|
- benchmarking - POST request with wrk? - Stack Overflow
I started to try wrk It's very simple to use and very hard on the server, but I don't know how to perform other kind of request such as POST In fact, I don't even know if this tool allows it The
- OWASP ZAP dangling when trying to scan - Stack Overflow
The reason for that is, if you use -r parameter, zap will attempt to generate the file report html at location zap wrk In order to make this work, we have to mount a directory to this location zap wrk
- wrk - How to send lt;n gt; requests (instead of sending for duration lt;d . . .
1 Current wrk configuration allows sending continuous requests for seconds (duration parameter) Is there a way to use wrk to send requests and then exit My use case: I want to create large number of threads + connections (e g 1000 threads with 100 connections per thread) and send instantaneous bursts towards the server
- From wrk to k6: equivalent parameters and testing methodology
The concept of -c in wrk appears similar to the 'vus' concept in k6, but the documentation is somewhat ambiguous The k6 documentation contains related options such as 'batch', 'rps', and 'iterations', but they don't exactly match the parameters in wrk
- ZAP baseline scan doesnt generate report - Stack Overflow
So its a file permissions problem :) Creating the zap wrk directory will not help - thats the directory you will be mapping to so it should not exist Instead create the testreport html file in your CWD and chmod a+w testreport html then try again with the standard ZAP image
- Is there a way to pass parameters to GET request using wrk?
I need to benchmark a REST API that takes parameters as input I wondering if there is a way to do it using wrk Right now I don't see such an option: user@Ubuntu-K56CA:~ wrk$ wrk Usage: wrk <
- Go HTTP server testing ab vs wrk so much difference in result
The main difference is that by default ab uses HTTP 1 0, so close each transmission after each request, whereas wrk uses HTTP 1 1, so keep alive the connection and reuse it for the next request
- Load Testing and Benchmarking With siege vs wrk [closed]
I've used wrk and siege, siege is a really easy to use tool, but I'm not sure if you can test DELETE or PUT with siege Wrk can use provided lua script to generate requests, so DELETE and PUT won't be a problem AND wrk is a tool that can overpower NGINX static file server, so I think it's fast enough for general purpose load testing
|
|
|