Hey David, I've used both.
Its not much to compare :). If you understand the Constant Throughput Timer, then you understand both and it's easy to see that its major limitation is that it holds (if possible) the throughput constant at the value you define (which was the intent). However if you want to easily create a more complex test scenario like: 1. run a test with throughput 100 for 2 min 2. continue for 2 more minutes with throughput 200 3. continue for 2 more minutes with throughput 500 to see how the application responds to these changes in the load received, without the plugin you had to use more thread groups and configure the scheduling so you get the same effect. The plugin makes these use cases simple and more easy to understand. You can make things a lot more complicated than that if you'd like using both methods and a lot of imagination. On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 5:19 AM, David Luu <manga...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 implement the > changing of the throughput variable and where to place in test plan. > > FYI, I'm refering to this JMeter plugin: > > http://code.google.com/p/jmeter-plugins/wiki/ThroughputShapingTimer >
