Re: Huge Domain List
unjc email <[email protected]> Thu, 19 Apr 2012 23:28:06 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.web-polygraph.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAG8sZZAmO78yjc2NqLmkiZZR0kZ76dZx1JVWbSWxgsPRuybdEw@mail.gmail.com> |
Hi Alex, I have a shorter list of 5000 domains that I usually test with. It works pretty well with a "poisoned" DNS server. However, I found that 5000 domains are still quite enough for stressing the application. That's why I want to run with a much longer list of domains. If Webpolygraph manages to run with the 30k domain list, it would likely be a stress test I will run regularly. Therefore, as you said, 25-min of start time is definitely not very efficient for running a test. Do you know if there is any way to shorten the preparation time? Would a sorted list be helpful? Thanks, Jacky On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Alex Rousskov <[email protected]> wrote: > On 04/19/2012 03:31 PM, unjc email wrote: >> I have a long list of (~30000) domains which I want Webpolygraph >> clients to use them in the request URLs. > >> I have tried using addressMap in workload as like below: > >> AddrMap M = { >> names = [ 'google.com','facebook.com','youtube.com','yahoo.com','live.com','baidu.com','blogspot.com','wikipedia.org'........]; >> addresses = [ '192.168.1.1' ]; >> }; > > >> I believe the address list is too long, Webpolygraph throws the >> "SynSym.cc:61: cannot cast string to addr" exception after trying to >> start the test for more than 10 minutes. >> >> Please advise if there is another way to input my custom domain-list >> for Webpolygraph to generate URLs. > > > I just tried a simple.pg workload with an address map like yours that > has 30000 domain names (formed from a local dictionary file). It does > take 25min to parse and interpret 30K strings(*), but the test starts. > Even the memory consumption looks reasonable at 100MB per process. The > client then fails in my case because I do not have a name server setup > to resolve those names, but I hope you do. > > I used the following #include trick to keep the workload readable: > >> AddrMap M = { >> names = [ >> 'firstname', >> #include "/tmp/names" >> 'lastname' >> ]; >> addresses = [ '192.168.1.1:80' ]; >> }; >> >> use(M); > > > Does your workload work fine with, say, 10 custom domains? > > If yes, perhaps your input line is too long (for Polygraph or for your > text editor)? Try the #include trick above, with every domain on its own > line. It is more manageable that way. > > > HTH, > > Alex. > P.S.(*) Polygraph is not optimized to quickly grok 30K random names. In > fact, the default algorithm may try to find a "range" pattern in those > names so that they can be merged into a more compact representation. It > is possible to optimize handling of a large number of random names as > well, of course. Running more than a few tests with 25min startup times > would not be very productive! _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users-mN9fGWdlm5pku/f+YMZH/di2O/[email protected] http://www.web-polygraph.org/mailman/listinfo/users