jmeter-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From UBIK LOAD PACK Support <supp...@ubikloadpack.com>
Subject Re: Backend Listener and reduced throughput
Date Wed, 16 Dec 2015 14:53:28 GMT
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Bhadauria, Tarun Kumar <
tarun.kumar.bhadauria@zalando.de> wrote:

> @Steven
> Given that I run test in distributed mode, I was hoping that the
> controller machine would push stats to influx db after it receives results
> from agents pumping the load and this should not have
>
any impact on test results, but that does not seem to be the case here Or I
> missed something.
>

As per my explanation in previous mail you can understand the impact

>
> @UBIK
> Where can I set Async Queue Size?
>
In BackendListener GUI

>
>
> Thanks
> Tarun K
>
> On 16 December 2015 at 14:47, UBIK LOAD PACK Support <
> support@ubikloadpack.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>> Did you try playing with Async Queue Size 5000 might be very short for a
>> test that has no timer?
>>
>> The difference can be explained by many factors:
>>
>>    - Network quality between JMeter and the InfluxDB or Graphite server
>>    - Number of Samples that you track
>>    - The queue size, if you test is at high throughput (no timer), then
>> the
>>    Async Queue Size will slow down compared to no using backend listener.
>>    - Bear in mind also that Increasing Async Queue Size will increase
>>
>>    memory footprint
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Steven Swor <sworisbreathing@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Generally speaking, performance degradation is a known issue with all
>> > listeners (more processing = more cpu cycles consumed per loop).
>> However,
>> > with the GraphiteBackendListener(
>> >
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/jmeter/blob/v2_13/src/components/org/apache/jmeter/visualizers/backend/graphite/GraphiteBackendListenerClient.java
>> > ),
>> > there seems to be a lot of thread synchronization going on, which could
>> > potentially be contributing to a performance degradation. It's hard to
>> say
>> > for sure, though, without doing some actual measurements on it.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 8:45 PM, Bhadauria, Tarun Kumar <
>> > tarun.kumar.bhadauria@zalando.de> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Test Summary -
>> > >
>> > > Jmeter Version - 2.13
>> > > Jmeter Machines - 10 AWS EC2 m4.4xlarge instances
>> > > Number of threads on each instance 72 hence in total 720 threads in
>> > > distributed mode
>> > > Test is executed in non GUI mode
>> > >
>> > > I was experimenting with Backend listener as described here
>> > > <http://jmeter.apache.org/usermanual/realtime-results.html> and came
>> > > across
>> > > drastic reduction in throughput against a static html file. These are
>> the
>> > > results are received for 5 minutes test -
>> > >
>> > > Throughput with backend listener - 5000/sec
>> > > Throughput without backend listener - 9800/sec
>> > >
>> > > I have repeated the test over a period of one week and test results
>> have
>> > > been consistent.
>> > >
>> > > I did not see any significant difference in load avg or cpu
>> utilization
>> > on
>> > > load agents with or without backend listener.
>> > >
>> > > Is JMeter performance degradation a known issue with Backend listener?
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards
>> Ubik Load Pack <http://ubikloadpack.com> Team
>> Follow us on Twitter <http://twitter.com/ubikloadpack>
>>
>>
>> Cordialement
>> L'équipe Ubik Load Pack <http://ubikloadpack.com>
>> Suivez-nous sur Twitter <http://twitter.com/ubikloadpack>
>>
>
>


-- 

Regards
Ubik Load Pack <http://ubikloadpack.com> Team
Follow us on Twitter <http://twitter.com/ubikloadpack>


Cordialement
L'équipe Ubik Load Pack <http://ubikloadpack.com>
Suivez-nous sur Twitter <http://twitter.com/ubikloadpack>

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