Activity for Java Modelling Tools
-
Giuliano Casale created ticket #152
Add unit tests to check that a new version can load jsimg files of older versions
-
Giuliano Casale committed [d136c0] on Code
Rollback of xerces version. Small refactorings.
-
What-if result bug
-
Graphical bug in Class Switch routing policy
-
See bottom right
-
Graphical bug in Class Switch routing policy
-
Test
-
Test
-
Giuliano Casale committed [83cc07] on Code
Merged initial JMCH revision.
-
Giuliano Casale committed [401f13] on Code
chore: added gitignore and maven files.
-
Giuliano Casale committed [b0a37c] on Code-Git
Initial commit at SVN r1153.
-
Poor GUI scaling under large resolution
-
Summary window that shows all parameters
-
Autocorrelation in statistical results
-
Add priority service for PS/DPS/GPS
-
done in 1.3.1
-
Arena simulator allows to associate to each a set fo stations
-
Java Modelling Tools released /jmt/JMT-1.3.0/JMT-installer-1.3.0.jar
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Add response time panel to JMVA
-
This feature has now been added to the upcoming JMT-1.3.0 release.
-
Graphics regression error
-
-
Add response time panel to JMVA
-
Thanks. We moved this to a feature request because this is what we refer to as aggregate response time rather than aggregate residence time. With JSIMgraph you will get the right value you say if you select the 'All classes' response time at the resource. Because JMVA's what-if shows only aggregate residence time, the request amounts to also showing aggregate response time in JMVA that is a new feature.
-
Ticket moved from /p/jmt/bugs/136/
-
Bug in JMVA to JSIMwiz conversion
-
Bug in JMVA to JSIMwiz conversion
-
Add sorting feature under the performance metrics definition panel
-
Greg Franks posted a comment on ticket #136
The underlying MVA solver is working fine. MVA does not compute the average over all classes directly. Disk B does not see the system throughput. It only sees throughput from two classes. Since the average response time is computed using the throughput result, the value is too high (Disk B only sees a fraction of the total throughput).
-
Many thanks for flagging this matter and sharing the additional results. We ran various checks also using CTMCs and exact MVA. We confirm that JMVA uses the scaling based on dividing by the System throughput. JMT as a whole follows the Lazowska's book conventions, so this is not a bug but rather a design choice. We also do not observe discrepancies in our tests between exact solvers and JMVA relative to the System Response Time (R), the values are consistent within the Lazowska's book conventions....
-
Many thanks for flagging this matter and sharing the additional results. We ran various checks also using CTMCs and exact MVA. We confirm that JMVA uses the scaling based on dividing by the System throughput. JMT as a whole follows the Lazowska's book conventions, so this is not a bug but rather a design choice. We also do not observe discrepancies in our tests between exact solvers and JMVA relative to the System Response Time (R), they values are consistent within the Lazowska's book conventions....
-
Many thanks for flagging this matter and sharing the additional results. We run various checks also using CTMCs and exact MVA. We confirm that JMVA uses the scaling based on dividing by the System throughput. JMT as a whole follows the Lazowska's book conventions, so this is not a bug but rather a design choice. We also do not observe discrepancies in our tests between exact solvers and JMVA relative to the System Response Time (R), they values are consistent within the Lazowska's book conventions....
-
Lognormal regression bug
-
fixed in 1.3.0
-
I have attached the full output from qnap2. It includes the source code for qnap2. The output above is for Beta=1..5. Here is the output from JMVA for Disk B with Beta=5. The per-class results match (though qnap2 uses real*4). System response time is a derived value. <stationresults station="Disk B"> <classresults customerclass="OE"> <measure meanValue="0.6589864605709487" measureType="Number of Customers" successful="true"/> <measure meanValue="1.5954233130406923" measureType="Throughput" successful="true"/>...
-
Thank you for flagging this Greg, we are checking and we will follow up. This discrepency shows up in the System Response Time output. Would you please have more information on this point, in particular the system response time returned by QNAP2? Thanks.
-
The bug is now verified. The correct version is the one used in 1.2.1
-
Lognormal regression bug
-
Seize and Release nodes
-
Automatic increment of Execution Number in What-IF
-
File menu needs a 'Save as' option in JMVA
-
Add setup times and delay-off server options
-
added to 1.3.0-beta2
-
Add method to log calendar of JSIM
-
added to 1.3.0-beta2
-
Queue time bug
-
closed in 1.3.0-BETA2
-
Add support for modelling sychronous and forwarding calls
-
Graphical bugs
-
Graphical symbol missing for inhibitor arc
-
Add upgrade window to JMT
-
Integrated in 1.3.0-BETA2
-
What-if extensions
-
Merged text from other feature request
-
What-if extensions
-
Implemented JSIMgraph WIF extension as of 1.2.5 - increase the number of servers - vary routing probability (only) in the case of a station with two outgoing links
-
Aggregate residence time/response time incorrect for station with zero visits
-
Bug in arrival rate within FCR
-
FCR bug
-
When JMT writes the XML file to send it internally to the simulation engine, it gets reloaded and the Java objects for each simulation entity are instantiated. In this last step the code parses the XML and seems to overwrite the values it reads, but the matter seems broader than JobSize as it seems to done so for each and every FCR parameter, so this is a large bug. The file that has the bug is SimLoader.java, for example it reads classSize around line 1239 and then does a loop that incorrectly overwrites...
-
FCR bug
-
Second graphic regression issue in 1.3.0 BETA 1 but probably older:
-
Bug in polling
-
Bug in polling
-
Bug in polling
-
Polling bu
-
Graphics regression error