jmeter-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Philippe Mouawad <philippe.moua...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Distributed testing and active threads over time
Date Wed, 05 Sep 2018 21:35:11 GMT
Hello,
This has been implemented today within:
- https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62684

No additional CSV field was needed.

It would be nice if you could review , test and give feedback.

Regards

On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 7:11 AM sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 1 July 2015 at 21:59, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Good idea Andrei indeed.
> >
> > How do you see it:
> >
> >    - Would we add a new field called :
> >       - jmeter.save.saveservice.injid composed of host:port
> >    - Or would we ad jmeter.save.saveservice.port and require users to
> set:
> >       - jmeter.save.saveservice.hostname=true
> >       - jmeter.save.saveservice.port=true
> >       - And compute the field from this.
>
> I prefer that.
>
> >
> > One thing I find a bit bad  is network traffic, as we repeat in batch
> mode
> > (default) this information uselessly
> >
> > For example for 100 results, we would transmit it 100 times while only 1
> > would be better.
>
> In which case the client would need to add the field back before
> storing the record.
>
> > Note this applies to other fields like:
> > jmeter.save.saveservice.filename=false
> >
> > But maybe it's another topic related to Network traffic optimization in
> > Distributed testing, some ideas:
>
> Yes, that should be a separate discussion.
>
> >    - Switch to Rest WS or Google Protobuf
> >    - Only send required data and no more serialized objects
> >    - ....
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 10:24 AM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 1 July 2015 at 09:11, Andrey Pokhilko <apc4@ya.ru> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for this initiative, I felt it painful for jp@gc, for
> >> > Loadosophia.org and for my new project Taurus.
> >> >
> >> > I would solve it with hostname+port pair in SampleResult, as it makes
> >>
> >> Using port is an excellent idea.
> >>
> >> Maybe as host:port as that is a standard way of representing them.
> >>
> >> > easier to map results to originating JMeter servers. Unique ID's would
> >> > also solve it, but it will require additional work to match ID back to
> >> > server. And ID's are not obvious, so it's bad user experience.
> >>
> >> Agreed.
> >>
> >> > Andrey Pokhilko
> >> >
> >> > On 07/01/2015 01:46 AM, Philippe Mouawad wrote:
> >> >> On Wednesday, July 1, 2015, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> On 30 June 2015 at 22:16, Philippe Mouawad <
> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >> >>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >>>> Hello,
> >> >>>> When we do distributed testing and need afterwards to analyze
> >> results, we
> >> >>>> need to know how much threads were running at the some point
in
> time
> >> by
> >> >>>> doing aggregation work, as illustrated here:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> - http://jmeter-plugins.org/wiki/ActiveThreadsOverTime/
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I am just illustrating this need by this particular plugin,
but
> this
> >> need
> >> >>>> is here whatever plugin or custom code is used to create this
> graph.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Currently as each server reports his own number of threads,
and
> this
> >> is
> >> >>>> then written to a file, we need a way to know that N number
of
> threads
> >> >>> are
> >> >>>> associated to X server.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I suggest that when a test starts, JMeter client (controller)
> computes
> >> >>> and
> >> >>>> sends to each server a unique ID, this id would then be stored
by
> the
> >> >>>> server and accessible under a property or function.
> >> >>> What's wrong with storing the hostname?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>  usability and see below
> >> >>>> This way, users would only have to add to their thread group
name
> this
> >> >>>> additional property without any other configuration.
> >> >>> Already possible; just use the hostname
> >> >>>
> >> >>>  Not enough if you have 2 servers on 1 host
> >> >>>> Another better options is to even remove the need for users
to add
> >> this
> >> >>>> function / property by appending this information automatically
> from
> >> the
> >> >>>> server in the thread name.
> >> >>> I don't understand what you are proposing here.
> >> >>
> >> >> jmeter client assigns a unique id to each server that the latter
> uses to
> >> >> name thread and appends to thread group value leading to unique
> values
> >> and
> >> >> possibility to copite the cumulated number of threads among all
> servers
> >> >>
> >> >>>> Thoughts ?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> --
> >> >>>> Regards.
> >> >>>> Philippe M
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cordialement.
> > Philippe Mouawad.
>


-- 
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message