Hi
cool , thanks.
regards
deepak

On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 4:31 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 11/01/2010, sebb <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 10/01/2010, Deepak Shetty <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > hi
> >  >  so what do you think is the cause behind latency being reported as
> 0(is it
> >  >  the granularity)?
> >
> >
> > Yes
> >
> >
> >  > a quick glance through the code showed that latencyEnd is
> >  >  not called if the content length isn't 0 and some property
> >  >  httpsampler.obey_contentlength is set to true  , but i dont think
> this
> >  >  property is set by default
> >
> >
> > Oops!
> >
> >  No, that is not the default - I've run a test that shows non-zero
> >  latency for 200 and 304 status returns.
> >
>
> The obey_contentlength property only applies if the content-length is zero.
> But it's a good idea to call latencyEnd for this case (and an error
> case) - which is now done.
>
> >  >
> >  >  regards
> >  >
> >  > deepak
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >  On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 3:51 AM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote:
> >  >
> >  >  > On 10/01/2010, Deepak Shetty <[email protected]> wrote:
> >  >  > > I guess someone familiar with the code base would have to reply ,
> I guess
> >  >  > >  latency may not be calculated if the status code is not in 2xx.
> >  >  >
> >  >  > Yes, it is calculated for both HTTP Samplers.
> >  >  >
> >  >  > >  Alternately its possible that the latency is an extremely small
> value (<
> >  >  > 1ms
> >  >  > >  which is the granularity for older JVMs) since the server is
> simply
> >  >  > >  returning you a status which is why you see zero(means less than
> 1 ms).
> >  >  >
> >  >  > Timer granularity may be a lot higher than 1ms.
> >  >  >
> >  >  > However, if the test plan is being run using Java 1.5 or later, the
> >  >  > code will automatically use System.nanoTime() for elapsed time
> >  >  > measurement, which should have much lower granularity.
> >  >  >
> >  >  > >  regards
> >  >  > >
> >  >  > > deepak
> >  >  > >
> >  >  > >
> >  >  > >  On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 10:37 PM, Jatin <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >  >  > >
> >  >  > >  > You are correct deepak , I had redirects in the first sampler.
> >  >  > Observerd
> >  >  > >  > the HTTP redirection status code in the view results listener.
> After
> >  >  > >  > removing that sampler i had latency being shown correctly.
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  > Again , why is the latency shown 0 for redirects as even the
> redirects
> >  >  > >  > traverse across the internet and it takes time for Jmeter to
> get them
> >  >  > >  > process them.
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  > Thanks
> >  >  > >  > Jatin
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  > Deepak Shetty wrote:
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  >> Hi
> >  >  > >  >> I tested against www.google.com and I dont see a zero
> latency. did
> >  >  > you
> >  >  > >  >> verify with View Results Tree that you are indeed getting
> Google's
> >  >  > home
> >  >  > >  >> page
> >  >  > >  >> (no redirects/errors or anything)? are you seeing this
> behavior for
> >  >  > all
> >  >  > >  >> external sites?
> >  >  > >  >>
> >  >  > >  >> The elapsed time = latency +( time from 1st byte to last byte
> >  >  > received).
> >  >  > >  >> Any combination of value is possible , with elapsed time
> always
> >  >  > greater
> >  >  > >  >> than
> >  >  > >  >> latency.
> >  >  > >  >>
> >  >  > >  >> regards
> >  >  > >  >> deepak
> >  >  > >  >>
> >  >  > >  >>
> >  >  > >  >> On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 10:11 PM, Jatin <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >  >  > >  >>
> >  >  > >  >>
> >  >  > >  >>
> >  >  > >  >>> I was testing from my home laptop. My internet speed is 256
> kbps. I
> >  >  > >  >>> recorded the home page of google.com and was replaying it
> which had
> >  >  > 9
> >  >  > >  >>> samplers to access all the contents of the home page. I am
> confused
> >  >  > on
> >  >  > >  >>> one
> >  >  > >  >>> point , the Elapsed time is mostly above 400ms for the first
> sampler
> >  >  > >  >>> where
> >  >  > >  >>> as the latency for this sampler is always 0 no matter how
> many times
> >  >  > i
> >  >  > >  >>> loop.
> >  >  > >  >>> Both Elapsed time and latency have one thing in common which
> is that
> >  >  > both
> >  >  > >  >>> take into account the delay happening because of the
> response
> >  >  > getting
> >  >  > >  >>> from
> >  >  > >  >>> across the internet, then how come latency is 0 all the time
> while
> >  >  > the
> >  >  > >  >>> elapsed time is more than 400ms for most of the time.
> >  >  > >  >>>
> >  >  > >  >>> Thanks
> >  >  > >  >>> Jatin
> >  >  > >  >>>
> >  >  > >  >>>
> >  >  > >  >>> Deepak Shetty wrote:
> >  >  > >  >>>
> >  >  > >  >>>
> >  >  > >  >>>
> >  >  > >  >>>> if you are testing this out within your intranet , its
> possible you
> >  >  > >  >>>> could
> >  >  > >  >>>> see extremely low or zero values.
> >  >  > >  >>>> regards
> >  >  > >  >>>> deepak
> >  >  > >  >>>>
> >  >  > >  >>>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 2:59 AM, Jatin <
> [email protected]>
> >  >  > wrote:
> >  >  > >  >>>>
> >  >  > >  >>>>
> >  >  > >  >>>>
> >  >  > >  >>>>
> >  >  > >  >>>>
> >  >  > >  >>>>> Hi all
> >  >  > >  >>>>>
> >  >  > >  >>>>> I had a recorded script that will access the home page of
> a site.
> >  >  > The
> >  >  > >  >>>>> listener that i was using was a graph results listener. I
> wanted
> >  >  > to
> >  >  > >  >>>>> save
> >  >  > >  >>>>> the
> >  >  > >  >>>>> results in a csv file for only two variables namely:
> latency and
> >  >  > >  >>>>> Elapsed
> >  >  > >  >>>>> time. So in the configure dialog only selected these two
> >  >  > parameters and
> >  >  > >  >>>>> obtained a csv file.
> >  >  > >  >>>>>
> >  >  > >  >>>>> My test plan organization was comprised of 9 HTTP samplers
> in one
> >  >  > >  >>>>> thread
> >  >  > >  >>>>> group with all the samplers put into a loop controller
> looping
> >  >  > forever.
> >  >  > >  >>>>> For
> >  >  > >  >>>>> all the tests that were looping in the controller i
> noticed that
> >  >  > for
> >  >  > >  >>>>> the
> >  >  > >  >>>>> first sampler the latency was always 0 even though the
> elapsed
> >  >  > time was
> >  >  > >  >>>>> around 400ms but not less than that. Is the latency value
> correct
> >  >  > since
> >  >  > >  >>>>> for
> >  >  > >  >>>>> both these parameters the response has to be fetched from
> the
> >  >  > server
> >  >  > >  >>>>> and
> >  >  > >  >>>>> there could be delay in receiving the response. Please let
> me know
> >  >  > if i
> >  >  > >  >>>>> am
> >  >  > >  >>>>> missing something here.
> >  >  > >  >>>>>
> >  >  > >  >>>>> Some test run samples are as below :
> >  >  > >  >>>>>
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 459,0
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 140,137
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 63,40
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 179,134
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 137,137
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 120,120
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 53,39
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 40,40
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 113,113
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 275,0
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 157,154
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 62,40
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 540,144
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 149,148
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 33,33
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 53,38
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 37,37
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 113,113
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 470,0
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 159,155
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 62,39
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 178,133
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 176,176
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 120,120
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 54,39
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 38,37
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 113,113
> >  >  > >  >>>>>
> >  >  > >  >>>>>
> >  >  > >  >>>>> Thanks
> >  >  > >  >>>>> Jatin
> >  >  > >  >>>>>
> >  >  > >  >>>>>
> >  >  >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  >  > >  >>>>> 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]
> >  >  > >  >>>
> >  >  > >  >>>
> >  >  > >  >>>
> >  >  > >  >>>
> >  >  > >  >>
> >  >  > >  >>
> >  >  > >  >>
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  >  > >  > 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]
> >  >  >
> >  >  >
> >  >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to