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 2015/02/19 23:53:28 UTC
Re: Release 2.13 ?
Hi,
I fixed what seemed urgent, remaining work (html report) will require much
more time.
So if we want to release we could start.
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.
Regards
On Friday, January 30, 2015, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
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:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','apc4@ya.ru');>> 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:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','apc4@ya.ru');>> 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:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','felix.schumacher@internetallee.de');>
>> <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.
>>
Re: Release 2.13 ?
Posted by Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>.
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>.
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" <fe...@internetallee.de>:
>> Am 19. Februar 2015 23:53:28 MEZ, schrieb Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>:
>>> 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
>>> <ph...@gmail.com>
>>> 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:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','apc4@ya.ru');>> 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:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','apc4@ya.ru');>> 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:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','felix.schumacher@internetallee.de');>
>>>>> <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.
Re: Release 2.13 ?
Posted by Похилько Андрей <ap...@ya.ru>.
+1
I also have fixed connect time measurements, it was not operational, now it works.
26.02.2015, 09:24, "Felix Schumacher" <fe...@internetallee.de>:
> Am 19. Februar 2015 23:53:28 MEZ, schrieb Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>:
>> 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
>> <ph...@gmail.com>
>> 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:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','apc4@ya.ru');>> 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:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','apc4@ya.ru');>> 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:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','felix.schumacher@internetallee.de');>
>>>> <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.
Re: Release 2.13 ?
Posted by Felix Schumacher <fe...@internetallee.de>.
Am 19. Februar 2015 23:53:28 MEZ, schrieb Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>:
>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
><ph...@gmail.com>
>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:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','apc4@ya.ru');>> 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:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','apc4@ya.ru');>> 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:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','felix.schumacher@internetallee.de');>
>>> <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.
>>
>>
>>