QALoad is not a functional testing tool. Compuware's functional testing tool is TestPartner (and QARun).
Although load testing tools perform some amount of functional testing inherently, they're designed for generating load, not functional validation. As such the maintenance of functional tests would be prohibitive.
I don't know about Rational products, but Compuware's tools for functional and load testing utilize completely different scripting and are essentially incompatible - as are most. Even when they are compatible (such as running QARun scripts via QALoad), they are usually inefficient for generating load.
QARun is an old tool that uses a "like VB" scripting language and is about to become unsupported by Compuware. Test Partner is the current tool that uses VB and is being supported as well as updated periodically.
With the new features in QALoad technically it is feasible to do a functional test (say using content check), but why would one use a tool that costs 50 times as much and is much more complex to use?
I've been using Rational for functional tests and someone else is using QALoad for load testing. They would like us to do comparison if QALoad can do functional tests and how feasible it is to use just the one tool for both functional and load. Obviously if it's too limited then we'll probably have to continue using RFT.
Does TestPartner uses the full VB language and can you create your own classes and methods?
Has anybody used both TestPartner and RFT and has an opinion on which is better to work with? Thanks.
I have not used RFT but I have used Test Partner & QARun. To answer your question, doing functional testing with QALoad would be much more complicated and time consuming than with a tool meant for Functional Testing like Test Partner, and in my humble opinion not worth it. You can use a 100 tons hydraulic hammer to drive a nail and also use a hammer. The latter is more practical.