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

Improve coordinated omission handling #87

Open
sbordet opened this issue Jun 1, 2021 · 2 comments
Open

Improve coordinated omission handling #87

sbordet opened this issue Jun 1, 2021 · 2 comments

Comments

@sbordet
Copy link
Member

sbordet commented Jun 1, 2021

The load generator compensates for external pauses that cause missing samples by calculating the required samples to send in the next iteration.

However, the send time is not the intended send time, but rather it is always the actual send time.

When the resource rate is non-zero, the intended send time should be used.

@sbordet
Copy link
Member Author

sbordet commented Jun 1, 2021

A non-trivial glitch with the "intended" send time is that response times can now be negative.

This may happen when the load generator under-sleeps, the intended time is far in the future, and the response time comes back before the intended send time.

Yes, TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS.sleep(value) may return earlier than expected.

@sbordet
Copy link
Member Author

sbordet commented Jun 1, 2021

Also, when using the intended send time, the load generator pauses are taken into account in the response times.
If the goal is to measure the server response times, the fact that the load generator pauses is not a fault of the server.
Using the actual send time will avoid to take into account the load generator pauses.

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