I have 2 subsequent request. If first request result is Success then i want to execute second request in JMETER else don't want to execute second request. So how do i do that? Any help will be appreciated.
Make sure you set Thread Groups Action to be taken on sample error set to "Start new Thread Group" , This will tell JMeter to stop executing subsequent samplers when a sampler fails.
you can use Assertions to verify whether the request is successful or not , When an Assertion is failed JMEter marks the saample as failed and it wont execute subsequent requests if you mention Start new Thread Group option in thread group Configuration
More information:
Thread Groups in JMeter
Related
In My Project I am using Quartz.net Scheduler (3.0.7), Now There are some automated verification process which reads the DB and process it and generate output based on few conditions, (You can take example of Email Sending Mechanism which sends email read from DB and Send to Respective mail address) Now If we assume There are 300 Request to be processed and each will take long time to complete, Now There is one feature required which pause the current execution of the job, what i want is that if from 300 requests 25 is completed and currently 26 is running so the job should complete the 26th execution but should stop rest of the request.
What I have tried is to implement the Pause and Interrupt methods of Quartz.net
i.e. await scheduler.PauseJob(jobKey); &
await scheduler.Interrupt(jobKey);
Which Can Pause the upcoming executions, If I can get any Event or Token into Job Execution Class, I can achieve what i want.
IInterruptableJob Has been removed from the Quartz.net
If anyone can help me on this.
From the migration guide:
IInterruptableJob interface has been removed. You need to check for IJobExecutionContext’s CancellationToken.IsCancellationRequested to determine whether job interruption has been requested.
So combining the pause and observing the token should work.
I am developing a webservice that alllows users to request validation reports. Report generation might take up to 20 hours per report. When a new validation request is posted, I return a 202 Accepted answer with Location set to a processing queue (e.g./queue/5) When the queue resource is polled some processing information is provided:
<queueResponse>
<status>QUEUED</status>
<queuePosition>1</queuePosition>
</queueResponse>
Once processing completes successfully and the queue is polled, a 303 see other will redirect to the created resource (at /reports/5 e.g.).
However if a processing error occurs on server, i simply return my queueResponse without redirect and status set to <status>ERROR</status>.
Is this the best way to comunicate a processing error to the client? Or should instead simply a 500 Internal Server Error returned when polling the queue for a failed validation task?.....
Your current solution is best. A 500 error for the queued process information would indicate that the request for that resource had failed, not the process it was reporting on.
postscript: If your API is still being defined, I would suggest FAILED instead of ERROR, as it sounds more permanent. Errors are potentially recoverable situations, failures are not.
I need to send Only one SUCCESS email when ALL the requests mentioned in Type A, B and C pass.
If any of the requests mentioned in ANY of the Type A, B or C fails, there shouldn't be any SUCCESS email, just the failure mail of that request.
You can add Mailer Visualizer with Failure Limit set to 0. Also set number in Success Limit as you need for getting success mail. You can add fake request that will fail and then you will get success mail only if the number of your requests succeeded.
Failure Limit
Once this number of failed responses is exceeded, a failure email is sent - i.e. set the count to 0 to send an e-mail on the first failure.
Success Limit
Once this number of successful responses is exceeded after previously reaching the failure limit, a success email is sent. The mailer will thus only send out messages in a sequence of failed-succeeded-failed-succeeded, etc.
Move your SUCCESS email SMTP Sampler into tearDown Thread Group
Put it under If Controller with the condition of ${__P(failure,)}
Add JSR223 Listener to your main Thread Group
Put the following code into "Script" area:
if (!prev.isSuccessful()) {props.put('failure', 'true')}
If any sampler in the main "Thread Group" fails it will set failure property to true therefore "SUCCESS" mail will be sent out only if there will be no failing requests
I implemented a https/REST provider in node.js using express. The function is calling a webservice, transforming/enhancing data and returning transformed data as csv using response. Execution time of one get request is between 4 minutes 30 seconds and 5 minutes. I want to test the implementation by calling the url.
Problem:
execution in google chrome fails since it runs to long. No option to
increase the time out value.
execution in modzilla firefox:
network.http.response.timeout changed. Now the request is executed
over and over again. Looks like the response is ignored completely.
execution in postman: changed settings->general->XHR timeout in ms(...) .
Nevertheless execution stops every time after the same amount of seconds with
message: "Could not get any response" .
My question: which tool(s) can I use for reliable testing of long running http REST requests?
curl has a --max-time in seconds setting which should do what you want.
curl -m 330 http://you.url
But it might be worth creating a background job and polling for completion of the background job instead. HTTP isn't best suited to long running tasks.
I suggest you to use Socket IO to async response with pub/sub when the csv file is ready In the client send the request and put a timeout of 6 minutes for example, the server in the request return an ack to confirm the file process start, when the file is ready, return with Socket IO the file, Socket IO can be integrated with express
http://socket.io/
Do you have control over the server? If so, you should alter how it operates. Instead of the initial request expecting a response containing the answer, your API should emit a token (a URI) from where the status of the operation can be obtained. The status will either be "in progress" or "completed; here's your answer: ..."
You make the problem (the long-running operation) into its own first-class entity on your server.
I have implemented a chain of executions and each execution will send a HTTP request to the server and does check if the response status is 2XX. I need to implement a synchronous model in which the next execution in the chain should only get triggered when the previous execution is successful i.e response status is 2xx.
Below is the snapshot of the execution chain.
feed(postcodeFeeder).
exec(Seq(LocateStock.locateStockExecution, ReserveStock.reserveStockExecution, CancelOrder.cancelStockExecution,
ReserveStock.reserveStockExecution, ConfirmOrder.confirmStockExecution, CancelOrder.cancelStockExecution)
Since gatling has asynchronous IO model, what am currently observing is the HTTP requests are sent to the server in an asynchronous manner by a number of users and there is no real dependency between the executions with respect to a single user.
Also I wanted to know for an actor/user if an execution in a chain fails due the check, does it not proceed with the next execution in the chain?
there is no real dependency between the executions with respect to a single user
No, you are wrong. Except when using "resources", requests are sequential for a given user. If you want to stop the flow for a given user when it encounters an error, you can use exitblockonfail.
Gatling does not consider the failure response from the previous request before firing next in chain. You may need to cover the entire block with exitBlockOnFail{} to block the gatling to fire next.