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 2015/03/01 20:13:06 UTC
Re: Release 2.13 ?
Hi,
I am writing a doc on Graphite Backend listener. I have nearly finished it.
I may make some changes to implementation to add a small feature or change
slightly some behaviour like:
- We don't compute response time metrics for KO samplers but it may be
interesting to have it
- we don't compute threads per thread group
I will try to add it this evening unless you absolutely want to release
this evening.
Regards
On Thursday, February 26, 2015, Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> It is not necessary to vote to start a new release. Just start a
> discussion for make a new release, and if nobody put a veto (missing
> fixes, wait for a new behavior to commit, etc.) the release process can
> be start.
>
> Thus if everybody are ok, I can start the release process, as the RM,
> next Sunday (1st march).
>
> The re-ordering of the contents in changes page seems a good thing too.
>
> Milamber
>
>
> On 26/02/2015 07:58, Похилько Андрей wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > I also have fixed connect time measurements, it was not operational, now
> it works.
> >
> > 26.02.2015, 09:24, "Felix Schumacher" <felix.schumacher@internetallee.de
> <javascript:;>>:
> >> Am 19. Februar 2015 23:53:28 MEZ, schrieb Philippe Mouawad <
> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com <javascript:;>>:
> >>> Hi,
> >>> I fixed what seemed urgent, remaining work (html report) will require
> >>> much
> >>> more time.
> >>> So if we want to release we could start.
> >> +1
> >>> Regarding changes.xml I suggest to change order:
> >>> - New and noteworthy
> >>> - Improvements
> >>> - Bugs
> >>> - Thanks
> >>> - Known issues
> >>>
> >>> As when you read them today, you see bugs before while enhancement are
> >>> usually what makes a product nice.
> >>> Known bugs are at the begining, I find personnaly that it may give a
> >>> bad
> >>> idea of jmeter while almost all of them are due to jdk bugs on some
> >>> systems.
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Felix
> >>> Regards
> >>>
> >>> On Friday, January 30, 2015, Philippe Mouawad
> >>> <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> Thanks Andrey,
> >>>> If possible we should fix this one before:
> >>>> - https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57514
> >>>>
> >>>> And I intend to commit a BackendListener client implementation
> >>> related to
> >>>> reporting.
> >>>> See a thread I will start.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Andrey Pokhilko <apc4@ya.ru
> <javascript:;>
> >>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','apc4@ya.ru <javascript:;>');>> wrote:
> >>>>> I have committed remote retry feature into trunk. Now I have no more
> >>>>> reasons to delay 2.13 release. Instead, I support it to be out as
> >>> soon
> >>>>> as it is possible.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Andrey Pokhilko
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 01/25/2015 07:02 PM, Philippe Mouawad wrote:
> >>>>>> +1 for inclusion (will reconsider once PR is available :-) )
> >>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Sunday, January 25, 2015, Andrey Pokhilko <apc4@ya.ru
> <javascript:;>
> >>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','apc4@ya.ru <javascript:;>');>> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Ah, I forgot one thing that I wanted to commit in 2.13: remote
> >>> retry
> >>>>>>> feature.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It is needed when you run distributed test with tens of slaves
> >>> and some
> >>>>>>> of them fail because of network glitches or other reasons.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> May I do that before starting release process for 2.13? As usual,
> >>> I'll
> >>>>>>> show it as GitHub PR first for easy review, and there will be
> >>> bugzilla
> >>>>>>> with explanation.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Andrey Pokhilko
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 01/25/2015 05:11 PM, Milamber wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> +1 for me to release a 2.13 version. (I can act as RM)
> >>>>>>>> +1 too for a new property to disable RSTA on Logger panel before
> >>> the
> >>>>> new
> >>>>>>>> release.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Milamber
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 25/01/2015 00:20, sebb wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> OK to name it 2.13 and to release it.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Given that there have been some issues with using
> >>> RSyntaxTextArea, I
> >>>>>>>>> wonder whether what it provides for the LoggerPanel is worth
> >>> the
> >>>>>>>>> potential disadvantages.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I have just had a look at the display, and I'm not sure it
> >>> provides
> >>>>>>>>> much apart from line numbering..
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I can see that RSTA is beneficial for the GUI fields, but these
> >>> are
> >>>>>>>>> generally quite small, whereas the logging panel can grow
> >>> without
> >>>>>>>>> bound.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> At the moment the user has no choice as to whether to use it.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Rather than release 2.13 and hope that the issues have been
> >>> solved, I
> >>>>>>>>> think it would be better to at least provide the option to
> >>> disable
> >>>>>>>>> RSTA for the LoggerPanel. This could be done with a property.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> At least then there would be a work round if RSTA proves
> >>> problematic.
> >>>>>>>>> On 24 January 2015 at 19:56, Felix Schumacher
> >>>>>>>>> <felix.schumacher@internetallee.de <javascript:;>
> >>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','felix.schumacher@internetallee.de
> <javascript:;>');>
> >>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Am 24.01.2015 um 16:30 schrieb Philippe Mouawad:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>>>>>> It appears 2.12 suffers from an OOM in GUI mode :
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> -
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57440
> >>>>>>>>>>> This OOM seems to be due to RSyntaxTexarea bug:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> - https://github.com/bobbylight/RSyntaxTextArea/issues/99
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> It appeared after the rework of LoggerPanel#processEvent way
> >>> of
> >>>>>>> appending
> >>>>>>>>>>> event.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Now that it receivs log event even when closed this OOM has
> >>> more
> >>>>>>> chances
> >>>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>> appear.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I reverted to 2.11 way of appending events to fix OOM waiting
> >>> for
> >>>>>>> answer
> >>>>>>>>>>> from rsyntaxtarea project.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> There was also a bug in the way limit=0 was set that had no
> >>>>> effect, I
> >>>>>>>>>>> fixed
> >>>>>>>>>>> it as part of the bug.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> There is a workaround which is to set:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> - jmeter.loggerpanel.enable_when_closed=false
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> But if user opens panel, OOM will occur if lot of logs occur
> >>>>>>> (specially if
> >>>>>>>>>>> stacktraces).
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> If we release, it cannot be named 2.12.1 because we have some
> >>>>> "big?"
> >>>>>>>>>>> features in this versions so it would not be a minor one.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Regarding the frequency and impact of this bug, in our
> >>> company I
> >>>>> had 2
> >>>>>>>>>>> reports in 5 days of this OOM so I think it is not to be
> >>> ignored.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts ?
> >>>>>>>>>> +1 to release 2.13. I don't think a we should go for 2.x.y.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>>>>> Felix
> >>>> --
> >>>> Cordialement.
> >>>> Philippe Mouawad.
>
>
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
Re: Release 2.13 ?
Posted by Milamber <mi...@apache.org>.
On 01/03/2015 19:13, Philippe Mouawad wrote:
> Hi,
> I am writing a doc on Graphite Backend listener. I have nearly finished it.
> I may make some changes to implementation to add a small feature or change
> slightly some behaviour like:
> - We don't compute response time metrics for KO samplers but it may be
> interesting to have it
> - we don't compute threads per thread group
>
> I will try to add it this evening unless you absolutely want to release
> this evening.
No, I will delay the release for next Tuesday (3rd, evening). (That also
suits me :-))
Milamber
>
> Regards
> On Thursday, February 26, 2015, Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> It is not necessary to vote to start a new release. Just start a
>> discussion for make a new release, and if nobody put a veto (missing
>> fixes, wait for a new behavior to commit, etc.) the release process can
>> be start.
>>
>> Thus if everybody are ok, I can start the release process, as the RM,
>> next Sunday (1st march).
>>
>> The re-ordering of the contents in changes page seems a good thing too.
>>
>> Milamber
>>
>>
>> On 26/02/2015 07:58, Похилько Андрей wrote:
>>> +1
>>>
>>> I also have fixed connect time measurements, it was not operational, now
>> it works.
>>> 26.02.2015, 09:24, "Felix Schumacher" <felix.schumacher@internetallee.de
>> <javascript:;>>:
>>>> Am 19. Februar 2015 23:53:28 MEZ, schrieb Philippe Mouawad <
>> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com <javascript:;>>:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> I fixed what seemed urgent, remaining work (html report) will require
>>>>> much
>>>>> more time.
>>>>> So if we want to release we could start.
>>>> +1
>>>>> Regarding changes.xml I suggest to change order:
>>>>> - New and noteworthy
>>>>> - Improvements
>>>>> - Bugs
>>>>> - Thanks
>>>>> - Known issues
>>>>>
>>>>> As when you read them today, you see bugs before while enhancement are
>>>>> usually what makes a product nice.
>>>>> Known bugs are at the begining, I find personnaly that it may give a
>>>>> bad
>>>>> idea of jmeter while almost all of them are due to jdk bugs on some
>>>>> systems.
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Felix
>>>>> Regards
>>>>>
>>>>> On Friday, January 30, 2015, Philippe Mouawad
>>>>> <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks Andrey,
>>>>>> If possible we should fix this one before:
>>>>>> - https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57514
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And I intend to commit a BackendListener client implementation
>>>>> related to
>>>>>> reporting.
>>>>>> See a thread I will start.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Andrey Pokhilko <apc4@ya.ru
>> <javascript:;>
>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','apc4@ya.ru <javascript:;>');>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I have committed remote retry feature into trunk. Now I have no more
>>>>>>> reasons to delay 2.13 release. Instead, I support it to be out as
>>>>> soon
>>>>>>> as it is possible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andrey Pokhilko
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 01/25/2015 07:02 PM, Philippe Mouawad wrote:
>>>>>>>> +1 for inclusion (will reconsider once PR is available :-) )
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sunday, January 25, 2015, Andrey Pokhilko <apc4@ya.ru
>> <javascript:;>
>>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','apc4@ya.ru <javascript:;>');>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Ah, I forgot one thing that I wanted to commit in 2.13: remote
>>>>> retry
>>>>>>>>> feature.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It is needed when you run distributed test with tens of slaves
>>>>> and some
>>>>>>>>> of them fail because of network glitches or other reasons.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> May I do that before starting release process for 2.13? As usual,
>>>>> I'll
>>>>>>>>> show it as GitHub PR first for easy review, and there will be
>>>>> bugzilla
>>>>>>>>> with explanation.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Andrey Pokhilko
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 01/25/2015 05:11 PM, Milamber wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +1 for me to release a 2.13 version. (I can act as RM)
>>>>>>>>>> +1 too for a new property to disable RSTA on Logger panel before
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>>>> release.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Milamber
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 25/01/2015 00:20, sebb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> OK to name it 2.13 and to release it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Given that there have been some issues with using
>>>>> RSyntaxTextArea, I
>>>>>>>>>>> wonder whether what it provides for the LoggerPanel is worth
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> potential disadvantages.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have just had a look at the display, and I'm not sure it
>>>>> provides
>>>>>>>>>>> much apart from line numbering..
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I can see that RSTA is beneficial for the GUI fields, but these
>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>> generally quite small, whereas the logging panel can grow
>>>>> without
>>>>>>>>>>> bound.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> At the moment the user has no choice as to whether to use it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Rather than release 2.13 and hope that the issues have been
>>>>> solved, I
>>>>>>>>>>> think it would be better to at least provide the option to
>>>>> disable
>>>>>>>>>>> RSTA for the LoggerPanel. This could be done with a property.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> At least then there would be a work round if RSTA proves
>>>>> problematic.
>>>>>>>>>>> On 24 January 2015 at 19:56, Felix Schumacher
>>>>>>>>>>> <felix.schumacher@internetallee.de <javascript:;>
>>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','felix.schumacher@internetallee.de
>> <javascript:;>');>
>>>>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 24.01.2015 um 16:30 schrieb Philippe Mouawad:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It appears 2.12 suffers from an OOM in GUI mode :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57440
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This OOM seems to be due to RSyntaxTexarea bug:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - https://github.com/bobbylight/RSyntaxTextArea/issues/99
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It appeared after the rework of LoggerPanel#processEvent way
>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>> appending
>>>>>>>>>>>>> event.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now that it receivs log event even when closed this OOM has
>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>> chances
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> appear.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I reverted to 2.11 way of appending events to fix OOM waiting
>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> answer
>>>>>>>>>>>>> from rsyntaxtarea project.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> There was also a bug in the way limit=0 was set that had no
>>>>>>> effect, I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it as part of the bug.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is a workaround which is to set:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - jmeter.loggerpanel.enable_when_closed=false
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> But if user opens panel, OOM will occur if lot of logs occur
>>>>>>>>> (specially if
>>>>>>>>>>>>> stacktraces).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we release, it cannot be named 2.12.1 because we have some
>>>>>>> "big?"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> features in this versions so it would not be a minor one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding the frequency and impact of this bug, in our
>>>>> company I
>>>>>>> had 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reports in 5 days of this OOM so I think it is not to be
>>>>> ignored.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts ?
>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 to release 2.13. I don't think a we should go for 2.x.y.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>>> Felix
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Cordialement.
>>>>>> Philippe Mouawad.
>>