On 19 October 2013 16:47, Milamber <[email protected]> wrote: > > Le 19/10/2013 01:26, sebb a ecrit : > >> [Trying again - please do not hijack this thread.] >> >> The Constant Throughput Timer (CTT) calculates the desired wait time, >> and if this is less than zero - i.e. a sample should already have been >> generated - it could trigger the creation of a failed Assertion (or >> similar) >> showing the time difference. >> >> Would this be sufficient to detect all CO occurrences? > > > An option in CTT element which allow to mark as fail the(s) sampler(s) in > the scope with a less than zero wait time seems a good point to inform > users. > The failed message can indicate the delay to help users to fix the scenario > (i.e. add more VU and reduce frequency of CTT)
Or CTT would save the delay somewhere, and a new Assertion could be created to report it. That might work better if there are more places where delays could be detected. > Milamber > > >> If not, what other metric needs to be checked? >> >> Even if it is not the only possible cause, would it be useful as a >> starting point? >> >> I am assuming that the CTT is the primary means of controlling the >> sample request rate. >> If there are other elements that are commonly used to control the >> rate, please note them here. > > > > >> >> N.B: this thread is only for discussion of how to detect CO and how to >> report it. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
