is it better to Use to store the Function libraries, repositories in QC itself?

I 'm planning to use QC as a place for Repositories for Libraries, Object repositories , other data files. I'll be executing the all the test cases from QC. If i use QC for these, Will that be a better opinion? Will the execution be more faster than usually?

Note: usual Method is functions, repo on local and just updating t开发者_StackOverflow中文版he Driver script in QC and running it from QC.

Whatever is stored on QC will have to be downloaded to the machine on which the QTP test run is executed. Increasing the number of items to be downloaded from QC will not increase performance.

After thinking about it for a while, I decided to come up with my own answer:

If you

• work with more than one people on the QTP tests,
• AND/OR execute the tests on more than one or two machines,
• AND/OR use QC's workflow scripting features to keep track of tests' stati (or other attributes)
• AND/OR want to do more than execute tests directly ("interactively") from QTP using Run/F5
• AND/OR want to use QC's version control for QTP tests (urgh..)

then it is highly recommended to put the tests into QC because

• a central repository is useful in such situations
• it is the only way to use QC's requirements tree, test lab and defect manager with automated test integration, including the graphing/reporting facilities.

The biggest disadvantages of having them in QC is that you

• never will see a usable hierarchical file system of those tests again (but hey! Does QTP without QC create a useful file system for every test? No!),
• thus must do all operations via the QC interface (forget about deleting or copying while trees with Windows Explorer)
• Will pay a performance penalty since upon every open or save operation, the test must be transferred to/from the local file system from/to QC. (Once it is there, you have full local performance, though, at least in most cases.)
• heavily increase the dependency on stability of your local network
• should always have the most current QTP & QC releases (especially in terms of patches/SRs),
• will see some rare cases where the QTP IDE crashes when it would not have crashed if the test was in the local file system (there still seem to be some bugs in the interface implementation between both)

So only put the stuff into QC if you can live with the disadvantages.

In the past ive used a tool called StarTeam which contains a working folder with all your repositories in. This is version controlled and means that any one of the engineers can access it or check it out to make changes to it.

Execution is quick because your own personal version of the working folder is held on your local drive, giving you speedy access.

However it may be better having it in QC to increase visibility to the other testers. Its personal preference really each solution has good and bad points.