You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@jmeter.apache.org by Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com> on 2014/03/23 15:26:44 UTC
Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Hello,
What do you think about the following enhancement:
- Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG Sampler results in
ResultCollector
Why:
- Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput results and error rate
positively
- I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause time in Test Plan,
usually when pause time are not the same between samples (I put Timer as a
child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
- Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final results ?
--
Regards.
Philippe
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 24 March 2014 12:46, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is already a way to drop sampler output from the results - just
> return null.
>
> This is what the Test Sampler does.
>
> At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can return null.
However, it's easy enough to use a scripting Pre-Processor or
Post-Processor instead.
If there is no suitable sampler to attach it to, then just add a Test
Sampler in the appropriate location.
> The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners, so it's not
> possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler output.
>
> However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the Listener
> processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get saved.
>
>
> On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I agree , this would be even better. I have the same requirement for JSR223
>> Samplers.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user chooses it.
>>> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't wanna see...
>>>
>>> But this may get your implementation comlex...
>>>
>>> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world wide
>>> locations.
>>> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <ph...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hello,
>>> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
>>> >
>>> > - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG Sampler results
>>> in
>>> > ResultCollector
>>> >
>>> > Why:
>>> >
>>> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput results and error rate
>>> > positively
>>> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause time in Test Plan,
>>> > usually when pause time are not the same between samples (I put Timer
>>> > as a
>>> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
>>> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final results ?
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Regards.
>>> > Philippe
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cordialement.
>> Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>.
On Wednesday, March 26, 2014, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 25 March 2014 23:02, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, March 26, 2014, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On 25 March 2014 22:31, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com<javascript:;>
> <javascript:;>>
> >> wrote:
> >> > They differ because in Test Action case, there is a sleep which is
> taken
> >> > as processing of Sampler.
> >>
> >> If you set the Test Action sleep to zero, it won't affect the TC output.
> >>
> >> But my aim was to control better pause time.
> > So ok it answers other needs but not my main one.
>
> See below.
>
> >> > While with my strategy the timer being a child of DebugSampler it will
> >> act
> >> > as TestAction but as time is within a timer it will not affect time
> taken
> >> > by DebugSampler.
> >> > Make the test sebb you will see.
> >>
> >> I have, and I did not see a problem.
> >>
> >> Set it to > 0 and you will see the difference
>
> Well of course, but the suggestion from Shmuel was to use a dummy Test
> Action as the parent for the Timer.
>
> Simply replace the Debug Sampler with a Test Action Sampler that does
> nothing.
>
> Okay, thanks Shmuel and sebb for this tip, didn't think about it !
>> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:26 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On 25 March 2014 21:53, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Shmuel Krakower <
> shmulikk@gmail.com
> >> >> >wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Regarding the timer just put it under A Test Action which is
> already
> >> >> hidden
> >> >> >> from results...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > No it is not the same, because I usually use a Transaction
> Controller
> >> >> and
> >> >> > have HTTP Sampler as its children .
> >> >> > Using Test Action will make Transaction Sampler report time taken
> by
> >> HTTP
> >> >> > Sampler + Test Action which I don't want.
> >> >> > While using Timer will give correct time.
> >> >>
> >> >> The Debug Sampler is a sampler, the same as the Test Action sampler.
> >> >> So I don't see how they differ when used under a TC.
> >> >> Note that the Test Action controller itself does not have to wait.
> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from
> world
> >> >> wide
> >> >> >> locations.
> >> >> >> On Mar 25, 2014 11:38 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
> >> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:30 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > > On 25 March 2014 21:27, Philippe Mouawad <
> >> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
> >> >> >> > > wrote:
> >> >> >> > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >> On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower <
> shmulikk@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> > > >> > Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean
> >> data
> >> >> >> member
> >> >> >> > > to
> >> >> >> > > >> the
> >> >> >> > > >> > sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a
> piece
> >> of
> >> >> code
> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> > > >> > ignore those who are marked hidden?
> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> > > >> The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent /
> >> >> SampleResult
> >> >> >> > > >> class, as Listeners only operate on them.
> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> > > >> It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the
> >> file
> >> >> >> > output
> >> >> >> > > >> section.
> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> > > >> However the sample would still be sent to all Listener
> GUIs,
> >> even
> >> >> >> ones
> >> >> >> > > >> that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser.
> >> >> >> > > >> Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug"
> >> data,
> >> >> >> but
> >> >> >> > > >> what about all the 3rd party code?
> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> > > >> It has long been a fundamental design feature of
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 25 March 2014 23:02, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 26, 2014, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 25 March 2014 22:31, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com<javascript:;>>
>> wrote:
>> > They differ because in Test Action case, there is a sleep which is taken
>> > as processing of Sampler.
>>
>> If you set the Test Action sleep to zero, it won't affect the TC output.
>>
>> But my aim was to control better pause time.
> So ok it answers other needs but not my main one.
See below.
>> > While with my strategy the timer being a child of DebugSampler it will
>> act
>> > as TestAction but as time is within a timer it will not affect time taken
>> > by DebugSampler.
>> > Make the test sebb you will see.
>>
>> I have, and I did not see a problem.
>>
>> Set it to > 0 and you will see the difference
Well of course, but the suggestion from Shmuel was to use a dummy Test
Action as the parent for the Timer.
Simply replace the Debug Sampler with a Test Action Sampler that does nothing.
>> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:26 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 25 March 2014 21:53, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Shmuel Krakower <shmulikk@gmail.com
>> >> >wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Regarding the timer just put it under A Test Action which is already
>> >> hidden
>> >> >> from results...
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > No it is not the same, because I usually use a Transaction Controller
>> >> and
>> >> > have HTTP Sampler as its children .
>> >> > Using Test Action will make Transaction Sampler report time taken by
>> HTTP
>> >> > Sampler + Test Action which I don't want.
>> >> > While using Timer will give correct time.
>> >>
>> >> The Debug Sampler is a sampler, the same as the Test Action sampler.
>> >> So I don't see how they differ when used under a TC.
>> >> Note that the Test Action controller itself does not have to wait.
>> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world
>> >> wide
>> >> >> locations.
>> >> >> On Mar 25, 2014 11:38 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
>> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:30 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > On 25 March 2014 21:27, Philippe Mouawad <
>> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
>> >> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >> > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > >> On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >> > > >> > Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean
>> data
>> >> >> member
>> >> >> > > to
>> >> >> > > >> the
>> >> >> > > >> > sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a piece
>> of
>> >> code
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > > >> > ignore those who are marked hidden?
>> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> > > >> The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent /
>> >> SampleResult
>> >> >> > > >> class, as Listeners only operate on them.
>> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> > > >> It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the
>> file
>> >> >> > output
>> >> >> > > >> section.
>> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> > > >> However the sample would still be sent to all Listener GUIs,
>> even
>> >> >> ones
>> >> >> > > >> that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser.
>> >> >> > > >> Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug"
>> data,
>> >> >> but
>> >> >> > > >> what about all the 3rd party code?
>> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> > > >> It has long been a fundamental design feature of JMeter that
>> all
>> >> >> > > >> results go to all Listeners in scope, and all results are sent
>> >> >> equally
>> >> >> > > >> to file and GUI.
>> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> > > >> I think changing this strategy is extremely risky, and will
>> >> likely
>> >> >> > > >> cause more problems than the minor issue it is proposed to
>> solve.
>> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > I think there is a misunderstanding.
>> >> >> > > > I
>
>
>
> --
> Cordialement.
> Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>.
On Wednesday, March 26, 2014, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 25 March 2014 22:31, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> > They differ because in Test Action case, there is a sleep which is taken
> > as processing of Sampler.
>
> If you set the Test Action sleep to zero, it won't affect the TC output.
>
> But my aim was to control better pause time.
So ok it answers other needs but not my main one.
> > While with my strategy the timer being a child of DebugSampler it will
> act
> > as TestAction but as time is within a timer it will not affect time taken
> > by DebugSampler.
> > Make the test sebb you will see.
>
> I have, and I did not see a problem.
>
> Set it to > 0 and you will see the difference
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:26 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 25 March 2014 21:53, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Shmuel Krakower <shmulikk@gmail.com
> >> >wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Regarding the timer just put it under A Test Action which is already
> >> hidden
> >> >> from results...
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > No it is not the same, because I usually use a Transaction Controller
> >> and
> >> > have HTTP Sampler as its children .
> >> > Using Test Action will make Transaction Sampler report time taken by
> HTTP
> >> > Sampler + Test Action which I don't want.
> >> > While using Timer will give correct time.
> >>
> >> The Debug Sampler is a sampler, the same as the Test Action sampler.
> >> So I don't see how they differ when used under a TC.
> >> Note that the Test Action controller itself does not have to wait.
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world
> >> wide
> >> >> locations.
> >> >> On Mar 25, 2014 11:38 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:30 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > On 25 March 2014 21:27, Philippe Mouawad <
> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
> >> >> > > wrote:
> >> >> > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > >> On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> > > >> > Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean
> data
> >> >> member
> >> >> > > to
> >> >> > > >> the
> >> >> > > >> > sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a piece
> of
> >> code
> >> >> > to
> >> >> > > >> > ignore those who are marked hidden?
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent /
> >> SampleResult
> >> >> > > >> class, as Listeners only operate on them.
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the
> file
> >> >> > output
> >> >> > > >> section.
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> However the sample would still be sent to all Listener GUIs,
> even
> >> >> ones
> >> >> > > >> that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser.
> >> >> > > >> Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug"
> data,
> >> >> but
> >> >> > > >> what about all the 3rd party code?
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> It has long been a fundamental design feature of JMeter that
> all
> >> >> > > >> results go to all Listeners in scope, and all results are sent
> >> >> equally
> >> >> > > >> to file and GUI.
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> I think changing this strategy is extremely risky, and will
> >> likely
> >> >> > > >> cause more problems than the minor issue it is proposed to
> solve.
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > I think there is a misunderstanding.
> >> >> > > > I
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 25 March 2014 22:31, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> They differ because in Test Action case, there is a sleep which is taken
> as processing of Sampler.
If you set the Test Action sleep to zero, it won't affect the TC output.
> While with my strategy the timer being a child of DebugSampler it will act
> as TestAction but as time is within a timer it will not affect time taken
> by DebugSampler.
> Make the test sebb you will see.
I have, and I did not see a problem.
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:26 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 25 March 2014 21:53, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Shmuel Krakower <shmulikk@gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> Regarding the timer just put it under A Test Action which is already
>> hidden
>> >> from results...
>> >>
>> >
>> > No it is not the same, because I usually use a Transaction Controller
>> and
>> > have HTTP Sampler as its children .
>> > Using Test Action will make Transaction Sampler report time taken by HTTP
>> > Sampler + Test Action which I don't want.
>> > While using Timer will give correct time.
>>
>> The Debug Sampler is a sampler, the same as the Test Action sampler.
>> So I don't see how they differ when used under a TC.
>> Note that the Test Action controller itself does not have to wait.
>>
>> >>
>> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world
>> wide
>> >> locations.
>> >> On Mar 25, 2014 11:38 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
>> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:30 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > On 25 March 2014 21:27, Philippe Mouawad <
>> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >> On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> > > >> > Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean data
>> >> member
>> >> > > to
>> >> > > >> the
>> >> > > >> > sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a piece of
>> code
>> >> > to
>> >> > > >> > ignore those who are marked hidden?
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent /
>> SampleResult
>> >> > > >> class, as Listeners only operate on them.
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the file
>> >> > output
>> >> > > >> section.
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> However the sample would still be sent to all Listener GUIs, even
>> >> ones
>> >> > > >> that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser.
>> >> > > >> Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug" data,
>> >> but
>> >> > > >> what about all the 3rd party code?
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> It has long been a fundamental design feature of JMeter that all
>> >> > > >> results go to all Listeners in scope, and all results are sent
>> >> equally
>> >> > > >> to file and GUI.
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> I think changing this strategy is extremely risky, and will
>> likely
>> >> > > >> cause more problems than the minor issue it is proposed to solve.
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > I think there is a misunderstanding.
>> >> > > > I was just proposing to change DebugSampler#sample(Entry e) like
>> >> this:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > if(silent_mode) {
>> >> > > > return null;
>> >> > > > }
>> >> > > > // Otherwise current code still applies
>> >> > > > ...
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Where silent_mode is a boolean configured from a new property:
>> >> > > > # Flag to enable silent mode which leads to
>> >> > > > # debug_samplers doing nothing
>> >> > > > #debug_sampler_silent_mode=false
>> >> > >
>> >> > > How does that differ from disabling the Debug Sampler?
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> > Well in my case, as I said I put Timer as a child of Debug Sampler
>> (DS)
>> >> so
>> >> > with this change, I get no DS in output but get the right pause times.
>> >> > The other benefit is that in GUI mode/ During debug of script I will
>> put
>> >> > flag to true and during load test to false.
>> >> >
>> >> > So it really answers my need.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> > www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from
>> >> > world
>> >> > > >> wide
>> >> > > >> > locations.
>> >> > > >> > On Mar 25, 2014 1:46 AM, "sebb" <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >
>> >> > > >> >> On 24 March 2014 20:16, Philippe Mouawad <
>> >> > philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >> >> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> There is already a way to drop sampler output from the
>> >> results -
>> >> > > just
>> >> > > >> >> >> return null.
>> >> > > >> >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> >> This is what the Test Sampler does.
>> >> > > >> >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> >> At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can
>> >> > return
>> >> > > >> null.
>> >> > > >> >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> >> The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners,
>> so
>> >> > it's
>> >> > > not
>> >> > > >> >> >> possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler
>> >> output.
>> >> > > >> >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> >> Would it make sense to add a property making Debug Sampler
>> >> > return
>> >> > > >> null ?
>> >> > > >> >> > #debug_sampler.silente_mode=false
>> >> > > >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> Yes, but the debug sampler would then do nothing.
>> >> > > >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the
>> >> > Listener
>> >> > > >> >> >> processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get
>> >> > saved.
>> >> > > >> >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> > In that case what do you propose ?
>> >> > > >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> Not sure.
>> >> > > >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> >> On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <
>> >> > > philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>> >> > > >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >> >> > Hello,
>> >> > > >> >> >> > I agree , this would be even better. I have the same
>> >> > requirement
>> >> > > >> for
>> >> > > >> >> >> JSR223
>> >> > > >> >> >> > Samplers.
>> >> > > >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> > Regards
>> >> > > >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <
>> >> > > >> shmulikk@gmail.com>
>> >> > > >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user
>> >> chooses
>> >> > > it.
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly
>> don't
>> >> > wanna
>> >> > > >> >> see...
>> >> > > >> >> >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> But this may get your implementation comlex...
>> >> > > >> >> >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance
>> monitoring
>> >> > from
>> >> > > >> world
>> >> > > >> >> >> wide
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> locations.
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
>> >> > > >> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>> >> > > >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >> >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Hello,
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > - Be able through a new property to not output
>> DEBUG
>> >> > > Sampler
>> >> > > >> >> >> results
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> in
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > ResultCollector
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Why:
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput
>> >> results
>> >> > > and
>> >> > > >> >> error
>> >> > > >> >> >> rate
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > positively
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause
>> >> time
>> >> > > in
>> >> > > >> Test
>> >> > > >> >> >> Plan,
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > usually when pause time are not the same between
>> >> samples
>> >> > > (I
>> >> > > >> put
>> >> > > >> >> >> Timer
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > as a
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in
>> final
>> >> > > >> results ?
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > --
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Regards.
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Philippe
>> >> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >> > --
>> >> > > >> >> >> > Cordialement.
>> >> > > >> >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
>> >> > > >> >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> >
>> >> > > >> >> > --
>> >> > > >> >> > Cordialement.
>> >> > > >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
>> >> > > >> >>
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > --
>> >> > > > Cordialement.
>> >> > > > Philippe Mouawad.
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Cordialement.
>> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Cordialement.
>> > Philippe Mouawad.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cordialement.
> Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>.
Note it's not my strategy, I think I read it here:
-
http://blog.milamberspace.net/index.php/2009/02/08/jmeter-think-time-et-ordre-dexecution-les-bons-plans-212.html
And found it nice
Maybe an alternative would be to change or allow timers not to use scoping
strategy but serial one, ie pause where they are located but could be a big
change
On Tuesday, March 25, 2014, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> They differ because in Test Action case, there is a sleep which is taken
> as processing of Sampler.
> While with my strategy the timer being a child of DebugSampler it will act
> as TestAction but as time is within a timer it will not affect time taken
> by DebugSampler.
> Make the test sebb you will see.
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:26 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 25 March 2014 21:53, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Shmuel Krakower <shmulikk@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Regarding the timer just put it under A Test Action which is already
> hidden
> >> from results...
> >>
> >
> > No it is not the same, because I usually use a Transaction Controller
> and
> > have HTTP Sampler as its children .
> > Using Test Action will make Transaction Sampler report time taken by HTTP
> > Sampler + Test Action which I don't want.
> > While using Timer will give correct time.
>
> The Debug Sampler is a sampler, the same as the Test Action sampler.
> So I don't see how they differ when used under a TC.
> Note that the Test Action controller itself does not have to wait.
>
> >>
> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world
> wide
> >> locations.
> >> On Mar 25, 2014 11:38 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:30 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > On 25 March 2014 21:27, Philippe Mouawad <
> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > > >> > Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean data
> >> member
> >> > > to
> >> > > >> the
> >> > > >> > sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a piece of
> code
> >> > to
> >> > > >> > ignore those who are marked hidden?
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent /
> SampleResult
> >> > > >> class, as Listeners only operate on them.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the file
> >> > output
> >> > > >> section.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> However the sample would still be sent to all Listener GUIs, even
> >> ones
> >> > > >> that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser.
> >> > > >> Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug" data,
> >> but
> >> > > >> what about all the 3rd party code?
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> It has long been a fundamental design feature of JMeter that all
> >> > > >> results go to all Listeners in scope, and all results are sent
> >> equally
> >> > > >> to file and GUI.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> I think changing this strategy is extremely risky, and will
> likely
> >> > > >> cause more problems than the minor issue it is proposed to solve.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I think there is a misunderstanding.
> >> > > > I was just proposing to change DebugSampler#sample(Entry e) like
> >> this:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > if(silent_mode) {
> >> > > > return null;
> >> > > > }
> >> > > > // Otherwise current code still applies
> >> > > > ...
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Where silent_mode is a boolean configured from a new property:
> >> > > > # Fla
>
> --
> Cordialement.
> Philippe Mouawad.
>
>
>
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>.
They differ because in Test Action case, there is a sleep which is taken
as processing of Sampler.
While with my strategy the timer being a child of DebugSampler it will act
as TestAction but as time is within a timer it will not affect time taken
by DebugSampler.
Make the test sebb you will see.
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:26 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 25 March 2014 21:53, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Shmuel Krakower <shmulikk@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Regarding the timer just put it under A Test Action which is already
> hidden
> >> from results...
> >>
> >
> > No it is not the same, because I usually use a Transaction Controller
> and
> > have HTTP Sampler as its children .
> > Using Test Action will make Transaction Sampler report time taken by HTTP
> > Sampler + Test Action which I don't want.
> > While using Timer will give correct time.
>
> The Debug Sampler is a sampler, the same as the Test Action sampler.
> So I don't see how they differ when used under a TC.
> Note that the Test Action controller itself does not have to wait.
>
> >>
> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world
> wide
> >> locations.
> >> On Mar 25, 2014 11:38 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:30 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > On 25 March 2014 21:27, Philippe Mouawad <
> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > > >> > Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean data
> >> member
> >> > > to
> >> > > >> the
> >> > > >> > sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a piece of
> code
> >> > to
> >> > > >> > ignore those who are marked hidden?
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent /
> SampleResult
> >> > > >> class, as Listeners only operate on them.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the file
> >> > output
> >> > > >> section.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> However the sample would still be sent to all Listener GUIs, even
> >> ones
> >> > > >> that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser.
> >> > > >> Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug" data,
> >> but
> >> > > >> what about all the 3rd party code?
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> It has long been a fundamental design feature of JMeter that all
> >> > > >> results go to all Listeners in scope, and all results are sent
> >> equally
> >> > > >> to file and GUI.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> I think changing this strategy is extremely risky, and will
> likely
> >> > > >> cause more problems than the minor issue it is proposed to solve.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I think there is a misunderstanding.
> >> > > > I was just proposing to change DebugSampler#sample(Entry e) like
> >> this:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > if(silent_mode) {
> >> > > > return null;
> >> > > > }
> >> > > > // Otherwise current code still applies
> >> > > > ...
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Where silent_mode is a boolean configured from a new property:
> >> > > > # Flag to enable silent mode which leads to
> >> > > > # debug_samplers doing nothing
> >> > > > #debug_sampler_silent_mode=false
> >> > >
> >> > > How does that differ from disabling the Debug Sampler?
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Well in my case, as I said I put Timer as a child of Debug Sampler
> (DS)
> >> so
> >> > with this change, I get no DS in output but get the right pause times.
> >> > The other benefit is that in GUI mode/ During debug of script I will
> put
> >> > flag to true and during load test to false.
> >> >
> >> > So it really answers my need.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> > www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from
> >> > world
> >> > > >> wide
> >> > > >> > locations.
> >> > > >> > On Mar 25, 2014 1:46 AM, "sebb" <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> >> On 24 March 2014 20:16, Philippe Mouawad <
> >> > philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> >> wrote:
> >> > > >> >> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> There is already a way to drop sampler output from the
> >> results -
> >> > > just
> >> > > >> >> >> return null.
> >> > > >> >> >>
> >> > > >> >> >> This is what the Test Sampler does.
> >> > > >> >> >>
> >> > > >> >> >> At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can
> >> > return
> >> > > >> null.
> >> > > >> >> >>
> >> > > >> >> >> The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners,
> so
> >> > it's
> >> > > not
> >> > > >> >> >> possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler
> >> output.
> >> > > >> >> >>
> >> > > >> >> >> Would it make sense to add a property making Debug Sampler
> >> > return
> >> > > >> null ?
> >> > > >> >> > #debug_sampler.silente_mode=false
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> Yes, but the debug sampler would then do nothing.
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the
> >> > Listener
> >> > > >> >> >> processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get
> >> > saved.
> >> > > >> >> >>
> >> > > >> >> > In that case what do you propose ?
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> Not sure.
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> >>
> >> > > >> >> >>
> >> > > >> >> >> On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <
> >> > > philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> wrote:
> >> > > >> >> >> > Hello,
> >> > > >> >> >> > I agree , this would be even better. I have the same
> >> > requirement
> >> > > >> for
> >> > > >> >> >> JSR223
> >> > > >> >> >> > Samplers.
> >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> > Regards
> >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <
> >> > > >> shmulikk@gmail.com>
> >> > > >> >> >> wrote:
> >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> >> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user
> >> chooses
> >> > > it.
> >> > > >> >> >> >> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly
> don't
> >> > wanna
> >> > > >> >> see...
> >> > > >> >> >> >>
> >> > > >> >> >> >> But this may get your implementation comlex...
> >> > > >> >> >> >>
> >> > > >> >> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance
> monitoring
> >> > from
> >> > > >> world
> >> > > >> >> >> wide
> >> > > >> >> >> >> locations.
> >> > > >> >> >> >> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
> >> > > >> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> > > >> >> >> >>
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Hello,
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
> >> > > >> >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > - Be able through a new property to not output
> DEBUG
> >> > > Sampler
> >> > > >> >> >> results
> >> > > >> >> >> >> in
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > ResultCollector
> >> > > >> >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Why:
> >> > > >> >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput
> >> results
> >> > > and
> >> > > >> >> error
> >> > > >> >> >> rate
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > positively
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause
> >> time
> >> > > in
> >> > > >> Test
> >> > > >> >> >> Plan,
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > usually when pause time are not the same between
> >> samples
> >> > > (I
> >> > > >> put
> >> > > >> >> >> Timer
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > as a
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in
> final
> >> > > >> results ?
> >> > > >> >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > --
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Regards.
> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Philippe
> >> > > >> >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> >>
> >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >> > --
> >> > > >> >> >> > Cordialement.
> >> > > >> >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
> >> > > >> >> >>
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> > --
> >> > > >> >> > Cordialement.
> >> > > >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > --
> >> > > > Cordialement.
> >> > > > Philippe Mouawad.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Cordialement.
> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cordialement.
> > Philippe Mouawad.
>
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 25 March 2014 21:53, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Regarding the timer just put it under A Test Action which is already hidden
>> from results...
>>
>
> No it is not the same, because I usually use a Transaction Controller and
> have HTTP Sampler as its children .
> Using Test Action will make Transaction Sampler report time taken by HTTP
> Sampler + Test Action which I don't want.
> While using Timer will give correct time.
The Debug Sampler is a sampler, the same as the Test Action sampler.
So I don't see how they differ when used under a TC.
Note that the Test Action controller itself does not have to wait.
>>
>> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world wide
>> locations.
>> On Mar 25, 2014 11:38 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <ph...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:30 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > On 25 March 2014 21:27, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >> > Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean data
>> member
>> > > to
>> > > >> the
>> > > >> > sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a piece of code
>> > to
>> > > >> > ignore those who are marked hidden?
>> > > >>
>> > > >> The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent / SampleResult
>> > > >> class, as Listeners only operate on them.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the file
>> > output
>> > > >> section.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> However the sample would still be sent to all Listener GUIs, even
>> ones
>> > > >> that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser.
>> > > >> Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug" data,
>> but
>> > > >> what about all the 3rd party code?
>> > > >>
>> > > >> It has long been a fundamental design feature of JMeter that all
>> > > >> results go to all Listeners in scope, and all results are sent
>> equally
>> > > >> to file and GUI.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I think changing this strategy is extremely risky, and will likely
>> > > >> cause more problems than the minor issue it is proposed to solve.
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > > I think there is a misunderstanding.
>> > > > I was just proposing to change DebugSampler#sample(Entry e) like
>> this:
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > if(silent_mode) {
>> > > > return null;
>> > > > }
>> > > > // Otherwise current code still applies
>> > > > ...
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Where silent_mode is a boolean configured from a new property:
>> > > > # Flag to enable silent mode which leads to
>> > > > # debug_samplers doing nothing
>> > > > #debug_sampler_silent_mode=false
>> > >
>> > > How does that differ from disabling the Debug Sampler?
>> > >
>> >
>> > Well in my case, as I said I put Timer as a child of Debug Sampler (DS)
>> so
>> > with this change, I get no DS in output but get the right pause times.
>> > The other benefit is that in GUI mode/ During debug of script I will put
>> > flag to true and during load test to false.
>> >
>> > So it really answers my need.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > >>
>> > > >> > www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from
>> > world
>> > > >> wide
>> > > >> > locations.
>> > > >> > On Mar 25, 2014 1:46 AM, "sebb" <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >> On 24 March 2014 20:16, Philippe Mouawad <
>> > philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>> > > >
>> > > >> >> wrote:
>> > > >> >> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> There is already a way to drop sampler output from the
>> results -
>> > > just
>> > > >> >> >> return null.
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> This is what the Test Sampler does.
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can
>> > return
>> > > >> null.
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners, so
>> > it's
>> > > not
>> > > >> >> >> possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler
>> output.
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> Would it make sense to add a property making Debug Sampler
>> > return
>> > > >> null ?
>> > > >> >> > #debug_sampler.silente_mode=false
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> Yes, but the debug sampler would then do nothing.
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the
>> > Listener
>> > > >> >> >> processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get
>> > saved.
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> > In that case what do you propose ?
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> Not sure.
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <
>> > > philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >> >> wrote:
>> > > >> >> >> > Hello,
>> > > >> >> >> > I agree , this would be even better. I have the same
>> > requirement
>> > > >> for
>> > > >> >> >> JSR223
>> > > >> >> >> > Samplers.
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> > Regards
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <
>> > > >> shmulikk@gmail.com>
>> > > >> >> >> wrote:
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user
>> chooses
>> > > it.
>> > > >> >> >> >> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't
>> > wanna
>> > > >> >> see...
>> > > >> >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> >> But this may get your implementation comlex...
>> > > >> >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring
>> > from
>> > > >> world
>> > > >> >> >> wide
>> > > >> >> >> >> locations.
>> > > >> >> >> >> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
>> > > >> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >> wrote:
>> > > >> >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> >> > Hello,
>> > > >> >> >> >> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
>> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >> > - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG
>> > > Sampler
>> > > >> >> >> results
>> > > >> >> >> >> in
>> > > >> >> >> >> > ResultCollector
>> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >> > Why:
>> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput
>> results
>> > > and
>> > > >> >> error
>> > > >> >> >> rate
>> > > >> >> >> >> > positively
>> > > >> >> >> >> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause
>> time
>> > > in
>> > > >> Test
>> > > >> >> >> Plan,
>> > > >> >> >> >> > usually when pause time are not the same between
>> samples
>> > > (I
>> > > >> put
>> > > >> >> >> Timer
>> > > >> >> >> >> > as a
>> > > >> >> >> >> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
>> > > >> >> >> >> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final
>> > > >> results ?
>> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >> > --
>> > > >> >> >> >> > Regards.
>> > > >> >> >> >> > Philippe
>> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> > --
>> > > >> >> >> > Cordialement.
>> > > >> >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> > --
>> > > >> >> > Cordialement.
>> > > >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Cordialement.
>> > > > Philippe Mouawad.
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Cordialement.
>> > Philippe Mouawad.
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cordialement.
> Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>.
Hello,
Note of course I could post process the CSV file by respecting a naming
convention and making a:
- grep -v <> results.csv
then generate graphs but it would be much much easier if it was OOTB,
furthermore if I use it with this I get my accurate graphs at end of Load
Test:
-
http://www.ubik-ingenierie.com/blog/automatically-generating-nice-graphs-at-end-of-your-load-test-with-apache-jmeter-and-jmeter-plugins/
Regards
Philippe
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:53 PM, Philippe Mouawad <
philippe.mouawad@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Regarding the timer just put it under A Test Action which is already
>> hidden
>> from results...
>>
>
> No it is not the same, because I usually use a Transaction Controller and
> have HTTP Sampler as its children .
> Using Test Action will make Transaction Sampler report time taken by HTTP
> Sampler + Test Action which I don't want.
> While using Timer will give correct time.
>
>>
>> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world wide
>> locations.
>> On Mar 25, 2014 11:38 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <ph...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:30 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > On 25 March 2014 21:27, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > >> > Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean data
>> member
>> > > to
>> > > >> the
>> > > >> > sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a piece of
>> code
>> > to
>> > > >> > ignore those who are marked hidden?
>> > > >>
>> > > >> The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent /
>> SampleResult
>> > > >> class, as Listeners only operate on them.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the file
>> > output
>> > > >> section.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> However the sample would still be sent to all Listener GUIs, even
>> ones
>> > > >> that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser.
>> > > >> Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug" data,
>> but
>> > > >> what about all the 3rd party code?
>> > > >>
>> > > >> It has long been a fundamental design feature of JMeter that all
>> > > >> results go to all Listeners in scope, and all results are sent
>> equally
>> > > >> to file and GUI.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I think changing this strategy is extremely risky, and will likely
>> > > >> cause more problems than the minor issue it is proposed to solve.
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > > I think there is a misunderstanding.
>> > > > I was just proposing to change DebugSampler#sample(Entry e) like
>> this:
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > if(silent_mode) {
>> > > > return null;
>> > > > }
>> > > > // Otherwise current code still applies
>> > > > ...
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Where silent_mode is a boolean configured from a new property:
>> > > > # Flag to enable silent mode which leads to
>> > > > # debug_samplers doing nothing
>> > > > #debug_sampler_silent_mode=false
>> > >
>> > > How does that differ from disabling the Debug Sampler?
>> > >
>> >
>> > Well in my case, as I said I put Timer as a child of Debug Sampler (DS)
>> so
>> > with this change, I get no DS in output but get the right pause times.
>> > The other benefit is that in GUI mode/ During debug of script I will put
>> > flag to true and during load test to false.
>> >
>> > So it really answers my need.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > >>
>> > > >> > www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from
>> > world
>> > > >> wide
>> > > >> > locations.
>> > > >> > On Mar 25, 2014 1:46 AM, "sebb" <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >> On 24 March 2014 20:16, Philippe Mouawad <
>> > philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>> > > >
>> > > >> >> wrote:
>> > > >> >> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> There is already a way to drop sampler output from the
>> results -
>> > > just
>> > > >> >> >> return null.
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> This is what the Test Sampler does.
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can
>> > return
>> > > >> null.
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners, so
>> > it's
>> > > not
>> > > >> >> >> possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler
>> output.
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> Would it make sense to add a property making Debug Sampler
>> > return
>> > > >> null ?
>> > > >> >> > #debug_sampler.silente_mode=false
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> Yes, but the debug sampler would then do nothing.
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the
>> > Listener
>> > > >> >> >> processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get
>> > saved.
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> > In that case what do you propose ?
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> Not sure.
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <
>> > > philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >> >> wrote:
>> > > >> >> >> > Hello,
>> > > >> >> >> > I agree , this would be even better. I have the same
>> > requirement
>> > > >> for
>> > > >> >> >> JSR223
>> > > >> >> >> > Samplers.
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> > Regards
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <
>> > > >> shmulikk@gmail.com>
>> > > >> >> >> wrote:
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user
>> chooses
>> > > it.
>> > > >> >> >> >> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't
>> > wanna
>> > > >> >> see...
>> > > >> >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> >> But this may get your implementation comlex...
>> > > >> >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring
>> > from
>> > > >> world
>> > > >> >> >> wide
>> > > >> >> >> >> locations.
>> > > >> >> >> >> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
>> > > >> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >> wrote:
>> > > >> >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> >> > Hello,
>> > > >> >> >> >> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
>> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >> > - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG
>> > > Sampler
>> > > >> >> >> results
>> > > >> >> >> >> in
>> > > >> >> >> >> > ResultCollector
>> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >> > Why:
>> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput
>> results
>> > > and
>> > > >> >> error
>> > > >> >> >> rate
>> > > >> >> >> >> > positively
>> > > >> >> >> >> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause
>> time
>> > > in
>> > > >> Test
>> > > >> >> >> Plan,
>> > > >> >> >> >> > usually when pause time are not the same between
>> samples
>> > > (I
>> > > >> put
>> > > >> >> >> Timer
>> > > >> >> >> >> > as a
>> > > >> >> >> >> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
>> > > >> >> >> >> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final
>> > > >> results ?
>> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >> > --
>> > > >> >> >> >> > Regards.
>> > > >> >> >> >> > Philippe
>> > > >> >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >> > --
>> > > >> >> >> > Cordialement.
>> > > >> >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
>> > > >> >> >>
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> > --
>> > > >> >> > Cordialement.
>> > > >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Cordialement.
>> > > > Philippe Mouawad.
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Cordialement.
>> > Philippe Mouawad.
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cordialement.
> Philippe Mouawad.
>
>
>
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Regarding the timer just put it under A Test Action which is already hidden
> from results...
>
No it is not the same, because I usually use a Transaction Controller and
have HTTP Sampler as its children .
Using Test Action will make Transaction Sampler report time taken by HTTP
Sampler + Test Action which I don't want.
While using Timer will give correct time.
>
> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world wide
> locations.
> On Mar 25, 2014 11:38 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <ph...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:30 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 25 March 2014 21:27, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> > Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean data
> member
> > > to
> > > >> the
> > > >> > sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a piece of code
> > to
> > > >> > ignore those who are marked hidden?
> > > >>
> > > >> The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent / SampleResult
> > > >> class, as Listeners only operate on them.
> > > >>
> > > >> It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the file
> > output
> > > >> section.
> > > >>
> > > >> However the sample would still be sent to all Listener GUIs, even
> ones
> > > >> that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser.
> > > >> Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug" data,
> but
> > > >> what about all the 3rd party code?
> > > >>
> > > >> It has long been a fundamental design feature of JMeter that all
> > > >> results go to all Listeners in scope, and all results are sent
> equally
> > > >> to file and GUI.
> > > >>
> > > >> I think changing this strategy is extremely risky, and will likely
> > > >> cause more problems than the minor issue it is proposed to solve.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > I think there is a misunderstanding.
> > > > I was just proposing to change DebugSampler#sample(Entry e) like
> this:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > if(silent_mode) {
> > > > return null;
> > > > }
> > > > // Otherwise current code still applies
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Where silent_mode is a boolean configured from a new property:
> > > > # Flag to enable silent mode which leads to
> > > > # debug_samplers doing nothing
> > > > #debug_sampler_silent_mode=false
> > >
> > > How does that differ from disabling the Debug Sampler?
> > >
> >
> > Well in my case, as I said I put Timer as a child of Debug Sampler (DS)
> so
> > with this change, I get no DS in output but get the right pause times.
> > The other benefit is that in GUI mode/ During debug of script I will put
> > flag to true and during load test to false.
> >
> > So it really answers my need.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > >>
> > > >> > www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from
> > world
> > > >> wide
> > > >> > locations.
> > > >> > On Mar 25, 2014 1:46 AM, "sebb" <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> On 24 March 2014 20:16, Philippe Mouawad <
> > philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > >> >> wrote:
> > > >> >> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> There is already a way to drop sampler output from the
> results -
> > > just
> > > >> >> >> return null.
> > > >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >> This is what the Test Sampler does.
> > > >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >> At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can
> > return
> > > >> null.
> > > >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >> The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners, so
> > it's
> > > not
> > > >> >> >> possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler
> output.
> > > >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >> Would it make sense to add a property making Debug Sampler
> > return
> > > >> null ?
> > > >> >> > #debug_sampler.silente_mode=false
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Yes, but the debug sampler would then do nothing.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the
> > Listener
> > > >> >> >> processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get
> > saved.
> > > >> >> >>
> > > >> >> > In that case what do you propose ?
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Not sure.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >> On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <
> > > philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> >> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> > Hello,
> > > >> >> >> > I agree , this would be even better. I have the same
> > requirement
> > > >> for
> > > >> >> >> JSR223
> > > >> >> >> > Samplers.
> > > >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> > Regards
> > > >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <
> > > >> shmulikk@gmail.com>
> > > >> >> >> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user
> chooses
> > > it.
> > > >> >> >> >> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't
> > wanna
> > > >> >> see...
> > > >> >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >> >> But this may get your implementation comlex...
> > > >> >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring
> > from
> > > >> world
> > > >> >> >> wide
> > > >> >> >> >> locations.
> > > >> >> >> >> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
> > > >> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> > > >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >> >> > Hello,
> > > >> >> >> >> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
> > > >> >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >> > - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG
> > > Sampler
> > > >> >> >> results
> > > >> >> >> >> in
> > > >> >> >> >> > ResultCollector
> > > >> >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >> > Why:
> > > >> >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput
> results
> > > and
> > > >> >> error
> > > >> >> >> rate
> > > >> >> >> >> > positively
> > > >> >> >> >> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause
> time
> > > in
> > > >> Test
> > > >> >> >> Plan,
> > > >> >> >> >> > usually when pause time are not the same between
> samples
> > > (I
> > > >> put
> > > >> >> >> Timer
> > > >> >> >> >> > as a
> > > >> >> >> >> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
> > > >> >> >> >> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final
> > > >> results ?
> > > >> >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >> > --
> > > >> >> >> >> > Regards.
> > > >> >> >> >> > Philippe
> > > >> >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> >
> > > >> >> >> > --
> > > >> >> >> > Cordialement.
> > > >> >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
> > > >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > --
> > > >> >> > Cordialement.
> > > >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
> > > >> >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Cordialement.
> > > > Philippe Mouawad.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cordialement.
> > Philippe Mouawad.
> >
>
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>.
Regarding the timer just put it under A Test Action which is already hidden
from results...
www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world wide
locations.
On Mar 25, 2014 11:38 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <ph...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:30 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 25 March 2014 21:27, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean data member
> > to
> > >> the
> > >> > sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a piece of code
> to
> > >> > ignore those who are marked hidden?
> > >>
> > >> The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent / SampleResult
> > >> class, as Listeners only operate on them.
> > >>
> > >> It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the file
> output
> > >> section.
> > >>
> > >> However the sample would still be sent to all Listener GUIs, even ones
> > >> that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser.
> > >> Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug" data, but
> > >> what about all the 3rd party code?
> > >>
> > >> It has long been a fundamental design feature of JMeter that all
> > >> results go to all Listeners in scope, and all results are sent equally
> > >> to file and GUI.
> > >>
> > >> I think changing this strategy is extremely risky, and will likely
> > >> cause more problems than the minor issue it is proposed to solve.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I think there is a misunderstanding.
> > > I was just proposing to change DebugSampler#sample(Entry e) like this:
> > >
> > >
> > > if(silent_mode) {
> > > return null;
> > > }
> > > // Otherwise current code still applies
> > > ...
> > >
> > >
> > > Where silent_mode is a boolean configured from a new property:
> > > # Flag to enable silent mode which leads to
> > > # debug_samplers doing nothing
> > > #debug_sampler_silent_mode=false
> >
> > How does that differ from disabling the Debug Sampler?
> >
>
> Well in my case, as I said I put Timer as a child of Debug Sampler (DS) so
> with this change, I get no DS in output but get the right pause times.
> The other benefit is that in GUI mode/ During debug of script I will put
> flag to true and during load test to false.
>
> So it really answers my need.
>
>
>
>
>
> > >>
> > >> > www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from
> world
> > >> wide
> > >> > locations.
> > >> > On Mar 25, 2014 1:46 AM, "sebb" <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> On 24 March 2014 20:16, Philippe Mouawad <
> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> > >
> > >> >> wrote:
> > >> >> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >> There is already a way to drop sampler output from the results -
> > just
> > >> >> >> return null.
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> This is what the Test Sampler does.
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can
> return
> > >> null.
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners, so
> it's
> > not
> > >> >> >> possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler output.
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> Would it make sense to add a property making Debug Sampler
> return
> > >> null ?
> > >> >> > #debug_sampler.silente_mode=false
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Yes, but the debug sampler would then do nothing.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >> However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the
> Listener
> > >> >> >> processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get
> saved.
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> > In that case what do you propose ?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Not sure.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <
> > philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> > >> >
> > >> >> >> wrote:
> > >> >> >> > Hello,
> > >> >> >> > I agree , this would be even better. I have the same
> requirement
> > >> for
> > >> >> >> JSR223
> > >> >> >> > Samplers.
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> > Regards
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <
> > >> shmulikk@gmail.com>
> > >> >> >> wrote:
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user chooses
> > it.
> > >> >> >> >> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't
> wanna
> > >> >> see...
> > >> >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> >> But this may get your implementation comlex...
> > >> >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring
> from
> > >> world
> > >> >> >> wide
> > >> >> >> >> locations.
> > >> >> >> >> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
> > >> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >> wrote:
> > >> >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> >> > Hello,
> > >> >> >> >> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
> > >> >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >> > - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG
> > Sampler
> > >> >> >> results
> > >> >> >> >> in
> > >> >> >> >> > ResultCollector
> > >> >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >> > Why:
> > >> >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput results
> > and
> > >> >> error
> > >> >> >> rate
> > >> >> >> >> > positively
> > >> >> >> >> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause time
> > in
> > >> Test
> > >> >> >> Plan,
> > >> >> >> >> > usually when pause time are not the same between samples
> > (I
> > >> put
> > >> >> >> Timer
> > >> >> >> >> > as a
> > >> >> >> >> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
> > >> >> >> >> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final
> > >> results ?
> > >> >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >> > --
> > >> >> >> >> > Regards.
> > >> >> >> >> > Philippe
> > >> >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> > --
> > >> >> >> > Cordialement.
> > >> >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > --
> > >> >> > Cordialement.
> > >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cordialement.
> > > Philippe Mouawad.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cordialement.
> Philippe Mouawad.
>
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:30 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 25 March 2014 21:27, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean data member
> to
> >> the
> >> > sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a piece of code to
> >> > ignore those who are marked hidden?
> >>
> >> The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent / SampleResult
> >> class, as Listeners only operate on them.
> >>
> >> It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the file output
> >> section.
> >>
> >> However the sample would still be sent to all Listener GUIs, even ones
> >> that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser.
> >> Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug" data, but
> >> what about all the 3rd party code?
> >>
> >> It has long been a fundamental design feature of JMeter that all
> >> results go to all Listeners in scope, and all results are sent equally
> >> to file and GUI.
> >>
> >> I think changing this strategy is extremely risky, and will likely
> >> cause more problems than the minor issue it is proposed to solve.
> >>
> >
> > I think there is a misunderstanding.
> > I was just proposing to change DebugSampler#sample(Entry e) like this:
> >
> >
> > if(silent_mode) {
> > return null;
> > }
> > // Otherwise current code still applies
> > ...
> >
> >
> > Where silent_mode is a boolean configured from a new property:
> > # Flag to enable silent mode which leads to
> > # debug_samplers doing nothing
> > #debug_sampler_silent_mode=false
>
> How does that differ from disabling the Debug Sampler?
>
Well in my case, as I said I put Timer as a child of Debug Sampler (DS) so
with this change, I get no DS in output but get the right pause times.
The other benefit is that in GUI mode/ During debug of script I will put
flag to true and during load test to false.
So it really answers my need.
> >>
> >> > www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world
> >> wide
> >> > locations.
> >> > On Mar 25, 2014 1:46 AM, "sebb" <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On 24 March 2014 20:16, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> There is already a way to drop sampler output from the results -
> just
> >> >> >> return null.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> This is what the Test Sampler does.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can return
> >> null.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners, so it's
> not
> >> >> >> possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler output.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Would it make sense to add a property making Debug Sampler return
> >> null ?
> >> >> > #debug_sampler.silente_mode=false
> >> >>
> >> >> Yes, but the debug sampler would then do nothing.
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the Listener
> >> >> >> processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get saved.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> > In that case what do you propose ?
> >> >>
> >> >> Not sure.
> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <
> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> > Hello,
> >> >> >> > I agree , this would be even better. I have the same requirement
> >> for
> >> >> >> JSR223
> >> >> >> > Samplers.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Regards
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <
> >> shmulikk@gmail.com>
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user chooses
> it.
> >> >> >> >> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't wanna
> >> >> see...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> But this may get your implementation comlex...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from
> >> world
> >> >> >> wide
> >> >> >> >> locations.
> >> >> >> >> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
> >> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > Hello,
> >> >> >> >> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG
> Sampler
> >> >> >> results
> >> >> >> >> in
> >> >> >> >> > ResultCollector
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Why:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput results
> and
> >> >> error
> >> >> >> rate
> >> >> >> >> > positively
> >> >> >> >> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause time
> in
> >> Test
> >> >> >> Plan,
> >> >> >> >> > usually when pause time are not the same between samples
> (I
> >> put
> >> >> >> Timer
> >> >> >> >> > as a
> >> >> >> >> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
> >> >> >> >> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final
> >> results ?
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> >> > Regards.
> >> >> >> >> > Philippe
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> > Cordialement.
> >> >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Cordialement.
> >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
> >> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cordialement.
> > Philippe Mouawad.
>
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 25 March 2014 21:27, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean data member to
>> the
>> > sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a piece of code to
>> > ignore those who are marked hidden?
>>
>> The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent / SampleResult
>> class, as Listeners only operate on them.
>>
>> It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the file output
>> section.
>>
>> However the sample would still be sent to all Listener GUIs, even ones
>> that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser.
>> Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug" data, but
>> what about all the 3rd party code?
>>
>> It has long been a fundamental design feature of JMeter that all
>> results go to all Listeners in scope, and all results are sent equally
>> to file and GUI.
>>
>> I think changing this strategy is extremely risky, and will likely
>> cause more problems than the minor issue it is proposed to solve.
>>
>
> I think there is a misunderstanding.
> I was just proposing to change DebugSampler#sample(Entry e) like this:
>
>
> if(silent_mode) {
> return null;
> }
> // Otherwise current code still applies
> ...
>
>
> Where silent_mode is a boolean configured from a new property:
> # Flag to enable silent mode which leads to
> # debug_samplers doing nothing
> #debug_sampler_silent_mode=false
How does that differ from disabling the Debug Sampler?
>>
>> > www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world
>> wide
>> > locations.
>> > On Mar 25, 2014 1:46 AM, "sebb" <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 24 March 2014 20:16, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> There is already a way to drop sampler output from the results - just
>> >> >> return null.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> This is what the Test Sampler does.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can return
>> null.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners, so it's not
>> >> >> possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler output.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Would it make sense to add a property making Debug Sampler return
>> null ?
>> >> > #debug_sampler.silente_mode=false
>> >>
>> >> Yes, but the debug sampler would then do nothing.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >> However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the Listener
>> >> >> processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get saved.
>> >> >>
>> >> > In that case what do you propose ?
>> >>
>> >> Not sure.
>> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>> >
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> > Hello,
>> >> >> > I agree , this would be even better. I have the same requirement
>> for
>> >> >> JSR223
>> >> >> > Samplers.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Regards
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <
>> shmulikk@gmail.com>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user chooses it.
>> >> >> >> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't wanna
>> >> see...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> But this may get your implementation comlex...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from
>> world
>> >> >> wide
>> >> >> >> locations.
>> >> >> >> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
>> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > Hello,
>> >> >> >> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG Sampler
>> >> >> results
>> >> >> >> in
>> >> >> >> > ResultCollector
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Why:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput results and
>> >> error
>> >> >> rate
>> >> >> >> > positively
>> >> >> >> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause time in
>> Test
>> >> >> Plan,
>> >> >> >> > usually when pause time are not the same between samples (I
>> put
>> >> >> Timer
>> >> >> >> > as a
>> >> >> >> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
>> >> >> >> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final
>> results ?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > --
>> >> >> >> > Regards.
>> >> >> >> > Philippe
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --
>> >> >> > Cordialement.
>> >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Cordialement.
>> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
>> >>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cordialement.
> Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean data member to
> the
> > sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a piece of code to
> > ignore those who are marked hidden?
>
> The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent / SampleResult
> class, as Listeners only operate on them.
>
> It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the file output
> section.
>
> However the sample would still be sent to all Listener GUIs, even ones
> that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser.
> Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug" data, but
> what about all the 3rd party code?
>
> It has long been a fundamental design feature of JMeter that all
> results go to all Listeners in scope, and all results are sent equally
> to file and GUI.
>
> I think changing this strategy is extremely risky, and will likely
> cause more problems than the minor issue it is proposed to solve.
>
I think there is a misunderstanding.
I was just proposing to change DebugSampler#sample(Entry e) like this:
if(silent_mode) {
return null;
}
// Otherwise current code still applies
...
Where silent_mode is a boolean configured from a new property:
# Flag to enable silent mode which leads to
# debug_samplers doing nothing
#debug_sampler_silent_mode=false
>
> > www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world
> wide
> > locations.
> > On Mar 25, 2014 1:46 AM, "sebb" <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 24 March 2014 20:16, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> There is already a way to drop sampler output from the results - just
> >> >> return null.
> >> >>
> >> >> This is what the Test Sampler does.
> >> >>
> >> >> At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can return
> null.
> >> >>
> >> >> The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners, so it's not
> >> >> possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler output.
> >> >>
> >> >> Would it make sense to add a property making Debug Sampler return
> null ?
> >> > #debug_sampler.silente_mode=false
> >>
> >> Yes, but the debug sampler would then do nothing.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the Listener
> >> >> processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get saved.
> >> >>
> >> > In that case what do you propose ?
> >>
> >> Not sure.
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > Hello,
> >> >> > I agree , this would be even better. I have the same requirement
> for
> >> >> JSR223
> >> >> > Samplers.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Regards
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <
> shmulikk@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user chooses it.
> >> >> >> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't wanna
> >> see...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> But this may get your implementation comlex...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from
> world
> >> >> wide
> >> >> >> locations.
> >> >> >> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Hello,
> >> >> >> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG Sampler
> >> >> results
> >> >> >> in
> >> >> >> > ResultCollector
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Why:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput results and
> >> error
> >> >> rate
> >> >> >> > positively
> >> >> >> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause time in
> Test
> >> >> Plan,
> >> >> >> > usually when pause time are not the same between samples (I
> put
> >> >> Timer
> >> >> >> > as a
> >> >> >> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
> >> >> >> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final
> results ?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> > Regards.
> >> >> >> > Philippe
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Cordialement.
> >> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Cordialement.
> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
> >>
>
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean data member to the
> sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a piece of code to
> ignore those who are marked hidden?
The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent / SampleResult
class, as Listeners only operate on them.
It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the file output section.
However the sample would still be sent to all Listener GUIs, even ones
that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser.
Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug" data, but
what about all the 3rd party code?
It has long been a fundamental design feature of JMeter that all
results go to all Listeners in scope, and all results are sent equally
to file and GUI.
I think changing this strategy is extremely risky, and will likely
cause more problems than the minor issue it is proposed to solve.
> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world wide
> locations.
> On Mar 25, 2014 1:46 AM, "sebb" <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 24 March 2014 20:16, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> There is already a way to drop sampler output from the results - just
>> >> return null.
>> >>
>> >> This is what the Test Sampler does.
>> >>
>> >> At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can return null.
>> >>
>> >> The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners, so it's not
>> >> possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler output.
>> >>
>> >> Would it make sense to add a property making Debug Sampler return null ?
>> > #debug_sampler.silente_mode=false
>>
>> Yes, but the debug sampler would then do nothing.
>>
>> >
>> >> However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the Listener
>> >> processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get saved.
>> >>
>> > In that case what do you propose ?
>>
>> Not sure.
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Hello,
>> >> > I agree , this would be even better. I have the same requirement for
>> >> JSR223
>> >> > Samplers.
>> >> >
>> >> > Regards
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user chooses it.
>> >> >> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't wanna
>> see...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> But this may get your implementation comlex...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world
>> >> wide
>> >> >> locations.
>> >> >> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
>> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>> >> >
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Hello,
>> >> >> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG Sampler
>> >> results
>> >> >> in
>> >> >> > ResultCollector
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Why:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput results and
>> error
>> >> rate
>> >> >> > positively
>> >> >> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause time in Test
>> >> Plan,
>> >> >> > usually when pause time are not the same between samples (I put
>> >> Timer
>> >> >> > as a
>> >> >> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
>> >> >> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final results ?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --
>> >> >> > Regards.
>> >> >> > Philippe
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Cordialement.
>> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Cordialement.
>> > Philippe Mouawad.
>>
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>.
Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean data member to the
sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a piece of code to
ignore those who are marked hidden?
www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world wide
locations.
On Mar 25, 2014 1:46 AM, "sebb" <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 24 March 2014 20:16, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> There is already a way to drop sampler output from the results - just
> >> return null.
> >>
> >> This is what the Test Sampler does.
> >>
> >> At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can return null.
> >>
> >> The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners, so it's not
> >> possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler output.
> >>
> >> Would it make sense to add a property making Debug Sampler return null ?
> > #debug_sampler.silente_mode=false
>
> Yes, but the debug sampler would then do nothing.
>
> >
> >> However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the Listener
> >> processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get saved.
> >>
> > In that case what do you propose ?
>
> Not sure.
>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hello,
> >> > I agree , this would be even better. I have the same requirement for
> >> JSR223
> >> > Samplers.
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user chooses it.
> >> >> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't wanna
> see...
> >> >>
> >> >> But this may get your implementation comlex...
> >> >>
> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world
> >> wide
> >> >> locations.
> >> >> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <
> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Hello,
> >> >> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG Sampler
> >> results
> >> >> in
> >> >> > ResultCollector
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Why:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput results and
> error
> >> rate
> >> >> > positively
> >> >> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause time in Test
> >> Plan,
> >> >> > usually when pause time are not the same between samples (I put
> >> Timer
> >> >> > as a
> >> >> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
> >> >> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final results ?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Regards.
> >> >> > Philippe
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Cordialement.
> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cordialement.
> > Philippe Mouawad.
>
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 24 March 2014 20:16, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> There is already a way to drop sampler output from the results - just
>> return null.
>>
>> This is what the Test Sampler does.
>>
>> At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can return null.
>>
>> The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners, so it's not
>> possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler output.
>>
>> Would it make sense to add a property making Debug Sampler return null ?
> #debug_sampler.silente_mode=false
Yes, but the debug sampler would then do nothing.
>
>> However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the Listener
>> processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get saved.
>>
> In that case what do you propose ?
Not sure.
>>
>>
>> On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> > I agree , this would be even better. I have the same requirement for
>> JSR223
>> > Samplers.
>> >
>> > Regards
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user chooses it.
>> >> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't wanna see...
>> >>
>> >> But this may get your implementation comlex...
>> >>
>> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world
>> wide
>> >> locations.
>> >> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>> >
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Hello,
>> >> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
>> >> >
>> >> > - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG Sampler
>> results
>> >> in
>> >> > ResultCollector
>> >> >
>> >> > Why:
>> >> >
>> >> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput results and error
>> rate
>> >> > positively
>> >> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause time in Test
>> Plan,
>> >> > usually when pause time are not the same between samples (I put
>> Timer
>> >> > as a
>> >> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
>> >> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final results ?
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Regards.
>> >> > Philippe
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Cordialement.
>> > Philippe Mouawad.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cordialement.
> Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is already a way to drop sampler output from the results - just
> return null.
>
> This is what the Test Sampler does.
>
> At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can return null.
>
> The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners, so it's not
> possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler output.
>
> Would it make sense to add a property making Debug Sampler return null ?
#debug_sampler.silente_mode=false
> However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the Listener
> processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get saved.
>
In that case what do you propose ?
>
>
> On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I agree , this would be even better. I have the same requirement for
> JSR223
> > Samplers.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user chooses it.
> >> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't wanna see...
> >>
> >> But this may get your implementation comlex...
> >>
> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world
> wide
> >> locations.
> >> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hello,
> >> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
> >> >
> >> > - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG Sampler
> results
> >> in
> >> > ResultCollector
> >> >
> >> > Why:
> >> >
> >> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput results and error
> rate
> >> > positively
> >> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause time in Test
> Plan,
> >> > usually when pause time are not the same between samples (I put
> Timer
> >> > as a
> >> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
> >> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final results ?
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Regards.
> >> > Philippe
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cordialement.
> > Philippe Mouawad.
>
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
There is already a way to drop sampler output from the results - just
return null.
This is what the Test Sampler does.
At present it does not look like the scripting samplers can return null.
The Debug Sampler displays its results via the Listeners, so it's not
possible to use this mechanism to suppress Debug Sampler output.
However, I'm not sure it makes sense to special case the Listener
processing so that some samples get displayed but don't get saved.
On 23 March 2014 14:35, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> I agree , this would be even better. I have the same requirement for JSR223
> Samplers.
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user chooses it.
>> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't wanna see...
>>
>> But this may get your implementation comlex...
>>
>> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world wide
>> locations.
>> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <ph...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hello,
>> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
>> >
>> > - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG Sampler results
>> in
>> > ResultCollector
>> >
>> > Why:
>> >
>> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput results and error rate
>> > positively
>> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause time in Test Plan,
>> > usually when pause time are not the same between samples (I put Timer
>> > as a
>> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
>> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final results ?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Regards.
>> > Philippe
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cordialement.
> Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>.
Hello,
I agree , this would be even better. I have the same requirement for JSR223
Samplers.
Regards
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user chooses it.
> For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't wanna see...
>
> But this may get your implementation comlex...
>
> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world wide
> locations.
> On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <ph...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> > What do you think about the following enhancement:
> >
> > - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG Sampler results
> in
> > ResultCollector
> >
> > Why:
> >
> > - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput results and error rate
> > positively
> > - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause time in Test Plan,
> > usually when pause time are not the same between samples (I put Timer
> > as a
> > child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
> > - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final results ?
> >
> > --
> > Regards.
> > Philippe
> >
>
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Enhancement to be able to ignore DEBUG Sampler in ResultCollector
Posted by Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>.
I would suggest to allow ignoring any sampler if user chooses it.
For example I use beanshell samplers which I mostly don't wanna see...
But this may get your implementation comlex...
www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from world wide
locations.
On Mar 23, 2014 4:27 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" <ph...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hello,
> What do you think about the following enhancement:
>
> - Be able through a new property to not output DEBUG Sampler results in
> ResultCollector
>
> Why:
>
> - Because Debug Sampler might affect throughput results and error rate
> positively
> - I use Debug Sampler to have a more readable pause time in Test Plan,
> usually when pause time are not the same between samples (I put Timer
> as a
> child of Debug Sampler (all properties to false)
> - Because it is DEBUG, why would you need it in final results ?
>
> --
> Regards.
> Philippe
>