I would go with injid, single field.

Andrey Pokhilko

On 07/01/2015 11:59 PM, Philippe Mouawad wrote:
> Good idea Andrei indeed.
>
> How do you see it:
>
>    - Would we add a new field called :
>       - jmeter.save.saveservice.injid composed of host:port
>    - Or would we ad jmeter.save.saveservice.port and require users to set:
>       - jmeter.save.saveservice.hostname=true
>       - jmeter.save.saveservice.port=true
>       - And compute the field from this.
>
>
> One thing I find a bit bad  is network traffic, as we repeat in batch mode
> (default) this information uselessly
>
> For example for 100 results, we would transmit it 100 times while only 1
> would be better.
> Note this applies to other fields like:
> jmeter.save.saveservice.filename=false
>
> But maybe it's another topic related to Network traffic optimization in
> Distributed testing, some ideas:
>
>    - Switch to Rest WS or Google Protobuf
>    - Only send required data and no more serialized objects
>    - ....
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 10:24 AM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 1 July 2015 at 09:11, Andrey Pokhilko <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thanks for this initiative, I felt it painful for jp@gc, for
>>> Loadosophia.org and for my new project Taurus.
>>>
>>> I would solve it with hostname+port pair in SampleResult, as it makes
>> Using port is an excellent idea.
>>
>> Maybe as host:port as that is a standard way of representing them.
>>
>>> easier to map results to originating JMeter servers. Unique ID's would
>>> also solve it, but it will require additional work to match ID back to
>>> server. And ID's are not obvious, so it's bad user experience.
>> Agreed.
>>
>>> Andrey Pokhilko
>>>
>>> On 07/01/2015 01:46 AM, Philippe Mouawad wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, July 1, 2015, sebb <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 30 June 2015 at 22:16, Philippe Mouawad <[email protected]
>>>>> <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
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Regards.
>>>>>> Philippe M
>
>

Reply via email to