Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

PTE Driver nThread Bottleneck/Incompletion. Inability to Calculate Accurate TPS for Higher nThread Runs #8

Open
wfh19926658 opened this issue May 15, 2017 · 0 comments

Comments

@wfh19926658
Copy link

BC Topology: 1 Org, 1 Peer, 1 Ca, 1 Ord on bcfab2 w/ 10 IFLs, 48Gb Memory
While attempting to drive the above topology to max TPS, I continously encountered an issue with driving the peer to max TPS or CPU utilization. I tried multiple combinations of user input parameters (nThreads, constFreq, devFreq) to achieve the highest TPS possible. Although, I noticed using an "nThread" value higher than 20 threads produced the error:

"stderr: (node:36570) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: Unhandled promise rejection (rejection id: 3129): undefined" For every thread running.

This error indicated that the threads were not able to complete and therefore not able to produce the "eventRegister" message necessary for calculating TPS. In terms of driving the SUT, using more than 20 threads would still allow for proper container statistics and sampler data collection, but calculating the TPS to go along with it was not possible. For example, using 50+ threads would drive the SUT to ~ 50% CPU utilization, about the highest I was able to achieve. But only when nThread was < 20 was I able to get an accurate TPS. There are a few workarounds to patching this problem but it is very inconvenient that the PTE driver cannot produce an accurate TPS for more strenuous runs. If there are any more questions about the issue/error I am seeing, don't hesitate to contact me on sametime or email me at [email protected], and thanks for the help!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant