directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Lecharny <elecha...@iktek.com>
Subject Re: Ldap clients
Date Tue, 01 Feb 2005 22:10:14 GMT
The point is that those clients are pretty minimalist actually. The
question is : do we need them or not? 

Talking about performance and protocol tests, that are two different
subject:
1) performance : JMeter is - IMHO - a perfect tool to test the server.
I've used it a few years ago, and it gives good results. I don't like to
re-invent the wheel (well, from time to time, that could be an
option ;-), so I would +1 for it against writing specific load test
tool.
2) protocol tests : client are really good to start with, but they need
some add-ons (automatic tests cases, and so on). But there are others
options : using a Ldap browser to test EVE, for instance, in combinaison
with Ethereal, or ldapXXXX scripts, wich can be automated.

On the other side, it could be cool to deliver a whole package : EVE +
JNDI providers + direct clients. Sure, clients script could be wrote
using a JNDI LDAP provider, but is it necessary? And what about querying
other servers (replication/synchronisation in mind)?

So actually, I've finished with ldap.clients (except standalone, which
could be put aside), and it compiles. It does not work, because of the
digester/encoder/decoder problem, but this is NOT a regression. And
valon is no more needed.

So the next step could be the encoder/decoder stuff, with those steps :
1) eradicate the bugs
2) rethinking the encoder/decoder things (keeping the actuals one for
the moment, because it exists !)
3) rewrite it.

And maybe improve the clients to accept the same syntax and options than
OpendLdap scripts.

What do you think?

btw, do I push the client code through Jira? A svn diff is 3036 lines
long...

NB : bloody Babel tower! It takes me so looooong to write what I have in
mind in english (and, for sure, a trully bad english :( 

Le mardi 01 février 2005 à 16:33 -0500, Alex Karasulu a écrit :
> Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> 
> >Hi,
> >
> >is there any functionnal difference between :
> >org.apache.ldap.clients.standalone 
> >and
> >org.apache.ldap.clients
> >?
> >
> >Does some unit tests exist for those classes? I don't think so, but I
> >may be wrong.
> >
> >What about org.apache.ldap.clients.ldaptest : is it a kind of UI to test
> >Ldap clients operations? I've launched it after having crafted a minimal
> >XML configuration file, but I can't Add tests cases. Any clue?
> >
> >  
> >
> Emmanuel, your guess is as good as mine.  It's been over a year and a 
> half since I looked at the client code. 
> 
> Jeff Machols (primary guy who was working client code) and I started 
> talking about building an LDAP test suite for both performance and for 
> protocol testing.  We were going to use it to collect information about 
> how well ApacheDS performs in relation to other servers.  I think some 
> of the XML work was to design test cases around client requests for this 
> purpose.  Perhaps if Jeff is listening he can shed some light on this.
> 
> The stuff in client top pkg look almost exactly the same as the 
> standalone stuff.  I have no idea why Jeff may have structured it this 
> way.  Perhaps he was going to do some refactoring but descided not to 
> after copying stuff into a new package.  That too does not make sense 
> since he would have copied the trunk to branches.
> 
> Here's my recommendation to you.  If you want to totally revamp this go 
> right ahead.  Take what ever you can use from it and we'll just replace 
> the trunk with new code (granted if it passes review which I think it 
> will).
> 
> Is this preferrable for you?
> 
> Cheers,
> Alex
> 
> 
> 



Mime
View raw message