Looks like around 1x20 you saturated the JMeter CPU. 1x40 did not increase load -- not because the web server was saturated, but because the JMeter machine was. When you did the 2x20, you were actually providing twice as much CPU power to JMeter, so you could create twice as much load.

--
Salut,

Jordi.

Jean-Sebastien Morisset wrote:
Guys,

I ran some tests overnight with jmeter v1.9.1, and got some odd results...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Threads Rate    R/Thr.  Avg     CPU
1 x 1   13/sec  13/sec  75ms    28%
1 x 5   22/sec  4.4/sec 222ms   38%
1 x 10  23/sec  2.3/sec 436ms   37%
1 x 15  23/sec  1.5/sec 646ms   39%
1 x 20  23/sec  1.15/sec    850ms   38%
1 x 30  24/sec  0.8/sec 1251ms  38%
1 x 40  24/sec  0.6/sec 1665ms  38%
2 x 20  57/sec  0.7/sec 1265ms  72%
2 x 30  57/sec  1.4/sec 1541ms  72%
2 x 40  57/sec  0.7/sec 1486ms  72%
2 x 60  57/sec  0.5/sec 2220ms  72%

* CPU is the web server CPU.

* The Threads # x # is the number of jmeter servers x the number of
threads on each.

* When the jmeter servers were increased to 2, I added the Rates of each
together to get a total # of requests/second.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notice one of the tests was 1x40 and another 2x20. These two tests should
have given the same results since the total number of threads is the same.

When using 2 jmeter servers, I added the Rate together to get a total
number of requests / second. This _seems_ logical since each jmeter
server is telling me it can do X number of requests per second, but the
1x40 and 2x20 tests should then have the same Rate number.

I also don't understand why the web server's CPU jumped from 38% -> 72%
when going from 1x40 to 2x20. This would indicate twice the number of
users/threads.

Any thoughts? :-)

Thanks,
js.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to