...
| Expand |
|---|
| title | Initial mixed course test |
|---|
|
| Course Size | reqs | # | fails | Avg | Min | Max | Median | req/s | 95% |
|---|
| Large | GET_comment_list | 106 | 0(0.00%) | 864 | 263 | 4680 | 680 | 0 | 2700 | | | GET_thread | 6053 | 0(0.00%) | 213 | 156 | 1271 | 200 | 0.3 | 280 | | | GET_thread_list | 2928 | 240(7.58%) | 1012 | 175 | 5465 | 1000 | 0.2 | 1800 | | | PATCH_comment | 106 | 0(0.00%) | 1017 | 305 | 4738 | 790 | 0 | 2700 | | | PATCH_thread | 81 | 3(3.57%) | 681 | 167 | 4083 | 420 | 0 | 2000 | | Small | GET_comment_list | 3054 | 0(0.00%) | 247 | 143 | 1484 | 210 | 0.2 | 550 | | | GET_thread | 183499 | 1(0.00%) | 187 | 0 | 6247 | 180 | 28.1 | 250 | | | GET_thread_list | 97488 | 21(0.02%) | 501 | 141 | 6685 | 420 | 12.7 | 1100 | | | PATCH_comment | 3054 | 1(0.03%) | 368 | 173 | 4345 | 330 | 0.1 | 750 | | | PATCH_thread | 3305 | 43(1.28%) | 287 | 140 | 2584 | 250 | 0.2 | 570 |
The chart below is the SMES/ASLCx/1T2015 (1700 Threads, 3047 comments) loadtest by itself for reference. These numbers are not comparable since the test in the chart below was at 10 users vs 20 users in the above test. | Name | reqs | # | fails | Avg | Min | Max | Median | req/s | 95% |
|---|
| GET | GET_comment_list | 324 | 0(0.00%) | 221 | 139 | 1036 | 190 | 0.1 | 460 | | GET | GET_thread | 20485 | 0(0.00%) | 168 | 124 | 2079 | 170 | 12.7 | 220 | | GET | GET_thread_list | 10919 | 0(0.00%) | 461 | 132 | 1677 | 450 | 5.6 | 840 | | PATCH | PATCH_comment | 325 | 0(0.00%) | 348 | 176 | 1354 | 300 | 0.1 | 720 | | PATCH | PATCH_thread | 356 | 3(0.84%) | 272 | 134 | 895 | 230 | 0.2 | 500 |
|
Although only present on the larger courses, a significant amount of 500s were being returned. A solution has been proposed to include an index to account for this but for now in order to continue the load tests, the offending parameters "last_activity_at" and "asc" will be removed from out random selection. This also means that our thread retrieval for PATCHing (and DELETEing which has been disabled) will be less random, but sufficiently random. By removing these parameters, we hope to get rid of these 500s and see a performance improvement for large and small courses.
...
| Expand |
|---|
| title | TsinghuaX/00690242_2x/3T2014 (29 threads, 155 comments) |
|---|
|
 | Name | reqs | # | fails | Avg | Min | Max | Median | req/s | 95% |
|---|
| GET | GET_comment_list | 514 | 0(0.00%) | 176 | 133 | 514 | 170 | 0.2 | 240 | | GET | GET_thread | 29734 | 0(0.00%) | 164 | 126 | 2162 | 160 | 19.2 | 220 | | GET | GET_thread_list | 15738 | 0(0.00%) | 195 | 123 | 1427 | 150 | 10.1 | 340 | | PATCH | PATCH_comment | 512 | 0(0.00%) | 310 | 167 | 2377 | 290 | 0.4 | 520 | | PATCH | PATCH_thread | 506 | 8(1.56%) | 239 | 136 | 3293 | 220 | 0.3 | 380 |
|
After adding indices:
| Expand |
|---|
| Course | reqs | # | fails | Avg | Min | Max | Median | req/s | 95% | | Large | GET_comment_list | 60 | 0(0.00%) | 386 | 191 | 1095 | 330 | 0 | 760 | | | GET_thread | 3541 | 0(0.00%) | 240 | 9 | 1941 | 220 | 1.8 | 360 | | | GET_thread_list | 1620 | 238(12.81%) | 1037 | 187 | 5380 | 920 | 0.7 | 2200 | | | PATCH_comment | 60 | 0(0.00%) | 519 | 226 | 1131 | 480 | 0 | 970 | | | PATCH_thread | 65 | 0(0.00%) | 384 | 173 | 2059 | 320 | 0 | 770 | | Small | GET_comment_list | 1846 | 0(0.00%) | 240 | 152 | 1171 | 210 | 0.4 | 400 | | | GET_thread | 111004 | 0(0.00%) | 222 | -25 | 2395 | 200 | 26.1 | 340 | | | GET_thread_list | 59369 | 151(0.25%) | 603 | -25 | 5817 | 550 | 12.8 | 1200 | | | PATCH_comment | 1837 | 7(0.38%) | 402 | 182 | 2582 | 350 | 0.4 | 770 | | | PATCH_thread | 1995 | 35(1.72%) | 310 | 148 | 1611 | 270 | 0.4 | 550 |
|
NEXT STEPS:
Run with new index.
...