Hiya,
We took a look at the WHITE automation framework (which is basically a wrapper over UI Automation)
We noticed that it is often better performance than Ranorex
We believe this is becauseRanorex duplicates elements in its element tree (one element for pure MSAA and another for UI automation over MSAA)
Therefore we would like to know how to turn off all plugins, to force ranorex to use only UI Automation for everything, and not to use the UI Automation Raw view, but instead the Control view (I think its called)
This way we hope to improve performance, by not applying many interfaces to same object, and reducing the element tree size
Thanks,
Clayton
Ranorex verses White Performance
- Support Team
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12145
- Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 4:30 pm
- Location: Houston, Texas, USA
- Contact:
Re: Ranorex verses White Performance
Hello,
It could be that we are a little bit slower because of additional checks but this should improve the reliability and accuracy.
Do you have a specific case where you have seen the described behavior (one element for pure MSAA and another for UI automation over MSAA)?
In general it would be very helpful if we get as much information as possible. This would increase the possibility that we will be able to reproduce the issue/find a solution for the specific problem.
Regards,
Markus
Ranorex Support Team
Usually, we create UIAutomation elements or MSAA elements and not both.We believe this is because Ranorex duplicates elements in its element tree (one element for pure MSAA and another for UI automation over MSAA)
It could be that we are a little bit slower because of additional checks but this should improve the reliability and accuracy.
This is not possible, you cannot switch between Raw and Control View.not to use the UI Automation Raw view, but instead the Control view (I think its called)
Do you have a specific case where you have seen the described behavior (one element for pure MSAA and another for UI automation over MSAA)?
In general it would be very helpful if we get as much information as possible. This would increase the possibility that we will be able to reproduce the issue/find a solution for the specific problem.
Regards,
Markus
Ranorex Support Team
Re: Ranorex verses White Performance
Hiya,
The difference we see between WHITE and Ranorex is that to find our control of interest the Ranorex element tree is like 10-15 levels deep, and ranorex spy is really slow when it gets to such a level.
WHITE and UI Spy (Microsoft) are very quick, as the control to them is visible 3-4 levels deep
We also see a bug performance different on TABLE elements, WHITE and UI Spy alot quicker than Ranorex
Cheers
Clayton
The difference we see between WHITE and Ranorex is that to find our control of interest the Ranorex element tree is like 10-15 levels deep, and ranorex spy is really slow when it gets to such a level.
WHITE and UI Spy (Microsoft) are very quick, as the control to them is visible 3-4 levels deep
We also see a bug performance different on TABLE elements, WHITE and UI Spy alot quicker than Ranorex
Cheers
Clayton
- Support Team
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12145
- Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 4:30 pm
- Location: Houston, Texas, USA
- Contact:
Re: Ranorex verses White Performance
If the number of elements is different (raw vs control view), then the search times will differ, no question about that. You could try to limit Ranorex to "control" elements as well by adding a check for iscontrolelement='true' to your RanoreXPath.atom wrote:anorex element tree is like 10-15 levels deep ... WHITE and UI Spy (Microsoft) are very quick, as the control to them is visible 3-4 levels deep
Do you experience this speed problem when working with Ranorex Spy or at runtime, when searching using RanoreXPath?atom wrote:We also see a bug performance different on TABLE elements, WHITE and UI Spy alot quicker than Ranorex
Do you use RanoreXPaths with "//" in them?
Is this a WPF or Silverlight application?
Do you have a sample application that we can reproduce the problem with?
Regards,
Alex
Ranorex Team