Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ramp-up period option in parallel batch execution mode #18

Closed
aztheque opened this issue Feb 25, 2016 · 3 comments
Closed

Ramp-up period option in parallel batch execution mode #18

aztheque opened this issue Feb 25, 2016 · 3 comments

Comments

@aztheque
Copy link

Currently in parallel batch execution mode, all features start running simultaneously (up to a maximum number of processes determined by gwen). It is useful, especially when combined with CSV data driven features, to identify and diagnose potential threading issues in underlying applications.

However, there are some situations where it would be beneficial to stagger the start times of these parallel run features. Especially, in the case where gwen features are used to simulate load (or simply speed up running features) on the underlying application and the actions performed in each feature would not occur under normal circumstances. E.g., multiple near-simultaneous login with same credentials.

It would be great if there was an option to configure the "ramp-up period" when running features in parallel batch execution mode.

bjuric added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 27, 2016
To support user request issue #18
@bjuric
Copy link
Contributor

bjuric commented Feb 27, 2016

@aztheque, we've implemented this in the pull request above and published a gwen-web snapshot for you here:
https://oss.sonatype.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/gweninterpreter/gwen-web/1.2.0-1-g3ae08b8-SNAPSHOT/gwen-web-1.2.0-1-g3ae08b8-SNAPSHOT.zip

See pull request #19 for details and configuration instructions. Let us know how it goes, and we'll then merge it in and create a new release if you're happy with it.

@aztheque
Copy link
Author

Thanks @bjuric works as expected 👍

@bjuric
Copy link
Contributor

bjuric commented Feb 29, 2016

Excellent! Merging PR #19 and closing issue.

@bjuric bjuric closed this as completed Feb 29, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants