Boulkroune, Olivier (Non-HP:Atos Origin) wrote: Hello Olivier,
> As the way sipp computes its statistics has been enhanced, may I ask you > if you still encounter the same problem with the 2.0 version ? Currently the setup we used for testing has been retired and I can't immediately rerun the tests. But I'll see if I can find a spare moment in the coming two weeks to rerun a similar test. I'll reply in this test as soon as I have the results. Greetings, Bruno > Message: 5 > Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:22:47 +0100 > From: Bruno Van Den Bossche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [Sipp-users] Accuracy of time-measurements by SIPp > To: [email protected] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 > > Hallo all, > > As we recently took up some SIP-performance testing again and since our > tests in the past the -trace_rtt option was added, we compared the > measurement results obtained using three different methods: > > -trace_stat option which prints out global statistics about all calls. > -trace_rtt which prints out more detailed statistics about each > individual call > - a network capture using Wireshark > > Our test-setup was the following: > - switched network > - dual core intel machines running at 2.8Ghz > - Read Hat Linux Enterprise Edition installed > - a call rate of 100 caps, 2 SIPp's directly communicating, UDP > - a slightly modified uac and uas scenario: actually the scenario's are > the default, but we increased the response-time repartition and > call-lenght repartition granularity to 1 ms > (<ResponseTimeRepartition value="1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,...,300/>) > > The measured results are as follows: > trace_stat: > <1 : 19606 > <2 : 2559 > <3 : 1 > <4 : 1 > (average: 0.615) > [ (19606*0.5 + 2559*1.5 + 2.5 + 3.5)/22167] > > trace_rtt: > <1 : 0 > <2 : 6948 > <3 : 15207 > <4 : 10 > <5 : 1 > <6 : 1 > average: 2.187 > > pcap: > <1 : 22043 > <2 : 3 > <3 : 10 > <4 : 111 > average: 0.729 > > So we notice a very big difference between the output of -trace_stat and > -trace_rtt. The output from the Wireshark trace and -trace_stat seems > to be more in line. Especially considering there is already some > processing done by the time SIPp gets its hands on the packet. > > Is this an expected result? The difference between the -trace_rtt > output and trace_stat seems very large. Although I initially expected > that the trace_rtt output would allow us to get more detailed diagnostic > results. > > Another odd result is that although Wireshark reports 111 messages to > arrive later than 3ms, nor trace_rtt nor -trace_stat seem to detect > this. > > Has anyone else noticed this behavior? And is it to be expected or do > you think it can be fixed? > > > Kind Regards, > Bruno > -- Bruno Van Den Bossche [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ibcn.intec.UGent.be ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Sipp-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sipp-users
