I will test this tonight. Massimo
On Aug 12, 12:48 pm, Thadeus Burgess <[email protected]> wrote: > In my testings the errors were actually 500 internal server errors, > not content length issues. These pages were dynamic in that they > returned information from the database, but it was always the exact > same 10 records. The content length was not one of the reported failed > requests types. I can even replicate this with the welcome app, just > add a friends table, and a sqltable on the default/index page, insert > some records, then run ab on the index page, it always return sthe > same thing, but will generate roughly 15% error ratios not related to > content length (since it stays the same) > > -- > Thadeus > > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 12:27 PM, mdipierro <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think I figure it. It is not a bug in web2py. The Content-Length is > > not computed by web2py but it is computed by the web server and it is > > computed correctly. > > > The length is actually different at each request. > > > This is because: > > 1) in forms it contains the CSRF token with is a uuid and is different > > at each request > > 2) forms that contain a date may have different rounding for seconds > > 3) pages with display [request], [response], etc also contain datetime > > info which have different length at every request > > > The second link Jonathan posted says: > > > "Quite often you may see in the statistics "Failed requests: 5" or > > similar, followed by a list of the types of failure: "(Connect: 0, > > Receive: 0, Length: 5, Exceptions: 0)". If the only type of failure > > that actually occurred is 'Length' then don't be alarmed. This simply > > means that each request (for the same URL) returned a different length > > response, which ab regards as suspicious. However it's perfectly > > normal for dynamic webpages, especially if they include the time or > > other very dynamic data on the page. " > > > This our case. > > > Case closed? > > > Massimo > > > On Aug 12, 12:00 pm, mdipierro <[email protected]> wrote: > >> You are the man. > > >> For the page I am considering the fail requests are not a real failure > >> but declare a content-length of 19383 (wrong) instead of 19384 > >> (correct). Let's continue investigate... > > >> Massimo > > >> On Aug 12, 11:53 am, Jonathan Lundell <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > On Aug 12, 2010, at 8:44 AM, David Marko wrote: > > >> > > Failed requests: 19 > >> > > (Connect: 0, Receive: 0, Length: 19, Exceptions: 0) > > >> > Even more reassurance: > > >> >http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1512304/failed-requests-by-length-... > > >> >http://alwaysthecritic.typepad.com/atc/2009/04/apache-bench-notes.html > > >> > The length variation should be checked, of course, but it may well be > >> > harmless. > > >> > If the length variation is under our control (cookie format, maybe?), > >> > perhaps we could make an effort to make it the same.
