fdelmoro
Occasional Contributor
Joined 4 years ago
User Profile
User Widgets
Contributions
Results Interpretation
Hello guyz, I am using Loadninja to test how my application is going to behave in a 100 concurrent user scenario. I set up a duration based test with only one recorded script (to test for example the home page load) which runs during the test. While the test was running i tried to access my application many times with my own browser in which I configured the no caching option and the loading time that I experienced was totally different from the LoadNinja results under the voice "Avg. step duration", while it was totally in line with the LoadNinja report result marked as "Total nav timings (s)". The avg. step duration is calculated by LoadNinja as the sum of the total nav timing plus the think time, but considering that I only need to test the home page load, in my case the think time (which in Loadninja cannot be set to 0, but only minimized) is not a relevant metric. I exposed my doubts to the LoadNinja customer care, getting this feedback: "This corresponds to the definition of the “Think time” metric - the average time virtual users spent simulating pauses between user actions during the playback. Anyway, I think that using the “Think time” metric is not the right way to measure if page load times are within the expected boundaries. My recommendation would be to use SLA validations instead – they will be throwing errors if a step takes longer than expected and you’ll have an opportunity to measure the number of such errors". This answer seems to agree with us that "Think time” metric is not the right way to measure page load times performances", but it suggests to use the threshold SLA validation. From our direct experience the SLA threshold validation takes into account the think time, can you please confirm this hypotesis? If this is true, do you confirm the answer given above? (they suggested not to use think time as relevant metric but suggest a threshold validation that takes into account the think time).Solved1.3KViews1like1CommentRe: Doubts about "think time" interpretations
Hello, we got this feedback from the LoadNinja customer care: "This corresponds to the definition of the “Think time” metric - the average time virtual users spent simulating pauses between user actions during the playback. Anyway, I think that using the “Think time” metric is not the right way to measure if page load times are within the expected boundaries. My recommendation would be to use SLA validations instead – they will be throwing errors if a step takes longer than expected and you’ll have an opportunity to measure the number of such errors". This answer seems to agree with us that "Think time” metric is not the right way to measure page load times performances", but it suggests to use the threshold SLA validation. From our direct experience the SLA threshold validation takes into account the think time, can you please confirm this hypotesis? If this is true, do you confirm the answer given above? (they suggested not to use think time as relevant metric but suggest a threshold validation that takes into account the think time)3.1KViews1like0CommentsRe: Doubts about "think time" interpretations
Hi, thanks for the kind answer. Your answer seems reasonable, but could you please confirm us that the "think time" duration is not influenced by the page loading time? In other words: the time that a virtual user waits for the page to load is not included in the think time reported in final statistic summary? Thanks in advance3.3KViews0likes2CommentsDoubts about "think time" interpretations
Hi everybody, we have a question regarding the correct interpretation of the think time in the reports we are receiving after the end of a LoadNinja testing session. We performed a test in order to stress a single page of our application; in the Loadninja recorder script we only load the page including some validations just to be sure that te page is properly loaded. From the script recording, we see that we have a think time of around 2 seconds and we selected the "recorder think time option" for our test. On the reports that we attach here as example, we noticed that the avergage think time is around 8 seconds. Why is there this increase? If we load the same page on our browser while the LoadNinja test is running, we are experiencing a load time which is totally in line with the "Total nav timings (s)" reported in the final charts. For the sake of our performance test (single page load), should we consider the "total nav timing (s)" and ignore the think time? Or do we have to consider the "think time" as a relevant performance indicator?3.4KViews0likes4CommentsJavascript application caching during Load Tests
Hi! Our application is javascript based, so each new user downloads it at first access. We would like to know if, during tests iterations, Load Ninja caches javascript or if it clears cache, forcing a new full download at each step. Thank you in advanceSolved1.8KViews0likes4Comments