Hi, thanks for the reply. I already corrected that formula, but it still doesn't change anything. I tried for example counting all samples in each 1000 milliseconds interval, like: first sample=1385731060500 last sample=1385731061394 difference=894 milliseconds samples=277 So I tried with: (277/894)*1000=~309 requests/second. But the first graphic, in the same period, shows a throughput of ~90.
2013/11/30 sebb <[email protected]> > On 29 November 2013 22:39, Pierpaolo Bagnasco > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm using JMeter client to test the throughtput of a certain workload > > (PHP+MySQL, 1 page) on a certain server. Basically I'm doing a "capacity > > test" with an increasing number of threads over the time. > > > > I installed the "Statistical Aggregate Report" JMeter plugin and this was > > the result (ignore the "Response time" line): [image: enter image > > description here] > > > > At the same time I used the "Simple Data Writer" listener to write a log > > file ("JMeter.csv"). Then I tried to "manually" calculate the throughput > > for every second of the test. > > > > Each line of "JMeter.csv" has this format: > > > > timestamp elaspedtime responsecode success bytes > > 1385731020607 42 200 true 325 > > ... ... ... ... ... > > > > The timestamp is referred to the time when the request is made by the > > client, and not when the request is served by the server. So I simply > > did: *totaltime > > = timestamp + elapsedtime*. > > That's wrong. > > timestamp + elapsedtime = end time *not* total time. > > The timestamp is the start time. > > > In the next step I converted the *totaltime* to a date format, like: > > *13:17:01*. > > > > I have more than 14K samples and with Excel I was able to do this > quickly. > > > > Then I counted how many samples there were for each second. Example: > > > > totaltime samples (requestsServed/second) > > 13:17:01 204 > > 13:17:02 297 > > ... ... > > > > When I tried to plot the results I obtained the following graphic: > [image: > > enter image description here] > > > > As you can notice it is far different from the first graphic. > > > > Given that the first graphic is correct, what is the mistake of my > > formula/procedure to calculate the throughput? > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
