Hello, I could use something like Apache ab in Python ( https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/programs/ab.html ).
The reason why ab doesn't quite cut it for me is that I need to define a
pool of HTTP requests and I want the tool to run those (as opposed to
running the same request over and over again)
Does such a marvel exist?
Thinking about it, it doesn't necessarily need to be Python, but I guess
I would have a chance to tweak things if it was.
Hello, I could use something like Apache ab in Python ( https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/programs/ab.html ).
The reason why ab doesn't quite cut it for me is that I need to define
a pool of HTTP requests and I want the tool to run those (as opposed
to running the same request over and over again)
Does such a marvel exist?
Thinking about it, it doesn't necessarily need to be Python, but I
guess I would have a chance to tweak things if it was.
Thanks
Dino
I have used locust with success in the past.
https://locust.io
I actually have a Python program that does exactly this.
On 1/25/2023 1:21 PM, Thomas Passin wrote:
I actually have a Python program that does exactly this.
Thank you, Thomas. I'll check out Locust, mentioned by Orzodk, as it
looks like a mature library that appears to do exactly what I was hoping.
Great! Don't forget what I said about potential overheating if you
hit the server with as many requests as it can handle.
On 2023-01-25 16:30:56 -0500, Thomas Passin wrote:
Great! Don't forget what I said about potential overheating if you
hit the server with as many requests as it can handle.
Frankly, if you can overheat a server by hitting it with HTTP requests,
get better hardware and/or put it into a place with better airflow.
On 1/25/2023 7:38 PM, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
On 2023-01-25 16:30:56 -0500, Thomas Passin wrote:
Great! Don't forget what I said about potential overheating if you
hit the server with as many requests as it can handle.
Frankly, if you can overheat a server by hitting it with HTTP requests,
get better hardware and/or put it into a place with better airflow.
Frankly, if you have a server-grade machine then well and good but if
you are running a nice quiet consumer grade laptop - my development
machine - you need to be careful. We don't know what hardware the OP is using. And it's not servicing the requests per se that's the issue,
it's the heavy computing load that has to be done for each request. The
CPU is generally pegged at 100% for most or all of the test.
On 1/25/2023 1:33 PM, orzodk wrote:
I have used locust with success in the past.
https://locust.io
First impression, exactly what I need. Thank you Orzo!
On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 at 12:06, Thomas Passin <[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/25/2023 7:38 PM, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
On 2023-01-25 16:30:56 -0500, Thomas Passin wrote:
Great! Don't forget what I said about potential overheating if you
hit the server with as many requests as it can handle.
Frankly, if you can overheat a server by hitting it with HTTP requests,
get better hardware and/or put it into a place with better airflow.
Frankly, if you have a server-grade machine then well and good but if
you are running a nice quiet consumer grade laptop - my development
machine - you need to be careful. We don't know what hardware the OP is
using. And it's not servicing the requests per se that's the issue,
it's the heavy computing load that has to be done for each request. The
CPU is generally pegged at 100% for most or all of the test.
If you have to worry about thermals because of CPU load, then worry
about thermals because of CPU load. The HTTP request testing is
completely separate.
Load testing means putting a system under load. I'm not sure why you'd
be concerned about one specific possible consequence, rather than, I
dunno, just put the system under load and see how it performs?
On 1/25/2023 3:29 PM, Dino wrote:
Great! Don't forget what I said about potential overheating if you hit
the server with as many requests as it can handle.
On 1/25/2023 3:27 PM, Dino wrote:
On 1/25/2023 1:33 PM, orzodk wrote:
I have used locust with success in the past.
https://locust.io
First impression, exactly what I need. Thank you Orzo!
the more I learn about Locust and I tinker with it, the more I love it. Thanks again.
On 1/25/2023 7:38 PM, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
On 2023-01-25 16:30:56 -0500, Thomas Passin wrote:
Great! Don't forget what I said about potential overheating if you
hit the server with as many requests as it can handle.
Frankly, if you can overheat a server by hitting it with HTTP requests,
get better hardware and/or put it into a place with better airflow.
Frankly, if you have a server-grade machine then well and good but if
you are running a nice quiet consumer grade laptop - my development
machine - you need to be careful.
On Jan 26, 2023, at 11:02 AM, Grant Edwards <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2023-01-26, Thomas Passin <[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/25/2023 7:38 PM, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
On 2023-01-25 16:30:56 -0500, Thomas Passin wrote:
Great! Don't forget what I said about potential overheating if you
hit the server with as many requests as it can handle.
Frankly, if you can overheat a server by hitting it with HTTP requests,
get better hardware and/or put it into a place with better airflow.
Frankly, if you have a server-grade machine then well and good but if
you are running a nice quiet consumer grade laptop - my development
machine - you need to be careful.
A properly designed laptop with a non-broken OS will not overheat
regardless of the computing load you throw at it. The fan might get
annoying loud, but if it overheats either your hardware or OS needs
to be fixed.
A nice theory but nothing to do with the real world. I've had a number
of laptops that overheat (or would, if I let test program continue)
running this test program.
On 2023-01-26, Thomas Passin <[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/25/2023 7:38 PM, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
On 2023-01-25 16:30:56 -0500, Thomas Passin wrote:
Great! Don't forget what I said about potential overheating if you
hit the server with as many requests as it can handle.
Frankly, if you can overheat a server by hitting it with HTTP requests,
get better hardware and/or put it into a place with better airflow.
Frankly, if you have a server-grade machine then well and good but if
you are running a nice quiet consumer grade laptop - my development
machine - you need to be careful.
A properly designed laptop with a non-broken OS will not overheat
regardless of the computing load you throw at it. The fan might get
annoying loud, but if it overheats either your hardware or OS needs
to be fixed.
On 1/26/2023 11:02 AM, Grant Edwards wrote:
[...]
A properly designed laptop with a non-broken OS will not overheat
regardless of the computing load you throw at it. The fan might get
annoying loud, but if it overheats either your hardware or OS needs
to be fixed.
A nice theory but nothing to do with the real world. I've had a number
of laptops that overheat (or would, if I let test program continue)
running this test program.
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 at 03:34, Thomas Passin <[email protected]> wrote:
A nice theory but nothing to do with the real world. I've had a number
of laptops that overheat (or would, if I let test program continue)
running this test program.
Define "overheat". If all you're saying is "the fan began to whine and
I got annoyed so I shut off the program", that is absolutely NOT
overheating.
Or they just throttle the fans up and the CPU down to keep the core >temperature within limits?
On 1/26/2023 11:41 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 at 03:34, Thomas Passin <[email protected]> wrote:
A nice theory but nothing to do with the real world. I've had a number
of laptops that overheat (or would, if I let test program continue)
running this test program.
Define "overheat". If all you're saying is "the fan began to whine and
I got annoyed so I shut off the program", that is absolutely NOT overheating.
CPU core temperatures up to 95 deg C and rising rapidly, as reported by
a number of utilities including NZXT and CoreTemp. Max junction
temperature is given as 100 deg C, and I don't want to risk reducing the lifetime of my CPU.
Maybe five or ten minutes at or above 100 deg C every few months might
not make a noticeable lifetime difference, who knows? I don't want to
make a habit of it. I wouldn't drive my car very long with a low oil pressure warning active, either.
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 at 04:31, Thomas Passin <[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/26/2023 11:41 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 at 03:34, Thomas Passin <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> A nice theory but nothing to do with the real world. I've had a number >>>> of laptops that overheat (or would, if I let test program continue)
running this test program.
Define "overheat". If all you're saying is "the fan began to whine and
I got annoyed so I shut off the program", that is absolutely NOT
overheating.
CPU core temperatures up to 95 deg C and rising rapidly, as reported by
a number of utilities including NZXT and CoreTemp. Max junction
temperature is given as 100 deg C, and I don't want to risk reducing the
lifetime of my CPU.
Maybe five or ten minutes at or above 100 deg C every few months might
not make a noticeable lifetime difference, who knows? I don't want to
make a habit of it. I wouldn't drive my car very long with a low oil
pressure warning active, either.
Did you get a warning, or did you just decide to stop the test?
Did you continue the test and see what would happen?
Did you, when the temperature got up to 95°, check what the CPU's
clock frequency was? The easiest way to recognize thermal throttling
is a reduction in frequency while at 100% utilization.
Or did you just assume that, with a mere five degree buffer and your
own personal analysis, that the CPU was just seconds away from total destruction?
Did you get a warning, or did you just decide to stop the test?
(At least) one of the utilities, I forget which one, did show the
temperature in a danger zone.
On 26 Jan 2023, at 17:32, Thomas Passin <[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/26/2023 11:41 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 at 03:34, Thomas Passin <[email protected]> wrote: >>> A nice theory but nothing to do with the real world. I've had a numberDefine "overheat". If all you're saying is "the fan began to whine and
of laptops that overheat (or would, if I let test program continue)
running this test program.
I got annoyed so I shut off the program", that is absolutely NOT
overheating.
CPU core temperatures up to 95 deg C and rising rapidly, as reported by a number of utilities including NZXT and CoreTemp. Max junction temperature is given as 100 deg C, and I don't want to risk reducing the lifetime of my CPU.
Maybe five or ten minutes at or above 100 deg C every few months might not make a noticeable lifetime difference, who knows? I don't want to make a habit of it. I wouldn't drive my car very long with a low oil pressure warning active, either.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 at 06:54, Thomas Passin <[email protected]> wrote:
Did you get a warning, or did you just decide to stop the test?
(At least) one of the utilities, I forget which one, did show the
temperature in a danger zone.
I'm very curious as to which utility, and on what basis it called it "danger". Notably, whether there's any sort of actual manufacturer
threshold that that was based on.
Personally? Very dubious. Your entire premise is "five degrees MUST be
a problem", without any visible basis.
2. "What is Tjunction max temperature?"
Tjunction max is the maximum thermal junction temperature that a
processor will allow prior to using internal thermal control mechanisms
to reduce power and limit temperature. Activation of the processor's
thermal control system may cause performance loss as the processor
typically reduces frequency and power to prevent overheating. The
maximum junction temperature limit varies per product and usually is
between 100°C-110°C."
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000005597/processors.html
The utilities I used always stated a 100 deg limit for Tj.
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 at 14:21, Thomas Passin <[email protected]> wrote:
2. "What is Tjunction max temperature?"
Tjunction max is the maximum thermal junction temperature that a
processor will allow prior to using internal thermal control mechanisms
to reduce power and limit temperature. Activation of the processor's
thermal control system may cause performance loss as the processor
typically reduces frequency and power to prevent overheating. The
maximum junction temperature limit varies per product and usually is
between 100°C-110°C."
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000005597/processors.html
The utilities I used always stated a 100 deg limit for Tj.
Yeah, so "maximum" is "before performance loss", not "before damage".
On 26 Jan 2023, at 17:32, Thomas Passin <[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/26/2023 11:41 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 at 03:34, Thomas Passin <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> A nice theory but nothing to do with the real world. I've had a number >>>> of laptops that overheat (or would, if I let test program continue)Define "overheat". If all you're saying is "the fan began to whine and
running this test program.
I got annoyed so I shut off the program", that is absolutely NOT
overheating.
CPU core temperatures up to 95 deg C and rising rapidly, as reported by a number of utilities including NZXT and CoreTemp. Max junction temperature is given as 100 deg C, and I don't want to risk reducing the lifetime of my CPU.
Silicon junctions melt something like 400C ish not 100C.
The max you see is the operating temp of the CPU.
For intel CPU if you go beyond what the slow clocking can deal with the CPU turns itself off to prevent damage.
Intel did this to stop people asking for replacement parts when there cooling was at fault.
Barry
Maybe five or ten minutes at or above 100 deg C every few months might not make a noticeable lifetime difference, who knows? I don't want to make a habit of it. I wouldn't drive my car very long with a low oil pressure warning active, either.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 37:22:10 |
| Calls: | 12,109 |
| Files: | 15,006 |
| Messages: | 6,518,371 |