Thanks a lot Philippe. We will check on this and get back. On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 4:02 AM, Philippe Mouawad < [email protected]> wrote:
> Hello, > You can adjust accuracy by setting in user.properties: > > - jmeter.reportgenerator.statistic_window = 20000 > > Caution : higher value provides a better accuracy but needs more memory. > > This is not a bug. > > We use DescriptiveStatistics from commons-math with a sliding window. > > So if after modifying this value you still face issue, please report and > open a bug at commons-math. > > Regards > > > On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 5:04 AM, Malith Jayasinghe < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Dear All, > > > > We have been using JMETER extensively for performance testing. > > > > All our performance reports are generated using the JMETER Dashboard. > > > > Recently, we have found out that there is an issue in > > the JMETER dashboard's *latency percentile calculation. * > > > > There is a significant difference in the actual percentile values and the > > values shown in the dashboard. We have verified this using "R" and in > fact, > > the values shown the JMETER aggregate report are correct. The values that > > appear in the JMETER Dashboard are not. > > > > We understand that JMETER Dashboard may be using a different algorithm > > (approximation) for percentile calculation. However, the problem is that > > that latency percentiles values calculated using this algorithm are not > > accurate (at least for certain scenarios). > > > > We have had a case where the Dashboard showing a 95% percentile value > 1000 > > ms. However, the correct value was 321 ms. > > > > The accuracy of percentile values are of utmost importance to us and we > > would kindly ask you to look into this issue and release a patch if > > possible. > > > > If you can implement the same algorithm used in the aggregate report > within > > the dashboard that will resolve this issue. > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Malith Jayasinghe > > > > > > -- > Cordialement. > Philippe Mouawad. >
