On Wednesday, July 1, 2015, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 30 June 2015 at 23:46, Philippe Mouawad <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > On Wednesday, July 1, 2015, sebb <[email protected] <javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > >> On 30 June 2015 at 22:16, Philippe Mouawad <[email protected] > <javascript:;> > >> <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > Hello, > >> > When we do distributed testing and need afterwards to analyze > results, we > >> > need to know how much threads were running at the some point in time > by > >> > doing aggregation work, as illustrated here: > >> > > >> > - http://jmeter-plugins.org/wiki/ActiveThreadsOverTime/ > >> > > >> > I am just illustrating this need by this particular plugin, but this > need > >> > is here whatever plugin or custom code is used to create this graph. > >> > > >> > Currently as each server reports his own number of threads, and this > is > >> > then written to a file, we need a way to know that N number of threads > >> are > >> > associated to X server. > >> > > >> > I suggest that when a test starts, JMeter client (controller) computes > >> and > >> > sends to each server a unique ID, this id would then be stored by the > >> > server and accessible under a property or function. > >> > >> What's wrong with storing the hostname? > >> > >> usability and see below > > I don't understand the usability issue. > How is it less usable than an unique ID? > > with my proposal the id is computed and sent by jmeter and as you propose we can add it as additional column in csv. While currenly user has to set a different one for each server, so more configuration and more risk of duplicates.
>> > This way, users would only have to add to their thread group name this > >> > additional property without any other configuration. > >> > >> Already possible; just use the hostname > >> > >> Not enough if you have 2 servers on 1 host > > OK, true. > > >> > Another better options is to even remove the need for users to add > this > >> > function / property by appending this information automatically from > the > >> > server in the thread name. > >> > >> I don't understand what you are proposing here. > > > > > > jmeter client assigns a unique id to each server that the latter uses to > > name thread and appends to thread group value leading to unique values > and > > possibility to copite the cumulated number of threads among all servers > > The thread group names are already quite complicated; does it make > sense to extend them further? > > Would it not be better to have a separate field with the server id? it is fine also for me > This could be the hostname plus an instance number, or it could be an > id Id is better for me > that is not related to the hostname. > But I suspect that users will need to know which samples come from each > host. host is already a field no? > > This would make it easier to identify which records come from each > server instance. > Otherwise the group name will have to be split into separate parts for > analysis. > > >> > >> > Thoughts ? > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Regards. > >> > Philippe M > >> > > > > > > -- > > Cordialement. > > Philippe Mouawad. > -- Cordialement. Philippe Mouawad.
