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

Latest Docker image doesn't include artillery command #1394

Open
davistrent opened this issue Apr 1, 2022 · 5 comments · May be fixed by #1395
Open

Latest Docker image doesn't include artillery command #1394

davistrent opened this issue Apr 1, 2022 · 5 comments · May be fixed by #1395

Comments

@davistrent
Copy link

davistrent commented Apr 1, 2022

The latest Docker container image does not include the artillery command in the /bin directory. The only command available is run. run appears to be the artillery command, but does not match the usage documentation.

In the container, run must be used as artillery. e.g. run run /path/to/script ...

Latest container:

https://hub.docker.com/layers/artillery/artilleryio/artillery/2.0.0-14/images/sha256-8a1e0a395dbe0380b52b1632e73208c3fb0bc4d77eda262efdf5221bee5e8210

@pedropinheiro75
Copy link

I also facing this issue here!

I'm trying to follow the docs on how to run the artillery on the GitHub Actions and I need to change the binary call from /home/node/artillery/bin/artillery run tests/performance/socket-io.yml to /home/node/artillery/bin/run run tests/performance/socket-io.yml using the latest docker image tag.

@davistrent davistrent changed the title Latest Docker container doesn't include artillery command Latest Docker image doesn't include artillery command Apr 1, 2022
nzapo added a commit to nzapo/artillery that referenced this issue Apr 2, 2022
The currently built container image works fine if you want to
invoke artillery through a single docker command. But if you want to run
multiple artillery commands in the same container instance, or if you
want to use Artillery's container image as a base layer, then you ran
into issues such artilleryio#1394.

The issue us that the executable in the path is named `run` instead of
`artillery`. To address this while maintain compatibility for any users
depending on the existing executable we can run an `npm install` which
will setup artillery as if it had been installed globally.

Fixes artilleryio#1394.
@nzapo nzapo linked a pull request Apr 2, 2022 that will close this issue
nzapo added a commit to nzapo/artillery that referenced this issue Apr 9, 2022
Fixes artilleryio#1394.

The currently built container image works fine if you want to
invoke artillery through a single docker command. But if you want to run
multiple artillery commands in the same container instance, or if you
want to use Artillery's container image as a base layer, then you ran
into issues such artilleryio#1394.

The issue us that the executable in the path is named `run` instead of
`artillery`. To address this while maintain compatibility for any users
depending on the existing executable we can run an `npm install` which
will setup artillery as if it had been installed globally.
@chengyak
Copy link

any update on this issue? I can use /home/node/artillery/bin/run as workaround but that looks strange. also, when it is fix, my pipeline my break?

@xwiz
Copy link

xwiz commented Feb 3, 2023

How does one add curl to the docker image?

@nbpeth
Copy link

nbpeth commented Feb 7, 2023

welp I just ran into this, so curious if there is any movement.

@nbpeth
Copy link

nbpeth commented Feb 7, 2023

FYI I reconciled the command from the tutorial with the package and that seems right, the command should be
/home/node/artillery/bin/run run <path/to/test.yaml>

it is working for me.

I also noticed that the version artillery/2.0.0-dev9 has the run command is replaced by artillery. the latest release 2.0.0-29 still uses run

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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants