The company I work on compromises to deliver 99% of their service responses in less than 1 second and 99.9% or their responses in less that 2 seconds. How can I make Locust report if this rule has been broken for any of the virtual users?
My first approach would be to make a method in my user (inherited
from locust.HttpLocust) that will detect when this event happens and
record it in a user-based log. I think this would work but if I have
1000 user it means I will have 1000 different log files.
A second approach would be to create a single event log, but I guess
that would require me to deal with asynchronos IO handling. I guess
there must be a more pythonesque way.
Locust and performance newbie here. Sorry if my question is misguided.
You can add duration checks at the end of each #task like:
#task
def service_request(self):
r = self.client.get("/your/service/path")
assert r.elapsed < datetime.timedelta(seconds = 1), "Request took more than 1 second"
This way you will have a report on individual HTTP Requests level with regards to which ones are successful and which tool > 1 second.
More information: Locust Assertions - A Complete User Manual
Alternatively you can try considering running your test using Taurus tool as a wrapper. Taurus has powerful and flexible Pass/Fail Criteria subsystem which analyses the results on-the-fly and returns a non-zero exit status code which can be used as an indicator of failure for shell scripts or continuous integration solutions.
Related
currently I have started working with Locust. I follow the class-picker docs and practice with a simple test, but quickly realized that every time I increase the number of users during the test, Locust will reset the statistics table. Besides, Locust behevior of ramping up users is quite strange: instead of increasing from 2 users to 5 users, it set the number of users to 0 first and then increase to 5. Is that an obvious thing when running Locust in class-picker mode?
Here is test.py
from locust import HttpUser, constant, task
class MyReqRes1(HttpUser):
wait_time = constant(1)
host = "http://example.com"
#task
def get_users(self):
res = self.client.get("/hello")
print(res.status_code)
class MyReqRes2(HttpUser):
wait_time = constant(1)
host = "http://example.com"
#task
def get_users(self):
res = self.client.get("/world")
print(res.status_code)
And here is my command to run:
locust -f test.py --class-picker
I am trying to keep Locust ramping up users normally (the way it do without --class-picker arguments) and keep the statistic table as well.
The user class UI picker is designed to let you choose a user class to use for the test run. This means that user class will be used for the whole duration of the test. If you want to choose a different user class, you need to start a new test which results in the behavior you described: Locust stops all currently running users, resets the stats, switches user classes, starts the new test by spawning new users at your defined spawn rate to reach the number of desired users.
In other words, it's designed to let you have multiple different test scenarios defined in the same file and let you choose the one you want at run time.
The user class UI picker does not allow you to choose one user class, start a test and get X number of users, choose another class, add Y users, choose another class, add Z users, end up with X+Y+Z running users, which sounds like what you're trying to do. There is not currently a way to accomplish that.
Of course, you're welcome to put together a pull request with that kind of behavior and it can be reviewed and perhaps included in a future version.
I would like to measure the coverage of my Python code which gets executed in the production system.
I want an answer to this question:
Which lines get executed often (hot spots) and which lines are never used (dead code)?
Of course this must not slow down my production site.
I am not talking about measuring the coverage of tests.
I assume you are not talking about test suite code coverage which the other answer is referring to. That is a job for CI indeed.
If you want to know which code paths are hit often in your production system, then you're going to have to do some instrumentation / profiling. This will have a cost. You cannot add measurements for free. You can do it cheaply though and typically you would only run it for short amounts of time, long enough until you have your data.
Python has cProfile to do full profiling, measuring call counts per function etc. This will give you the most accurate data but will likely have relatively high impact on performance.
Alternatively, you can do statistical profiling which basically means you sample the stack on a timer instead of instrumenting everything. This can be much cheaper, even with high sampling rate! The downside of course is a loss of precision.
Even though it is surprisingly easy to do in Python, this stuff is still a bit much to put into an answer here. There is an excellent blog post by the Nylas team on this exact topic though.
The sampler below was lifted from the Nylas blog with some tweaks. After you start it, it fires an interrupt every millisecond and records the current call stack:
import collections
import signal
class Sampler(object):
def __init__(self, interval=0.001):
self.stack_counts = collections.defaultdict(int)
self.interval = interval
def start(self):
signal.signal(signal.VTALRM, self._sample)
signal.setitimer(signal.ITIMER_VIRTUAL, self.interval, 0)
def _sample(self, signum, frame):
stack = []
while frame is not None:
formatted_frame = '{}({})'.format(
frame.f_code.co_name,
frame.f_globals.get('__name__'))
stack.append(formatted_frame)
frame = frame.f_back
formatted_stack = ';'.join(reversed(stack))
self.stack_counts[formatted_stack] += 1
signal.setitimer(signal.ITIMER_VIRTUAL, self.interval, 0)
You inspect stack_counts to see what your program has been up to. This data can be plotted in a flame-graph which makes it really obvious to see in which code paths your program is spending the most time.
If i understand it right you want to learn which parts of your application is used most often by users.
TL;DR;
Use one of the metrics frameworks for python if you do not want to do it by hand. Some of them are above:
DataDog
Prometheus
Prometheus Python Client
Splunk
It is usually done by function level and it actually depends on application;
If it is a desktop app with internet access:
You can create a simple db and collect how many times your functions are called. For accomplish it you can write a simple function and call it inside every function that you want to track. After that you can define an asynchronous task to upload your data to internet.
If it is a web application:
You can track which functions are called from js (mostly preferred for user behaviour tracking) or from web api. It is a good practice to start from outer to go inner. First detect which end points are frequently called (If you are using a proxy like nginx you can analyze server logs to gather information. It is the easiest and cleanest way). After that insert a logger to every other function that you want to track and simply analyze your logs for every week or month.
But you want to analyze your production code line by line (it is a very bad idea) you can start your application with python profilers. Python has one already: cProfile.
Maybe make a text file and through your every program method just append some text referenced to it like "Method one executed". Run the web application like 10 times thoroughly as a viewer would and after this make a python program that reads the file and counts a specific parts of it or maybe even a pattern and adds it to a variable and outputs the variables.
I have a script that in the end executes two functions. It polls for data on a time interval (runs as daemon - and this data is retrieved from a shell command run on the local system) and, once it receives this data will: 1.) function 1 - first write this data to a log file, and 2.) function 2 - observe the data and then send an email IF that data meets certain criteria.
The logging will happen every time, but the alert may not. The issue is, in cases that an alert needs to be sent, if that email connection stalls or takes a lengthy amount of time to connect to the server, it obviously causes the next polling of the data to stall (for an undisclosed amount of time, depending on the server), and in my case it is very important that the polling interval remains consistent (for analytics purposes).
What is the most efficient way, if any, to keep the email process working independently of the logging process while still operating within the same application and depending on the same data? I was considering creating a separate thread for the mailer, but that kind of seems like overkill in this case.
I'd rather not set a short timeout on the email connection, because I want to give the process some chance to connect to the server, while still allowing the logging to be written consistently on the given interval. Some code:
def send(self,msg_):
"""
Send the alert message
:param str msg_: the message to send
"""
self.msg_ = msg_
ar = alert.Alert()
ar.send_message(msg_)
def monitor(self):
"""
Post to the log file and
send the alert message when
applicable
"""
read = r.SensorReading()
msg_ = read.get_message()
msg_ = read.get_message() # the data
if msg_: # if there is data in general...
x = read.get_failed() # store bad data
msg_ += self.write_avg(read)
msg_ += "==============================================="
self.ctlog.update_templog(msg_) # write general data to log
if x:
self.send(x) # if bad data, send...
This is exactly the kind of case you want to use threading/subprocesses for. Fork off a thread for the email, which times out after a while, and keep your daemon running normally.
Possible approaches that come to mind:
Multiprocessing
Multithreading
Parallel Python
My personal choice would be multiprocessing as you clearly mentioned independent processes; you wouldn't want a crashing thread to interrupt the other function.
You may also refer this before making your design choice: Multiprocessing vs Threading Python
Thanks everyone for the responses. It helped very much. I went with threading, but also updated the code to be sure it handled failing threads. Ran some regressions and found that the subsequent processes were no longer being interrupted by stalled connections and the log was being updated on a consistent schedule . Thanks again!!
The Amazon API limit is apparently 1 req per second or 3600 per hour. So I implemented it like so:
while True:
#sql stuff
time.sleep(1)
result = api.item_lookup(row[0], ResponseGroup='Images,ItemAttributes,Offers,OfferSummary', IdType='EAN', SearchIndex='All')
#sql stuff
Error:
amazonproduct.errors.TooManyRequests: RequestThrottled: AWS Access Key ID: ACCESS_KEY_REDACTED. You are submitting requests too quickly. Please retry your requests at a slower rate.
Any ideas why?
This code looks correct, and it looks like 1 request/second limit is still actual:
http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSECommerceService/latest/DG/TroubleshootingApplications.html#efficiency-guidelines
You want to make sure that no other process is using the same associate account. Depending on where and how you run the code, there may be an old version of the VM, or another instance of your application running, or maybe there is a version on the cloud and other one on your laptop, or if you are using a threaded web server, there may be multiple threads all running the same code.
If you still hit the query limit, you just want to retry, possibly with the TCP-like "additive increase/multiplicative decrease" back-off. You start by setting extra_delay = 0. When request fails, you set extra_delay += 1 and sleep(1 + extra_delay), then retry. When it finally succeeds, set extra_delay = extra_delay * 0.9.
Computer time is funny
This post is correct in saying "it varies in a non-deterministic manner" (https://stackoverflow.com/a/1133888/5044893). Depending on a whole host of factors, the time measured by a processor can be quite unreliable.
This is compounded by the fact that Amazon's API has a different clock than your program does. They are certainly not in-sync, and there's likely some overlap between their "1 second" time measurement and your program's. It's likely that Amazon tries to average out this inconsistency, and they probably also allow a small bit of error, maybe +/- 5%. Even so, the discrepancy between your clock and theirs is probably triggering the ACCESS_KEY_REDACTED signal.
Give yourself some buffer
Here are some thoughts to consider.
Do you really need to hit the Amazon API every single second? Would your program work with a 5 second interval? Even a 2-second interval is 200% less likely to trigger a lockout. Also, Amazon may be charging you for every service call, so spacing them out could save you money.
This is really a question of "optimization" now. If you use a constant variable to control your API call rate (say, SLEEP = 2), then you can adjust that rate easily. Fiddle with it, increase and decrease it, and see how your program performs.
Push, not pull
Sometimes, hitting an API every second means that you're polling for new data. Polling is notoriously wasteful, which is why Amazon API has a rate-limit.
Instead, could you switch to a queue-based approach? Amazon SQS can fire off events to your programs. This is especially easy if you host them with Amazon Lambda.
This is probably a truly basic thing that I'm simply having an odd time figuring out in a Python 2.5 app.
I have a process that will take roughly an hour to complete, so I made a backend. To that end, I have a backend.yaml that has something like the following:
-name: mybackend
options: dynamic
start: /path/to/script.py
(The script is just raw computation. There's no notion of an active web session anywhere.)
On toy data, this works just fine.
This used to be public, so I would navigate to the page, the script would start, and time out after about a minute (HTTP + 30s shutdown grace period I assume, ). I figured this was a browser issue. So I repeat the same thing with a cron job. No dice. Switch to a using a push queue and adding a targeted task, since on paper it looks like it would wait for 10 minutes. Same thing.
All 3 time out after that minute, which means I'm not decoupling the request from the backend like I believe I am.
I'm assuming that I need to write a proper Handler for the backend to do work, but I don't exactly know how to write the Handler/webapp2Route. Do I handle _ah/start/ or make a new endpoint for the backend? How do I handle the subdomain? It still seems like the wrong thing to do (I'm sticking a long-process directly into a request of sorts), but I'm at a loss otherwise.
So the root cause ended up being doing the following in the script itself:
models = MyModel.all()
for model in models:
# Magic happens
I was basically taking for granted that the query would automatically batch my Query.all() over many entities, but it was dying at the 1000th entry or so. I originally wrote it was computational only because I completely ignored the fact that the reads can fail.
The actual solution for solving the problem we wanted ended up being "Use the map-reduce library", since we were trying to look at each model for analysis.