On 10 October 2011 05:22, itsbritto brittobt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I'm too tried to parametrize the scheduler field by a user defined
variable.but it doesn't work.
Using variables for the delay and duration does work.
Is thera any other alternate for this?
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at
this is simililar to this post:
http://jmeter.512774.n5.nabble.com/Regular-expression-extractor-td4867973.html
ZK
--
View this message in context:
http://jmeter.512774.n5.nabble.com/jmeter-parameterization-tp4887918p4888010.html
Sent from the JMeter - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
so this isssue
(http://jmeter.512774.n5.nabble.com/Regular-expression-extractor-td4867973.html)
is now resolved?
ZK
--
View this message in context:
http://jmeter.512774.n5.nabble.com/jmeter-parameterization-tp4887918p4888264.html
Sent from the JMeter - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Can you provide an example of the request that results in the error?
ZK
--
View this message in context:
http://jmeter.512774.n5.nabble.com/jmeter-parameterization-tp4887918p4889088.html
Sent from the JMeter - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Thanks for the thoughts Deepak, after finding bigger issues with virtually
every other software package I played with over the last few days I'm back.
:) And Taking your advice on separating static content (not on a CDN in my
case) from dynamic pages. It's an extra level of abstraction which
Ugg, please ignore this. Oblivious user mistake - I had it set to total
iterations.
-Original Message-
From: David Parks [mailto:davidpark...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 11:30 AM
To: 'JMeter Users List'
Subject: RE: Emulating a browsers resource download patterns
Thanks
I'm seeing some results in the Summary Report listener that doesn't
really make sense to me. The test runs 200 concurrent users all
requesting the same resource for 60 seconds. Here are the Summary
Report Listener results:
Num requests: 101243
Average: 118
Min: 5
Max:
you arent factoring in that you are running 200 threads in parallel.
1681 transactions per second for 200 concurrent requests works out to
1681/200 = 9 requests per second per thread.
which means 1000/9 milliseconds per request(assuming no delays) about 111 ms
on average (118 in your case)
I was wondering if anybody has used both, and wonder how they compare.
Pros/cons of each.
And how one could best simulate the Throughput Shaping Timer with the
constant throughput timer via variable/property that defines the throughput
and changing it during test run. Particularly how would you
Oh I see. The throughput accounts for all threads while the average
transaction time does not. That makes a lot of sense actually. Thank
you.
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 6:29 PM, Deepak Shetty shet...@gmail.com wrote:
you arent factoring in that you are running 200 threads in parallel.
1681
10 matches
Mail list logo
