On 7/1/05, Rabi Lahiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually I think the user parameter thing was a bit of a red herring. > It worked that way several runs in a row but I can't reproduce the > behavior any longer. > > Here's a simple example that demonstrates the behavior I don't quite > understand. > > standard HTTP sampler (not my subclass), uncheck follow redirect and > uncheck use keepalive. point to www.google.com port 80. > > Timing is avg/min/max, with 1 loop and varying numbers of threads, > according to the aggregate report listener: > 1 thread = 48 / 48 / 48 > 10 threads = 47 / 44 / 52 > 25 threads = 66 / 46 / 107 > 50 threads = 89 / 39 / 193 > 100 threads = 137 / 46 / 247 > 500 threads = 1236 / 47 / 8076 > 1000 threads = 1670 / 29 / 15379 > > I wouldn't expect to see the increasing average times that way - even > if a few threads spike and make the max value go way up, the general > performance should still be pretty constant, as observed with the > minimum timing column. Also, if instead of 1000 threads in 1 loop, I > use 10 threads with 100 loops, I get > > avg / min / max > 56 / 24 / 197 > > Which looks much more reasonable. Since the request is the same all > the time, shouldn't the timing for 10 threads * 100 loops be very > similar to that with 1000 threads * 1 loop?
No, they are not at all equivalent. A test with a single loop does not get a chance to stabilise - apart from the fact that 1000 threads * 1 loop is a much higher load for the JMeter host machine than 10 threads with 100 loops. > > thanks again, > Rabi > > On 7/1/05, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Which version of Jmeter are you using? > > > > I don't understand what's happening here. > > > > Try replacing your HTTP Sampler with a JavaTest sampler to see if the > > timings are affected by the presence of the user parameter > > pre-processor or not. > > > > Or indeed try using the standard HTTP Sampler instead of yours. > > > > If either of these shows the timing problem, please create a Bugzilla > > issue, and then attach the following: > > > > - simple test script that has OK timing data > > - simple test script that causes timing data problems > > - jmeter.log for both test runs > > - jtl files for both runs. > > > > S. > > > > P.S. If you thing the changes you made to the HTTP Sampler might be > > useful to others, perhaps you would consider filing a Bugzilla > > enhancement request to describe what you have added. > > > > On 7/1/05, Rabi Lahiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I have the duration assertion as a child of the sampler. > > > > > > Something interesting I noticed just now, though - if I use static > > > arguments and no User parameter preprocessor with the sampler, the > > > timing data looks fine. If I add the user parameter preprocessor with > > > two $_StringFromFile functions (as a child of the sampler), the timing > > > data gets messed up and looks cumulative among all the threads, even > > > if I don't actually use the variables from the file (i.e. I leave the > > > arguments to the sampler as static data). > > > > > > Could the thread timers be including the time that each thread is > > > blocked on I/O or somehow accumulating time because of that? We have > > > subclassed the HTTPSampler and AbstractSamplerGui for our project; > > > otherwise everything is from the standard distribution. > > > > > > thanks again, > > > Rabi > > > > > > On 6/30/05, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Where have you put the duration assertions in relation to the samplers? > > > > > > > > Which version of JMeter are you using? > > > > > > > > S > > > > On 6/30/05, Rabi Lahiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > I've looked through all the docs I could find and the mail archives > > > > > and couldn't find an answer to this. I have a subclass of HTTPSampler > > > > > and need to implement timeouts for my requests. I'm using the sampler > > > > > with the following setup: > > > > > > > > > > 500 threads > > > > > 1 loop > > > > > parameter "args" is _StringFromFile(args.txt) > > > > > parameter "method" is _StringFromFile(methods.txt) > > > > > > > > > > My service needs to pass args and method dynamically this way. > > > > > args.txt and methods.txt are 500-line files which constitute the > > > > > requests I need. This works fine and I can test the results of each > > > > > with response assertions, except that duration assertions don't work > > > > > properly. The duration assertion appears to be timing the whole set > > > > > of 500 threads instead of each one individually, so as soon as the > > > > > group time hits the assertion value every thread fails. For example, > > > > > let's say each call takes exactly 200 ms. If I set the duration > > > > > assertion to 1100ms, the first five responses succeed but all the rest > > > > > fail. I need to be able to set it up so that I can verify that no > > > > > individual call takes more than, say, 250ms. Is this possible? If I > > > > > need to make a code change, can it be done relatively simply? > > > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > Rabi Lahiri > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
