.
Admin users create agent, city, and cabinet 4. Search agents and set gold to one agent.
6%
operations
5. Goto Cabinet, create a new cabinet.
6. Import personal document in the cabinet.
Scenario 5: Performance Scenario
1. Performance user login to the system.
2. Show the list of users with session
parameter.
3. Show cabinets with and without fetching
Performance users perform some permission.
4. Advance DQL query with and without range 8%
performance specific test transactions
added, go to last page to verify performance.
6. Create employee through process and
inline BO.
Clinical Test Cases

The table below describes the Process Application test cases used during this
assessment, a random think time (3-5 seconds) was added before each transaction,
no pace time added to test the max server throughput.
Table 23 - Clinical Test Transactions
xCP 20.4 Process Application/Case Management Performance Test Scenario
Login
Go to Case Cabinet
Create a new Clinical Case
Navigate Case
Acquire State Plan
Create a new Case Node
Complete State Plan
40% Users running Case Back to Case View
Node Scenarios
Acquire State Develop
Modify the Case Node
Complete State Develop
Back to Case View
Acquire State Analysis
Goto Case Node View
Create a New Object
Complete State Analysis

Back to Case View

Acquire State Submission
Initial Approval Process
Acquire Approval Task
40% Users running Case View Approval Task

Node Scenarios Complete Approval Task
Complete Submission State
Delete Case
Logout
Login
Inbox My Tasks
Search Task with Task Status
Search Task with Task name
Search Task with Task name/Sender
Search Task with Task name/Sender/Date
Search Task with Sorted by Priority
View Process Templates
30% Users running Goto Process Instance
Processes Scenarios
Search Specified Instance
Halt Instance
Search Halted Instance
Resume Instance
Click Change Supervisor
Filter Username
Finish Change Supervisor
Logout
Login
Go to Repo Browser
Expand Cabinet
Brower Cabinet
Brower Folder
30% Users running Navigate Cabinet
Navigation and Search
Create Folder
Scenarios
Import Document
View Document
Delete Document
Remove Folder
Go to Search

Search specified documents

Search specified folders
View searched folder
30% Users running
Navigation and Search Search specified cabinets
Scenarios
View searched cabinet
Logout
Appendix D - Glossary
Table 24 - Glossary
Term Description
CAPINS Casual and Property Insurance application, a
simple application deployed in xCP to verify major
runtime features.
Clinical An application which include the Case
Management and Process Management features.
Think time A delay between transactions to simulate end-user
actions.
Pace time A delay at the end of the test script to simulate
end-user actions (take a break after a round of
operation).
HPS HTTP requests per second
TPS Transactions per second
ACS The protocol between client/browser to
Documentum to retrieve document content.
CTS Content Transform Server for Documentum,
provide content transformation capabilities for
various of content formats.
CIS Content Intelligence Server for Documentum,
provide content classification and category
functions for metadata.
DA Documentum Administrator, the server for
administration operations in Documentum.
BAM Business Activity Monitor, the server to monitor
Workflow/Task/Activity operations and provide
reports for Documentum xCP.
BPS Business Process Integrator, the server to provide
inbound messaging capabilities to Documentum
applications.

About OpenText
OpenText enables the digital world, creating a better way for organizations to work with information, on premises or in the
cloud. For more information about OpenText (NASDAQ: OTEX, TSX: OTC) visit opentext.com.
Connect with us:
OpenText CEO Mark Barrenechea’s blog

Twitter | LinkedIn
45
www.opentext.com/contact
Copyright © 2020 Open Text SA or Open Text ULC (in Canada).
All rights reserved. Trademarks owned by Open Text SA or Open Text ULC (in Canada).

Performance Paper - OpenText Documentum XCP 20.4

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

Performance Paper - OpenText Documentum XCP 20.4

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Performance Paper - OpenText Documentum XCP 20.4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Product: OpenText™ Documentum xCP

The Information Company™ 2

The Information Company™ 3

The Information Company™ 4

1. Conduct various Designer operations and application deployment testing using

The Information Company™ 5

The Information Company™ 6

• Standard load tests

• Low load tests

Test Data Composition

Named Users 6000

Reference Documents 5000

Insurance Customer 15000

Customer Documents 45000

Car Insurance 15000

Car Objects 30000

Workflow Refdoc Manager Review 5000

Workflow Insurance Process 15000

The Information Company™ 7

Table 2 – Designer Operation Response Time

Save Artifact Process 1.3 1.7

The Information Company™ 8

xCP 20.4 Designer Response Time (s) with CAPINS

Save Artifact Permission Set 0.6 1.2

The Information Company™ 9

First time Repository deployment 221

Runtime Test with CAPINS

CAPINS Low Load Test

The Information Company™ 10

Table 4 – CAPINS Low Load Test Client Metrics

Concurrent Users 100

Total Number of Transactions 36219

Transactions per Second 10.06

Total number of HTTP Hits 113513

HTTP Hits per Second 31.53

Click to Update Car

The Information Company™ 11

Manager View Refdoc

Click on Propose New

Click on Propose New

The Information Company™ 12

View PDF File (Advanced

Advanced Viewer Add

Show Cabinet Without

The Information Company™ 13

CAPINS Gauging Test

CAPINS Standard Load Test

Concurrent Users 250

Total Number of Transactions 88389

Transactions per Second 24.55

Total number of HTTP Hits 276765

HTTP Hits per Second 76.88

The Information Company™ 14

The Information Company™ 15

The Information Company™ 16

The Information Company™ 17

CAPINS Endurance Test