Re: Add pacing feature
See the other thread, it does not seem to work On Sunday, April 26, 2020, Vladimir Sitnikov wrote: > >- Step 1 : X req/s > >- Step 2 : Y req/s > >- Step 3 : Y req/s > >I am not sure it is feasible with PTT. > > It should be feasible if a variable is used in PTT throughput. > > Vladimir > -- Cordialement. Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Add pacing feature
>- Step 1 : X req/s >- Step 2 : Y req/s >- Step 3 : Y req/s >I am not sure it is feasible with PTT. It should be feasible if a variable is used in PTT throughput. Vladimir
Re: Add pacing feature
Hello Vladimir, >From schema that Vincent sent in another thread , I guess what is requested here is ability to do steps: - Step 1 : X req/s - Step 2 : Y req/s - Step 3 : Y req/s I am not sure it is feasible with PTT. Regards On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 2:57 PM Vladimir Sitnikov < sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >for compute by groovy code the pacing > > I'm afraid I don't follow you here. > Can you please clarify why the current Precise Throughput Timer does not > work for your "pacing" scenario? > > Vladimir > -- Cordialement. Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Add pacing feature
>for compute by groovy code the pacing I'm afraid I don't follow you here. Can you please clarify why the current Precise Throughput Timer does not work for your "pacing" scenario? Vladimir
Re: Add pacing feature
Hi,
>
*If we had notion of try/finally, it could be doable and solve also other
requirements like ensuring a session is disconnected even if error occurs*
Yes if we can set a module controler or test frament for the finally is
could be a good solution for logout or for compute by groovy code the pacing
try {
sampler 1 login
sampler 2 home page
}
finally {
sampler 3 logout
sampler 4 groovy compute paging
}
Normal flow :
sampler 1 login, sampler 2 home page, sampler 3 logout, sampler 4
Error on sampler 1 => goto finally test frament or module controller
sampler 1 login, sampler 3 logout, sampler 4
Error on sampler 3
sampler 1 login, sampler 2 home page, sampler 3 logout => no sampler 4 ?
Regards.
Vincent DAB.
Le jeu. 16 avr. 2020 à 13:13, Philippe Mouawad
a écrit :
> Hello,
> What about following use case:
>
> - You have a number of virtual users running a scenario which is composed
> of 30 steps related through correlation of ids
> - You set thread group to Start next thread loop on error
> - you don’t have a requirement of number of execution per minute
>
> How do you avoid a burst in the first steps (the one before failure) of
> your scenario when errors start to happen, ie abnormal increase of Home
> Page calls or login process?
>
> If we had notion of try/finally, it could be doable and solve also other
> requirements like ensuring a session is disconnected even if error occurs
>
>
> Regards
>
> On Thursday, April 16, 2020, Antonio Gomes Rodrigues
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Pacing is used in Neoload, Loadruner...
> >
> > But I am agree with Vladimir, we can use "Precise Throughput Timer" and
> > "Constant Throughput Timer"
> >
> >
> > Le jeu. 16 avr. 2020 à 12:53, Vladimir Sitnikov <
> > sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com>
> > a écrit :
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > >For 3 years I have been using the notion of Pacing an iteration to
> > > >facilitate the modeling of the load and also because it is very
> > practical
> > > >when we are doing loads with load steps
> > >
> > > Can you please clarify how pacing makes it practical?
> > >
> > > For instance, I have never faced a case when the non-functional
> > > requirements are expressed in terms of "pacing".
> > >
> > > I often see non-functional requirements like "100 requests per hour",
> > > "200 concurrent users, each making requests as fast as possible",
> > > "300 concurrent users producing 50 requests per hour", and so on.
> > > However, none of the above is like "5sec pacing".
> > >
> > > >The pacing could be declare in a new Thread Group field and/or in a
> new
> > > >component
> > >
> > > Have you checked "Precise Throughput Timer" and "Constant Throughput
> > Timer"
> > > ?
> > > A single timer like that at the beginning of the plan could be used to
> > > emulate "pacing".
> > >
> > > Vladimir
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cordialement.
> Philippe Mouawad.
>
Re: Add pacing feature
Image test : [image: schema_pacing_4_iter_v3.png] Vladimir
Re: Add pacing feature
Vincent, I'm not sure why do you call it pacing, but what you draw is exactly what JMeter's Precise Throughput Timer is doing. If you place the timer under a "flow control action" which is before sampler1, then the timer would delay the theads that come to early. Have you tried it? Does it work for you? Vladimir
Re: Add pacing feature
Hi,
I complete pacing schema with 4 iterations :
1st iteration, sum of sampler durations < pacing
2sd iteration, *error *and Thread Group action : " *Start Next Thread Loop*"
3th iteration, sum of sampler durations *>* pacing
4th iteration, sum of sampler durations < pacing
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ptgram24/f2OVAIWazl8
Regards.
Vincent DAB.
Le jeu. 16 avr. 2020 à 15:30, Vincent Daburon a écrit :
> Hi,
> I put images on this topic
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ptgram24/f2OVAIWazl8
>
> Regards.
> Vincent DAB.
>
> Le jeu. 16 avr. 2020 à 14:45, Vincent Daburon a
> écrit :
>
>> Hi,
>> When you make load test with load steps, the pacing is useful.
>> 1st step 50% of the load
>> 2sd step 100% of the load
>> 3thd step 150% of the load
>>
>> [image: Active_Threads_ALL_Over_Time.png]
>>
>> The pacing for an iteration is constant and the number of samplers is
>> proportional to the number of threads even with a response time degradation.
>>
>> The degradation in response times by the increase in the number of people
>> is normal but the rhythm (pacing) is always constant and therefore the
>> number of iterations per thread is constant.
>>
>> It's more easy to response to the question :
>> Does the system could accept 1000 functional actions by hour (2sd step
>> 100% load) ?
>>
>> Currently i use groovy script to compute a pacing.
>>
>> First sampler in the scenario a groovy script :
>> vars.put("V_PACING_START_ITER_MILLISEC","" + System.currentTimeMillis());
>>
>> at the end of the scenario a groovy script with a parameter
>> ${K_PACING_ITER_SEC} ex : 60 sec
>> String sPACING_ITER_SEC = args[0];
>> long lParcingIterSec = Long.parseLong(sPACING_ITER_SEC);
>> String sPACING_START_ITER_MILLISEC =
>> vars.get("V_PACING_START_ITER_MILLISEC");
>> long lStartIter = Long.parseLong(sPACING_START_ITER_MILLISEC);
>>
>> long lCurrentTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
>> long lDurationIter = lCurrentTime - lStartIter;
>>
>> long lWaitPacing = (lParcingIterSec * 1000) - lDurationIter;
>>
>> if (lWaitPacing <= 0) {
>> lWaitPacing = 0;
>> }
>> vars.put("V_PACING_ITER_WAIT", "" + lWaitPacing);
>>
>> and
>> Flow Control Action Pause with
>> pause : ${V_PACING_ITER_WAIT}
>>
>> but when an errror is detected if the thead group is configured with
>> "start nex thread loop" the pacing is not compute.
>>
>> Regards.
>> Vincent DAB.
>>
>> Le jeu. 16 avr. 2020 à 13:54, Vincent Daburon a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> Hi
>>> a little schema to explain the pacing for an iteration for 1 thread
>>> The waiting time to complete the pacing is a dynamic waiting time.
>>> [image: schema_pacing_v1.png]
>>>
>>> Regards.
>>> Vincent DAB.
>>>
>>> Le jeu. 16 avr. 2020 à 13:32, Vladimir Sitnikov <
>>> sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>>
Philippe>- you don’t have a requirement of number of execution per
minute
How do you compute "pacing" then? :)
I guess you almost always have something on the number of scenarios per
hour :)
Philippe>How do you avoid a burst in the first steps (the one before
failure) of
Philippe>your scenario when errors start to happen, ie abnormal
increase of
Home
Philippe>Page calls or login process?
If you configure Precise Throughput Timer, then it would ensure the
scenarios are not launched more often
than the configured throughput.
For instance, if you configure PTT rate == 10 per hour, then it would
not
allow threads to pass the timer more
often than 10 per hour no matter if the new iteration is caused by
error or
not.
Philippe>If we had notion of try/finally
That is a slightly different topic, and I agree it would be great to add
something for try-catch.
Vladimir
>>>
Re: Add pacing feature
Hi,
I put images on this topic
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ptgram24/f2OVAIWazl8
Regards.
Vincent DAB.
Le jeu. 16 avr. 2020 à 14:45, Vincent Daburon a écrit :
> Hi,
> When you make load test with load steps, the pacing is useful.
> 1st step 50% of the load
> 2sd step 100% of the load
> 3thd step 150% of the load
>
> [image: Active_Threads_ALL_Over_Time.png]
>
> The pacing for an iteration is constant and the number of samplers is
> proportional to the number of threads even with a response time degradation.
>
> The degradation in response times by the increase in the number of people
> is normal but the rhythm (pacing) is always constant and therefore the
> number of iterations per thread is constant.
>
> It's more easy to response to the question :
> Does the system could accept 1000 functional actions by hour (2sd step
> 100% load) ?
>
> Currently i use groovy script to compute a pacing.
>
> First sampler in the scenario a groovy script :
> vars.put("V_PACING_START_ITER_MILLISEC","" + System.currentTimeMillis());
>
> at the end of the scenario a groovy script with a parameter
> ${K_PACING_ITER_SEC} ex : 60 sec
> String sPACING_ITER_SEC = args[0];
> long lParcingIterSec = Long.parseLong(sPACING_ITER_SEC);
> String sPACING_START_ITER_MILLISEC =
> vars.get("V_PACING_START_ITER_MILLISEC");
> long lStartIter = Long.parseLong(sPACING_START_ITER_MILLISEC);
>
> long lCurrentTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
> long lDurationIter = lCurrentTime - lStartIter;
>
> long lWaitPacing = (lParcingIterSec * 1000) - lDurationIter;
>
> if (lWaitPacing <= 0) {
> lWaitPacing = 0;
> }
> vars.put("V_PACING_ITER_WAIT", "" + lWaitPacing);
>
> and
> Flow Control Action Pause with
> pause : ${V_PACING_ITER_WAIT}
>
> but when an errror is detected if the thead group is configured with
> "start nex thread loop" the pacing is not compute.
>
> Regards.
> Vincent DAB.
>
> Le jeu. 16 avr. 2020 à 13:54, Vincent Daburon a
> écrit :
>
>> Hi
>> a little schema to explain the pacing for an iteration for 1 thread
>> The waiting time to complete the pacing is a dynamic waiting time.
>> [image: schema_pacing_v1.png]
>>
>> Regards.
>> Vincent DAB.
>>
>> Le jeu. 16 avr. 2020 à 13:32, Vladimir Sitnikov <
>> sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>
>>> Philippe>- you don’t have a requirement of number of execution per minute
>>>
>>> How do you compute "pacing" then? :)
>>> I guess you almost always have something on the number of scenarios per
>>> hour :)
>>>
>>> Philippe>How do you avoid a burst in the first steps (the one before
>>> failure) of
>>> Philippe>your scenario when errors start to happen, ie abnormal increase
>>> of
>>> Home
>>> Philippe>Page calls or login process?
>>>
>>> If you configure Precise Throughput Timer, then it would ensure the
>>> scenarios are not launched more often
>>> than the configured throughput.
>>> For instance, if you configure PTT rate == 10 per hour, then it would not
>>> allow threads to pass the timer more
>>> often than 10 per hour no matter if the new iteration is caused by error
>>> or
>>> not.
>>>
>>> Philippe>If we had notion of try/finally
>>>
>>> That is a slightly different topic, and I agree it would be great to add
>>> something for try-catch.
>>>
>>> Vladimir
>>>
>>
Re: Add pacing feature
Hi,
When you make load test with load steps, the pacing is useful.
1st step 50% of the load
2sd step 100% of the load
3thd step 150% of the load
[image: Active_Threads_ALL_Over_Time.png]
The pacing for an iteration is constant and the number of samplers is
proportional to the number of threads even with a response time degradation.
The degradation in response times by the increase in the number of people
is normal but the rhythm (pacing) is always constant and therefore the
number of iterations per thread is constant.
It's more easy to response to the question :
Does the system could accept 1000 functional actions by hour (2sd step 100%
load) ?
Currently i use groovy script to compute a pacing.
First sampler in the scenario a groovy script :
vars.put("V_PACING_START_ITER_MILLISEC","" + System.currentTimeMillis());
at the end of the scenario a groovy script with a parameter
${K_PACING_ITER_SEC} ex : 60 sec
String sPACING_ITER_SEC = args[0];
long lParcingIterSec = Long.parseLong(sPACING_ITER_SEC);
String sPACING_START_ITER_MILLISEC =
vars.get("V_PACING_START_ITER_MILLISEC");
long lStartIter = Long.parseLong(sPACING_START_ITER_MILLISEC);
long lCurrentTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
long lDurationIter = lCurrentTime - lStartIter;
long lWaitPacing = (lParcingIterSec * 1000) - lDurationIter;
if (lWaitPacing <= 0) {
lWaitPacing = 0;
}
vars.put("V_PACING_ITER_WAIT", "" + lWaitPacing);
and
Flow Control Action Pause with
pause : ${V_PACING_ITER_WAIT}
but when an errror is detected if the thead group is configured with "start
nex thread loop" the pacing is not compute.
Regards.
Vincent DAB.
Le jeu. 16 avr. 2020 à 13:54, Vincent Daburon a écrit :
> Hi
> a little schema to explain the pacing for an iteration for 1 thread
> The waiting time to complete the pacing is a dynamic waiting time.
> [image: schema_pacing_v1.png]
>
> Regards.
> Vincent DAB.
>
> Le jeu. 16 avr. 2020 à 13:32, Vladimir Sitnikov <
> sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>> Philippe>- you don’t have a requirement of number of execution per minute
>>
>> How do you compute "pacing" then? :)
>> I guess you almost always have something on the number of scenarios per
>> hour :)
>>
>> Philippe>How do you avoid a burst in the first steps (the one before
>> failure) of
>> Philippe>your scenario when errors start to happen, ie abnormal increase
>> of
>> Home
>> Philippe>Page calls or login process?
>>
>> If you configure Precise Throughput Timer, then it would ensure the
>> scenarios are not launched more often
>> than the configured throughput.
>> For instance, if you configure PTT rate == 10 per hour, then it would not
>> allow threads to pass the timer more
>> often than 10 per hour no matter if the new iteration is caused by error
>> or
>> not.
>>
>> Philippe>If we had notion of try/finally
>>
>> That is a slightly different topic, and I agree it would be great to add
>> something for try-catch.
>>
>> Vladimir
>>
>
Re: Add pacing feature
>[image: schema_pacing_v1.png] Unfortunately, the images are not yet enabled in this mailing list. I've filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-20125 to fix that. Could you please upload the image to gist.github.com or something like that in the mean time? Vladimir
Re: Add pacing feature
Hi a little schema to explain the pacing for an iteration for 1 thread The waiting time to complete the pacing is a dynamic waiting time. [image: schema_pacing_v1.png] Regards. Vincent DAB. Le jeu. 16 avr. 2020 à 13:32, Vladimir Sitnikov a écrit : > Philippe>- you don’t have a requirement of number of execution per minute > > How do you compute "pacing" then? :) > I guess you almost always have something on the number of scenarios per > hour :) > > Philippe>How do you avoid a burst in the first steps (the one before > failure) of > Philippe>your scenario when errors start to happen, ie abnormal increase of > Home > Philippe>Page calls or login process? > > If you configure Precise Throughput Timer, then it would ensure the > scenarios are not launched more often > than the configured throughput. > For instance, if you configure PTT rate == 10 per hour, then it would not > allow threads to pass the timer more > often than 10 per hour no matter if the new iteration is caused by error or > not. > > Philippe>If we had notion of try/finally > > That is a slightly different topic, and I agree it would be great to add > something for try-catch. > > Vladimir >
Re: Add pacing feature
Philippe>- you don’t have a requirement of number of execution per minute How do you compute "pacing" then? :) I guess you almost always have something on the number of scenarios per hour :) Philippe>How do you avoid a burst in the first steps (the one before failure) of Philippe>your scenario when errors start to happen, ie abnormal increase of Home Philippe>Page calls or login process? If you configure Precise Throughput Timer, then it would ensure the scenarios are not launched more often than the configured throughput. For instance, if you configure PTT rate == 10 per hour, then it would not allow threads to pass the timer more often than 10 per hour no matter if the new iteration is caused by error or not. Philippe>If we had notion of try/finally That is a slightly different topic, and I agree it would be great to add something for try-catch. Vladimir
Re: Add pacing feature
Hello, What about following use case: - You have a number of virtual users running a scenario which is composed of 30 steps related through correlation of ids - You set thread group to Start next thread loop on error - you don’t have a requirement of number of execution per minute How do you avoid a burst in the first steps (the one before failure) of your scenario when errors start to happen, ie abnormal increase of Home Page calls or login process? If we had notion of try/finally, it could be doable and solve also other requirements like ensuring a session is disconnected even if error occurs Regards On Thursday, April 16, 2020, Antonio Gomes Rodrigues wrote: > Hi, > > Pacing is used in Neoload, Loadruner... > > But I am agree with Vladimir, we can use "Precise Throughput Timer" and > "Constant Throughput Timer" > > > Le jeu. 16 avr. 2020 à 12:53, Vladimir Sitnikov < > sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com> > a écrit : > > > Hi, > > > > >For 3 years I have been using the notion of Pacing an iteration to > > >facilitate the modeling of the load and also because it is very > practical > > >when we are doing loads with load steps > > > > Can you please clarify how pacing makes it practical? > > > > For instance, I have never faced a case when the non-functional > > requirements are expressed in terms of "pacing". > > > > I often see non-functional requirements like "100 requests per hour", > > "200 concurrent users, each making requests as fast as possible", > > "300 concurrent users producing 50 requests per hour", and so on. > > However, none of the above is like "5sec pacing". > > > > >The pacing could be declare in a new Thread Group field and/or in a new > > >component > > > > Have you checked "Precise Throughput Timer" and "Constant Throughput > Timer" > > ? > > A single timer like that at the beginning of the plan could be used to > > emulate "pacing". > > > > Vladimir > > > -- Cordialement. Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Add pacing feature
Hi, Pacing is used in Neoload, Loadruner... But I am agree with Vladimir, we can use "Precise Throughput Timer" and "Constant Throughput Timer" Le jeu. 16 avr. 2020 à 12:53, Vladimir Sitnikov a écrit : > Hi, > > >For 3 years I have been using the notion of Pacing an iteration to > >facilitate the modeling of the load and also because it is very practical > >when we are doing loads with load steps > > Can you please clarify how pacing makes it practical? > > For instance, I have never faced a case when the non-functional > requirements are expressed in terms of "pacing". > > I often see non-functional requirements like "100 requests per hour", > "200 concurrent users, each making requests as fast as possible", > "300 concurrent users producing 50 requests per hour", and so on. > However, none of the above is like "5sec pacing". > > >The pacing could be declare in a new Thread Group field and/or in a new > >component > > Have you checked "Precise Throughput Timer" and "Constant Throughput Timer" > ? > A single timer like that at the beginning of the plan could be used to > emulate "pacing". > > Vladimir >
Re: Add pacing feature
Hi, >For 3 years I have been using the notion of Pacing an iteration to >facilitate the modeling of the load and also because it is very practical >when we are doing loads with load steps Can you please clarify how pacing makes it practical? For instance, I have never faced a case when the non-functional requirements are expressed in terms of "pacing". I often see non-functional requirements like "100 requests per hour", "200 concurrent users, each making requests as fast as possible", "300 concurrent users producing 50 requests per hour", and so on. However, none of the above is like "5sec pacing". >The pacing could be declare in a new Thread Group field and/or in a new >component Have you checked "Precise Throughput Timer" and "Constant Throughput Timer" ? A single timer like that at the beginning of the plan could be used to emulate "pacing". Vladimir
