Difference between winsock and wininet level recording

On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 11:55 PM, James Pulley wrote:
WinInet “weighs” more in terms of oveall system resources as it is integrated with the Microsoft security APIs. The sockets option, what used to be known as Turboload, was developed to allow for lighter weight virtual users to exist in larger quantities on a given reference hardware definition (Load Generator). The core change is on playback, if you need integration with the Microsoft security infrastructure, i.e. using web_set_user() you will need to use WinInet and you will need to use Windows Load Generators. And yes, these users will use more system resources.

The default is sockets. Unless you need to integrate directly with a security infrastructure for user authentication you will likely not need WinInet. I have yet to find a reason why you would need to alter these options on the recording front from the default of capturing both. I suppose there are some exotic instances where you would want to choose WinInet or Socket but not both (see recording options web+winsock virtual user), but I have yet to encounter those.

James Pulley, http://www.loadrunnerbythehour.com/PricingMatrix

From: lr-loadrunner@googlegroups.com [mailto:lr-loadrunner@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Abhishek Banginwar
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2010 1:48 PM
To: LR-LoadRunner@googlegroups.com
Subject: difference between winsock and wininet level recording

hi all,

Can anyone please explain what is winsock, wininet and winsock and wininet level in http/html protocol?
winsock and wininet microsoft apis but how does it affect recording and the script that is generated.

--
Abhishek