No sir.. my 30 users are not simultaneously run. They are concurrent. And
my response time is nothing less than 2 seconds with another 2 seconds of
think time added on top of it. So i wil never reach 600 MB. The max I can
reach is only 150MB that too in an ideal case.

Also not all 2MB is downloaded at the same moment as the concurrent calls
are only 6 for resources and the overall weight of all page resourcess
together is 2 MB.

On Saturday, October 21, 2017, <[email protected]> wrote:

> If your page has 2MB of data on it, and you are running 30 simultaneous
> users – that is 60MB per test of simultaneous data – which is roughly
> 600Mbits/sec – or 60% of your network’s bandwidth. That is substantial, and
> could account for your problem. There is no way you will get to 300
> simultaneous users if you are downloading 2MB per user – and you only have
> a 1Gb network. Remember, network speeds are referenced in “bits per
> second”, and there are ~10 bits per Byte of data (there are 8-bits per
> byte, plus some overhead – so I usually round it to 10-bits per byte). So 2
> mega “Bytes” is roughly 20 mega bits…
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Robin D. Wilson*
>
>
>
> *Cell: 512-426-3929*
>
>
>
> *From:* Ganesh Muralidhar [mailto:[email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>]
> *Sent:* Oct 20, 2017 9:44 A
> *To:* [email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>
> *Cc:* JMeter Users List <[email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>>
> *Subject:* Re: Load Test with embedded resources chokes CPU
>
>
>
> Our network switch is nothing less than 1GB and the testing is happening
> internal to the network. So no chance of network contention here.
>
>
>
> Secondly, after updating the JMeter version to 3.3 the CPU contention
> seems not to be appearing again. Also, as Antonio mentioned, the below
> mentioned bug fix sorted this.
>
>
>
> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59885
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 9:42 PM, <[email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>> wrote:
>
> Are you sure it's just CPU? It may be bandwidth for the network device
> that is constrained - and the CPU is trying to figure out where to put all
> the packets.
>
> Keep in mind, images (especially) are a lot of bytes worth of data. If
> your HTML is 10K, but you download a relatively small banner image - that
> can be 100K of additional data (e.g., more than 10X the workload). Of
> course that’s a lot more work for the system. A typical web page will have
> 10-20KB of "skeleton" framework, but could have several megabytes of images
> and non-HTML files. A multimedia page could have several times more of that
> if you include streaming resources like movies or sounds.
>
> --
> Robin D. Wilson
> Cell: 512-426-3929
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Antonio Gomes Rodrigues [mailto:[email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>]
> Sent: Oct 20, 2017 2:39 A
> To: JMeter Users List <[email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>>
> Cc: [email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>
> Subject: Re: Load Test with embedded resources chokes CPU
>
> Hi,
>
> Can you take a thread dump ?
>
> Antonio
>
> 2017-10-20 11:34 GMT+02:00 Bincy P S <[email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>>:
>
> > We have changed the JVM heap size to 2G , Jmeter version to 3.3 and tried
> > these test runs . I still see the same issue
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Philippe Mouawad <
> > [email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>> wrote:
> >
> > > What is the size of your JVM Heap ? If you didn't change it then it can
> > > explain your issues.
> > > Also why are you using an old version as 3.0, ? Last version is 3.3 ?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Bincy P S <[email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Jmeter Configuration :
> > > > Thread setting : 1 thread , 5 transaction controller ,each with 1
> HTTP
> > > > sampler. Home Page, PLP,PDP ,AddtoCart,View Cart
> > > > HTTP Request Sampler : tried with all Implementation,Download
> embedded
> > > > resources - retrieve embedded resources, parallel download - 6
> > > >
> > > > No other settings were changed
> > > >
> > > > jmeter version : 3.0
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Philippe Mouawad <
> > > > [email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > > What is your jmeter configuration ?
> > > > > Did you change any setting ?
> > > > > What is your jmeter version ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > Regards
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Bincy P S <[email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > A load test with downloading just the HTML scales upto 300 users
> on
> > > one
> > > > > > Load generator (8 Core, 8 GB RAM - CPU at 20% max and Memory at
> > 5%).
> > > > > > However, when a similar profile is tested with download of
> non-HTML
> > > > > > embedded resources (images, css, js, etc.,) along with HTML, the
> LG
> > > > gets
> > > > > > utilized to the max (100% CPU, Memory still at 20%) with just 30
> > > users.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Testing the same profiles with Load Runner, there is not much
> > > > difference
> > > > > on
> > > > > > LG performance between the 2 profiles
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > With Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bincy Suresh
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Cordialement.
> > > > > Philippe Mouawad.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > With Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Bincy Suresh
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cordialement.
> > > Philippe Mouawad.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > With Regards,
> >
> > Bincy Suresh
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Ganesh .N*
>
> *Bangalore*
>
> *Wireless:* *+91 9611906678*
>
>

-- 

*Ganesh .N*

*Bangalore*

*Wireless:* *+91 9611906678*

Reply via email to