I agree with your argument about pages downloaded per second Peter; in fact this graph is off by default in LoadRunner. But my company has used this as a metric (among others) for years and is not about to change. That's why I'm trying to find a JMeter equivalent.
-----Original Message----- From: Peter Lin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 5:30 PM To: JMeter Users List Subject: Re: Throughput in Aggregate report jmeter will measure the requests per second. that isn't the same as pages per second for a couple of reasons. 1. a page may have multiple images and stuff embedded 2. images are cached by the browser the first time it's loaded 3. not every page is the same, so page per second a poor measurement of load 4. bytes per second or requests per second is a better measurement 5. what happens when the pages change and a page ends up having more images? loadRunner is a good product. Pages downloaded per second isn't all that useful from a capacity and planning perspective. It is much better to measure bytes/second and requests/second. my bias opinion. peter On 12/13/06, rmiller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We use Pages Downloaded per Second as a performance metric in LoadRunner. > In > side by side tests with LoadRunner and JMeter there dosen't seem to be any > correlation between that metric in LoadRunner and Throughput in JMeter. > Can > someone please explain how to get the eaquivalent metric in JMeter? > > Regards, > Ron > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Throughput-in-Aggregate-report-tf2817925.html#a786 5207 > Sent from the JMeter - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
