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 2017/11/16 19:20:01 UTC
XPath Extractor : Drop Tidy Option
Hello,
Tidy option AFAIK used to allow using XPath Extractor for HTML.
I don't think it's needed anymore since we have CSS/JQuery extractor which
is:
- Up to date
- Powerful
- Performing much better than XPath
I propose to drop tidy options from XPath.
I even propose to think about dropping jtidy library which would mean :
- Either Dropping AnchorModifier or finding a better alternative to
jtidy to it if it's useful
IMO, we should drop it, as it doesn't work with Distributed testing as it
requires keeping the previous SampleResult response Data to be able to work
which Stripping mode clears.
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
Re: XPath Extractor : Drop Tidy Option
Posted by Antonio Gomes Rodrigues <ra...@gmail.com>.
+0 for me, I have never used XPath Extractor for HTML
Antonio
2017-11-17 8:10 GMT+01:00 Andrey Pokhilko <ap...@ya.ru>:
> +0 for me
>
> Andrey Pokhilko
>
> 16.11.2017 22:20, Philippe Mouawad пишет:
> > Hello,
> > Tidy option AFAIK used to allow using XPath Extractor for HTML.
> > I don't think it's needed anymore since we have CSS/JQuery extractor
> which
> > is:
> > - Up to date
> > - Powerful
> > - Performing much better than XPath
> >
> > I propose to drop tidy options from XPath.
> > I even propose to think about dropping jtidy library which would mean :
> >
> > - Either Dropping AnchorModifier or finding a better alternative to
> > jtidy to it if it's useful
> >
> > IMO, we should drop it, as it doesn't work with Distributed testing as
> it
> > requires keeping the previous SampleResult response Data to be able to
> work
> > which Stripping mode clears.
> >
>
>
Re: XPath Extractor : Drop Tidy Option
Posted by Andrey Pokhilko <ap...@ya.ru>.
+0 for me
Andrey Pokhilko
16.11.2017 22:20, Philippe Mouawad пишет:
> Hello,
> Tidy option AFAIK used to allow using XPath Extractor for HTML.
> I don't think it's needed anymore since we have CSS/JQuery extractor which
> is:
> - Up to date
> - Powerful
> - Performing much better than XPath
>
> I propose to drop tidy options from XPath.
> I even propose to think about dropping jtidy library which would mean :
>
> - Either Dropping AnchorModifier or finding a better alternative to
> jtidy to it if it's useful
>
> IMO, we should drop it, as it doesn't work with Distributed testing as it
> requires keeping the previous SampleResult response Data to be able to work
> which Stripping mode clears.
>
Re: XPath Extractor : Drop Tidy Option
Posted by Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>.
Hi ,
@Graham, would you propose a PR to:
- deprecate the properties in GUI
- amend documentation to say it will be dropped in N+2 and what is the
correct way
If you want to ask on user mailing list, feel free to do so.
Even if users use it, they should move out of it, but I am ok with the 2
steps process (Deprecate in N+1, Remove in N+2).
Thanks
On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Graham Russell <gr...@ham1.co.uk> wrote:
> +0
>
> I agree that CSS should be preferred for HTML and, in general, I'm in
> favour of removing seldom used/broken bits of functionality which don't
> warrant the cost of keeping them around, but I don't know enough about it
> nor how often XPath is currently used by people to say +1 for this yet.
>
> Maybe worth deprecating it and emailing the user mailing list to see the
> reaction?
>
> Graham
>
> On 16 November 2017 at 19:20, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
> > Hello,
> > Tidy option AFAIK used to allow using XPath Extractor for HTML.
> > I don't think it's needed anymore since we have CSS/JQuery extractor
> which
> > is:
> > - Up to date
> > - Powerful
> > - Performing much better than XPath
> >
> > I propose to drop tidy options from XPath.
> > I even propose to think about dropping jtidy library which would mean :
> >
> > - Either Dropping AnchorModifier or finding a better alternative to
> > jtidy to it if it's useful
> >
> > IMO, we should drop it, as it doesn't work with Distributed testing as
> it
> > requires keeping the previous SampleResult response Data to be able to
> work
> > which Stripping mode clears.
> >
> > --
> > Cordialement.
> > Philippe Mouawad.
>
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
Re: XPath Extractor : Drop Tidy Option
Posted by Graham Russell <gr...@ham1.co.uk>.
+0
I agree that CSS should be preferred for HTML and, in general, I'm in
favour of removing seldom used/broken bits of functionality which don't
warrant the cost of keeping them around, but I don't know enough about it
nor how often XPath is currently used by people to say +1 for this yet.
Maybe worth deprecating it and emailing the user mailing list to see the
reaction?
Graham
On 16 November 2017 at 19:20, Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hello,
> Tidy option AFAIK used to allow using XPath Extractor for HTML.
> I don't think it's needed anymore since we have CSS/JQuery extractor which
> is:
> - Up to date
> - Powerful
> - Performing much better than XPath
>
> I propose to drop tidy options from XPath.
> I even propose to think about dropping jtidy library which would mean :
>
> - Either Dropping AnchorModifier or finding a better alternative to
> jtidy to it if it's useful
>
> IMO, we should drop it, as it doesn't work with Distributed testing as it
> requires keeping the previous SampleResult response Data to be able to
work
> which Stripping mode clears.
>
> --
> Cordialement.
> Philippe Mouawad.
Re: XPath Extractor : Drop Tidy Option
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 18 November 2017 at 22:27, Philippe Mouawad
<ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 11:19 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 16 November 2017 at 19:20, Philippe Mouawad
>> <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> > Tidy option AFAIK used to allow using XPath Extractor for HTML.
>> > I don't think it's needed anymore since we have CSS/JQuery extractor
>> which
>> > is:
>> > - Up to date
>> > - Powerful
>> > - Performing much better than XPath
>> >
>> > I propose to drop tidy options from XPath.
>> > I even propose to think about dropping jtidy library which would mean :
>> >
>> > - Either Dropping AnchorModifier or finding a better alternative to
>> > jtidy to it if it's useful
>> >
>> > IMO, we should drop it, as it doesn't work with Distributed testing as
>> it
>> > requires keeping the previous SampleResult response Data to be able to
>> work
>> > which Stripping mode clears.
>>
>> Are you sure about that?
>>
> Yes, it is even documented in a note.
> To be clear,
> PreProcessor of Sampler N+1 requires access to Sample Result of Sampler N
> which would be stripped in distributed mode.
> It affects Link Parser and Re-writing Modifier:
> -
> http://jmeter.apache.org/usermanual/component_reference.html#HTML_Link_Parser
> -
> http://jmeter.apache.org/usermanual/component_reference.html#HTTP_URL_Re-writing_Modifier
>
> Surely that would break all PostProcessors that process response data?
>>
> No, because the problem is due to access to N-1 sampler's response data,
> not current N Sampler's response data
Unless I am missing something here, I think the way the sample data is
stripped is faulty.
AIUI the purpose of the stripping mode is to reduce the network
overheads, so only the returned data should be affected.
I would expect the server to keep the full data, and only strip the
data from the response.
>>
>> If it is the case, then that is a bug that needs to be fixed.
>>
>> > --
>> > Cordialement.
>> > Philippe Mouawad.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cordialement.
> Philippe Mouawad.
Re: XPath Extractor : Drop Tidy Option
Posted by Philippe Mouawad <ph...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 11:19 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 16 November 2017 at 19:20, Philippe Mouawad
> <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello,
> > Tidy option AFAIK used to allow using XPath Extractor for HTML.
> > I don't think it's needed anymore since we have CSS/JQuery extractor
> which
> > is:
> > - Up to date
> > - Powerful
> > - Performing much better than XPath
> >
> > I propose to drop tidy options from XPath.
> > I even propose to think about dropping jtidy library which would mean :
> >
> > - Either Dropping AnchorModifier or finding a better alternative to
> > jtidy to it if it's useful
> >
> > IMO, we should drop it, as it doesn't work with Distributed testing as
> it
> > requires keeping the previous SampleResult response Data to be able to
> work
> > which Stripping mode clears.
>
> Are you sure about that?
>
Yes, it is even documented in a note.
To be clear,
PreProcessor of Sampler N+1 requires access to Sample Result of Sampler N
which would be stripped in distributed mode.
It affects Link Parser and Re-writing Modifier:
-
http://jmeter.apache.org/usermanual/component_reference.html#HTML_Link_Parser
-
http://jmeter.apache.org/usermanual/component_reference.html#HTTP_URL_Re-writing_Modifier
Surely that would break all PostProcessors that process response data?
>
No, because the problem is due to access to N-1 sampler's response data,
not current N Sampler's response data
>
> If it is the case, then that is a bug that needs to be fixed.
>
> > --
> > Cordialement.
> > Philippe Mouawad.
>
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
Re: XPath Extractor : Drop Tidy Option
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 16 November 2017 at 19:20, Philippe Mouawad
<ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> Tidy option AFAIK used to allow using XPath Extractor for HTML.
> I don't think it's needed anymore since we have CSS/JQuery extractor which
> is:
> - Up to date
> - Powerful
> - Performing much better than XPath
>
> I propose to drop tidy options from XPath.
> I even propose to think about dropping jtidy library which would mean :
>
> - Either Dropping AnchorModifier or finding a better alternative to
> jtidy to it if it's useful
>
> IMO, we should drop it, as it doesn't work with Distributed testing as it
> requires keeping the previous SampleResult response Data to be able to work
> which Stripping mode clears.
Are you sure about that?
Surely that would break all PostProcessors that process response data?
If it is the case, then that is a bug that needs to be fixed.
> --
> Cordialement.
> Philippe Mouawad.