I have this strange issue where sometimes if I make two AJAX requests to my Apache 2.2 server in rapid succession, the second request will wait for the first to finish before finishing.
Example, I have two requests, one that sleeps for 10 seconds and one that returns immediately. If I run the request that returns immediatly by itself it will always return within 300ms. However, if I call the request that takes 10 seconds, and then call the request that returns right away about 50% of the time the second request will wait until the first finishes and chrome will report that the request too about 10 seconds before receiving a response. The other half of the time the quick request will return right away.
I can't find any pattern to make it behave one way or another, it will just randomly block the quick AJAX requests sometimes, and other times it will behave as expected. I'm working on a dev server that only I am accessing and I've set several variables such as MaxRequestsPerChild to a high value.
Does anyone have any idea why Apache, seemingly at random, is turning my AJAX requests into synchronous requests?
Here is the code I'm running:
$.ajax({async:true,dataType:'json',url:'/progressTest',success:function(d){console.log('FINAL',d)}}); // Sleeps for 10 seconds
$.ajax({async:true,dataType:'json',url:'/progressTestStatus',success:function(d){console.log('STATUS',d)}}); // Takes ~300ms
And here are two screen shots. The first where it behaved as expected and the second where it waited for the slow process to finish first (in the example the timeout was set to 3 seconds).
UPDATE: Per the comments below - this appears to be related to Chrome only performing one request at a time. Any ideas why Chrome would set such a low limit on async requests?
The problem is not with Apache but with Google Chrome limiting the number of concurrent requests to your development server. I can only make guesses as to why it's limited to one request. Here are a couple:
1) Do you have many tabs open? There is a limit to the total number of concurrent connections and if you have many tabs making requests with KeepAlive you may be at that limit and can only establish one connect to your server. If that's the case you might be able to fix that by adding KeepAlive to your own output headers.
2) Do you have some extensions enabled. Some extensions do weird things to the browser. Try disabling all your extensions and making the same requests. If it works then enable them one at a time to find the culprit extension.
Related
We are currently conducting performance tests on both web apps that we have, one is running within a private network and the other is accessible for all. For both apps, a single page-load of the landing page or initial page only takes between 2-3 seconds on a user POV, but when we use blaze and JMeter, the results are between 15-20 seconds. Am I missing something? The 15-20 seconds result came from the Loadtime/Sample Time in JMeter and in Elapsed column if extracted to .csv. Please help as I'm stuck.
We have tried conducting tests on multiple PCs within the office premises along with a PC remotely accessed on another site and we still get the same results. The number of thread and ramp-up period is both set to 1 to imitate a single user only.
Where a delta exists, it is certain to mean that two different items are being timed. It would help to understand on your front end are you timing to a standard metric, such as w3c domComplete, time to interactive, first contentful paint, some other location, and then compare where this comes into play on the drilldown on the performance tab of chrome. Odds are that there is a lot occuring that is not visible that is being captured by Jmeter.
You might also look for other threads on here on how jmeter operates as compared to a "real browser" There are differences which could come into play affecting your page comparisons, particularly if you have dozens/hundreds of elements that need to be downloaded to complete your page. Also, pay attention to third party components where you do not have permission to test their servers.
I can think of 2 possible causees:
Clear your browser history, especially browser cache. It might be the case you're getting HTTP Status 304 for all requests in browser because responses are being returned from the browser cache and no actual requests are being made while JMeter always uses "clean" session.
Pay attention to Connect Time and Latency metrics as it might be the case the server response time is low but the time for network packets to travel back and forth is very high.
Connect Time. JMeter measures the time it took to establish the connection, including SSL handshake. Note that connect time is not automatically subtracted from latency. In case of connection error, the metric will be equal to the time it took to face the error, for example in case of Timeout, it should be equal to connection timeout.
Latency. JMeter measures the latency from just before sending the request to just after the first response has been received. Thus the time includes all the processing needed to assemble the request as well as assembling the first part of the response, which in general will be longer than one byte. Protocol analysers (such as Wireshark) measure the time when bytes are actually sent/received over the interface. The JMeter time should be closer to that which is experienced by a browser or other application client.
So basically "Elapsed time = Connect Time + Latency + Server Processing Time"
In general given:
the same machine
clean browser session
and JMeter configured to behave like a real browser
you should get similar or equal timings for the same page
I'm load testing a system with 500 virtual users. I've kept the "Ramp-Up period (in seconds)" option to zero. So, what I understand, JMeter will hit the system with 500 virtual users all at the same time. Please correct me if I'm wrong here.
Now, the summary report shows the average response time for the first page is ~100 seconds!. Which is more than a minute and a half of wait time. But while the JMeter is running, I manually went to the same page/url using a browser and didn't have to wait for that long. It was not even close, the page response was almost immediate for me.
My question is: is there any known issue for the average response time of the first page? Is it JMeter which is taking long to trigger that many users?
Thanks in advance.
--Ishtiaque
There is no issue in Jmeter related to first page response time.
Summary Report shows all response time details in Milliseconds, the value "100" seconds have you converted milliseconds to seconds?
Also in order to make sure that 500 users hit concurrently, use Synchronizing Timer.
Hope this will help.
While the response times will be accurate, you need to consider the affect of starting so many threads at once on both your server and your client.
500 threads to start at once is not insignificant n the client. If your server has the connections, it will start 500 threads as well.
Ramping over a period of time is more realistic loadwise, but still not really indicative of server capability until the threads have all started and settled in.
Databases can also require a settling in period which can affect response times.
Alternative to ramping is introducing a random wait at the start of each thread before firing the first sample. You can then choose not to ramp over time, but still expect resources on the client to suddenly come under load and change the settings if you hit limits. This will make the entire run much more realistic of typical behaviour. However, you need to determine if your use cases are typical.
Although the heap size is increased, i notice there is still longer time as compared to actual response time. Later i realised it was the probe effect (the extra time a tool generates due to test execution)
I have a specific use case which Im trying to solve using Node. The response time that I receive from NodeJS is not the one I expect.
The application is an express.js web application. The flow is as below
a. Request reaches the server.
b. Based on the parameter, backend REST Service is invoked.
c. The response of the REST Service has links to multiple other objects.
d. Navigate each of the link and agrregate the data.
e. This data is formatted (not much) and send to the client.
The actual test data-
The response from C has got 100 links and hence I make 100 parallel calls (Im using async.map). Each of the backend service responds in less than 30 msecs. But the overall response time for 100 requests is 4 seconds. This is considerably high.
What I have observed is :
The time difference between the first backend request and the last backend request is around 3 seconds. I believe that this is due to the fact that Node is single threaded and it takes 3 seconds to place all of the 100 http requests.
The code that I use to make parallel calls is given below
var getIndividualRecord = function(entity,callback1)
{
httpExecutor.executeRequest( entity.link.url, callback1);
}
var aggregateData = function(err, results)
{
callback(null, results);
}
async.map(childObjects, getIndividualRecord, aggregateData);
The childObjects is an array with 100 records. httpExecutor makes a REST invocation using request module.
Is there something wrong Im doing or is this a wrong use case for Node?
You're assumption is correct: node is single threaded, so while your HTTP requests happen in a nonblocking manner (requests are made right after the other without even waiting for the response from the server), they don't truly happen in simultaneously.
So, yes, it's probable it takes Node 3 seconds to get through all these requests and process them.
There are a few ways "around" this, which might work depending on your situation:
Could you use Node's cluster module to spawn multiple node apps and each do a portion of the work? Then you would be doing things simultaneously (since you have N Node processes going on).
Use a background queue mechanism (aka: Resque, Beanstalk) and have a background worker (or a process spawned with Cluster) to distribute the work (to Node worker processes waiting around to pick things off this queue)
Refactor your web app a little bit to deal with the fact that parts will take a while. Perhaps render most of the page then onload make an ajax request that fires off the 3 second route and then puts the results in some DOM element when the AJAX request comes back.
i have similar scenario and similar observation.
in my case I run node app using pm2. in app there are 2 sub servers (let's call them A and B). pm2 spawns 2 processes per each server. from a client i call server A, it calculates simple thing and call server B in async manner. when server B responds server A sends data back to client.
very simple scenario but when I used jmeter to create 1000 threads (where each thread makes 50 calls)to call server A I got average response around 4 sec (for 50000 calls).
server B responds after 50ms and I think this is the problem. during first 50ms nodejs processes lots of incoming requests and then it cannot quickly process responses from server B and incoming calls.
I would expect that application code is executed in single thread but there supposed to be background threads to deal with all the rest. it seems this is not the case.
I have an application running in CF8 which does calls to external systems like search engine and ldaps often. But at times some request never gets the response and is shown always in the the active request list.
Even tho there is request timeout set in the administration, its not getting applied to these scenarios.
I have around 5 request still pending to be finished for the last 20hours !!!
My server settings are as below
Timeout Requests after ( seconds) : 300 sec
Max no of simultaneous requests : 20
Maximum number of running JRun threads : 50
Maximum number of running JRun threads : 1000
Timeout requests waiting in queue after 300 seconds
I read through some articles and found there are cases where threads are never responded or killed. But i dont have a solid solution how can i timeout this or kill this automatically
really appreciated if you guys have some idea on this :)
The ColdFusion timeout does not apply to 'third party' connections.
A long-running LDAP query, for example, will take as long as it needs. When the calling template gets the result from the query your timeout will apply.
This often leads to confusion interpreting errors. You will get an error saying that whichever function after the long running request causes the timeout.
Further reading available here
You can (and probably should) set a timeout on the CFLDAP call itself. http://help.adobe.com/en_US/ColdFusion/9.0/CFMLRef/WSc3ff6d0ea77859461172e0811cbec22c24-7f97.html
Thanks, Antony, for recommending my blog entry CF911: Lies, Damned Lies, and CF Request Timeouts...What You May Not Realize. This problem of requests not timing out when expected can be very troublesome and a surprise for most.
But Anooj, while that at least explains WHY they don't die (and you can't kill them within CF), one thing to consider is that you may be able to kill them in the REMOTE server being called, in your case, the LDAP server.
You may be able to go to the administrator of THAT server and on showing them that CF has a long-running request, they may be able to spot and resolve the problem. And if they can, that may free the connection from CF and your request then will stop.
I have just added a new section on this idea to the bottom of that blog entry, as "So is there really nothing I can do for the hung requests?"
Hope that helps.
Okay, so we all know that most modern browsers (without tweaking) are set to 4 parallel HTTP requests at a time to a single domain/subdomain, but how does long-polling AJAX affect this?
Say I have a long-poll on a 15 second interval. While the browser is waiting for a response during those 15 seconds, does that still eat up one of the 4 parallel lines effectively making any new tabs or page loads open to only 3 parallel HTTP requests?
It's not always 4, often it's 2.
It is configurable to a higher number on the client side in many browsers.
Yes it does eat up one of the parallel connections.
You can have 2 concurrent requests via XHR..if you use more you might end up with unexpected results.
Use a Request Queue for more than 2 requests...each one being made after the previous one ends...
Some popular JS libraries implement a queue and can be used, or you could create one easily.