Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jmeter.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@jmeter.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of sebbaz@gmail.com designates
 74.125.82.49 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <0E1FDD26CD35694FBC52505E30FA0448FC81EE@srv024038.bigpoint.local>
References: 
 <CAH9fUpY3eTVN7zt7sH9v8WZ1tgE3ownkKW2wd0VYTWz_fxmmhw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOGo0VbMBnB-XZfVsu56kTx7QV4aeTtqQ7YPo_eYCWntw4fnOw@mail.gmail.com>
	<0E1FDD26CD35694FBC52505E30FA0448FC81EE@srv024038.bigpoint.local>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 09:34:20 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAOGo0VbKGENw+PKfh7rbiNG0nY-=yViBkBkfraHVwqxYCPZ5tw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: About HoldSampleSender
From: sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>
To: dev@jmeter.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 19 August 2013 08:51, Danny Lade <D.Lade@bigpoint.net> wrote:
> Before we have written our own SampleSender we tried this one.
>
> What makes it most worse is the fact that it stores the whole response bo=
dy. Therefore rather small tests runs into OutOfMemory if the bodies are bi=
g (JSON/HTML).
> Additionally it blocks the whole process because the sample store is (unn=
ecessarily) synchronized.

There is one class instance per Listener (in test plan or created by
using -l flag).
This is shared between threads, and testEnded uses a different thread,
so access to the store must be synchronised.
Both to ensure the the store is updated safely and to ensure safe publicati=
on.

> In my opinion the only useful way to use a HoldSampleSender is one based =
on statistical data mining.

Good point; it could be useful to create a new version for that, as it
would avoid any network traffic during the run.
However one could just use independent non-GUI runs instead...

> IMHO Danny
>
>> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: sebb [mailto:sebbaz@gmail.com]
>> Gesendet: Sonntag, 18. August 2013 23:07
>> An: dev@jmeter.apache.org
>> Betreff: Re: About HoldSampleSender
>>
>> On 15 August 2013 22:02, Philippe Mouawad
>> <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> > Looking at this implementation, I wonder if it is really needed and
>> > wether it should not be deprecated.
>> >
>> > It seems to me dangerous:
>> >
>> >    - It requires a lot of memory, users should be aware of it.
>> >    - Even with lot of memory, it could impact highly performances of
>> >    jmeter-servers through GC impacts
>> >
>> >
>> > Thoughts ?
>>
>> Yes, it's probably not very useful, but we should probably not delete it=
 (yet).
>>
>> Let's add some docs to say don't use it (and perhaps add a log.warn
>> message on startup).
>>
>>
>> > --
>> > Regards.
>> > Philippe M.