You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We might benefit from making it easier for k6 to allocate the required VUs for a constant-arrival-rate. It might not be easy as the number of VUs will depend on the URLs under test latency, how this also varies with increasing load...
There is a warning in the logs when there will not be enough VUs (WARN[0000] Insufficient VUs, reached 2 active VUs and cannot initialize more executor=constant-arrival-rate scenario=k6_workshop). However, the user might only be looking at the final report. And miss that warning.
#974 Should help clear up this info (I hope!). One way to avoid running the test with insufficient VUs would be to add an add a threshold to dropped_iterations with abortOnFail set to true.
Based on https://community.k6.io/t/getting-very-low-rps/5649/, https://community.k6.io/t/load-test-using-one-user-id-at-a-time-for-each-user-and-iteration/5626, and https://community.k6.io/t/k6-and-the-k6-reporter-do-not-log-accurately-highly-concurrent-requests/5600, help to interpret why the iterations/s or VU/s are not the expected, and how to estimate the
preAllocatedVUs
(to avoid having to define amaxVUs
- except in cloud?) would be useful.We might benefit from making it easier for k6 to allocate the required VUs for a constant-arrival-rate. It might not be easy as the number of VUs will depend on the URLs under test latency, how this also varies with increasing load...
For ramping arrival rate I think we could add what we have in k6-learn about the ramping effect.
In the meantime:
WARN[0000] Insufficient VUs, reached 2 active VUs and cannot initialize more executor=constant-arrival-rate scenario=k6_workshop
). However, the user might only be looking at the final report. And miss that warning.I'm not sure what we are missing in the docs, if we are. I'm just opening this to start the discussion in case we can improve something.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: