Hello,

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:12 PM, chaitanya bhatt <[email protected]
> wrote:

> Thanks for replying Philippe!
>
> I noticed that the test cases you guys used to test the performance of
> Jmeter is far to small than real world cases. Your test case had JUST 3
> HTTP samplers with just 2 N-V pairs in each sample.
>

Of course, this test plan must be simple for simple setup and it's more a
basis to compare versions.
It just illustrates the efforts made since 2.6 to improve performances,
look at dev list to see
what was made on 2.8.



> Real world scenarios have at least 100-200 HTTP samples per thread group.
> And the requests should contain at least 10-20 NV (name/value) pairs for
> POST requests and the responses should at least weigh 80-120KB. At least 20
> response assertions. At least and at least 10 post response regex
> evaluators. This is when you actually exercise the engine.
>
> The test with 4000 threads I was talking about was a real life one.

I am currently using Jmeter 2.8 and JRE 1.6.
>
> I am not using third party plugins. I am not using XML/CSV output. I have
> removed all listeners.
>

I don't understand, which kind of save service are you using:
CSV or  XML ?

>
> I have 250 HTTP samplers with at least 10-NV pairs in each request. Most
> requests are of type: POST. I have 35 assertions and 13 regex evaluators. I
> have 2 If controllers, 15 transaction controllers, 8 constant timers and 1
> thread group.
>

Which type of assertions ?
What is the config of IfControllers ?

>
> Hope this helps. I will raise a defect in bugzilla but I'll be surprised if
> it doesn't already have one.
>
> Yes please do and if possible attach a Test Plan as close to possible to
your current one and anonymize data in it.


> Thanks
> Chaitanya M Bhatt
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Philippe Mouawad <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> > Which version of JMeter are you using ?
> >
> > Can you attach your test plan to a bugzilla or show a description of it ?
> >
> > As for what you are saying, I have already used jmeter with a machine
> > simular to the configuration you are describing and went up to 4000
> threads
> > and memory was not the limit in my case,
> > so you should investigate your test plan first particularly if you are
> > talking about Perm Gen as it's not the kind of memory that is highly
> > consumed except if you are using Javascript for example.
> >
> >    - What kind of Test Elements are you using ?
> >    - Are you using third party plugins?
> >    - Which listeners have you setup
> >    - Are you using XML or CSV output
> >
> >
> > As for what you are saying regarding "*This is a frustrating problem
> which
> > has been overlooked for a long time.*", please see:
> >
> >    - http://wiki.apache.org/jmeter/JMeterPerformance
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Philippe
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 8:40 PM, chaitanya bhatt
> > <[email protected]>wrote:
> >
> > > Group,
> > >
> > > I have noticed that Jmeter uses unreasonable amount of memory per
> thread.
> > > Even if you strip off loggers/result tree etc. you would still see a
> huge
> > > consumption of memory. I monitored the Jmeter memory heap and tuned the
> > JVM
> > > as much as possible. In spite of this I noticed that the tenured
> > generation
> > > of the heap is always packed with objects of huge size. Lots of classes
> > are
> > > loaded dynamically which is causing high occupancy in perm gen.
> > >
> > > I am working on another home grown tool which uses HTTPClient library
> to
> > > generate load. Using this home grown tool I can generate 4000 instances
> > per
> > > machine (64 bit with 32Gb ram and 16 CPU cores). But Jmeter on the
> > contrary
> > > fails to scale to a mere 1/10th of the target user load.
> > >
> > > This is a frustrating problem which has been overlooked for a long
> time.
> > >
> > > Can something be done about this?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Chaitanya M Bhatt
> > > http://performancecompetence.com
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cordialement.
> > Philippe Mouawad.
> >
>



-- 
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.

Reply via email to