jmeter-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Add an icon form Templates in toolbar
Date Tue, 09 Sep 2014 11:23:12 GMT
On 9 September 2014 09:00, Andrey Pohilko <apc4@ya.ru> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My opinion on the cached sample handling:
>
> 1. Not returning sample is wrong. Once user has Sampler he expects
> sample to be generated in that place. Without a sample we will have
> questions "what's happening" from users. If we look into Firebug or
> Developer Tools, we'll see that there are "samples' for cached content,
> having "from cache" as size qualifier.
> 2. Response code 204 is also wrong, it means different situation in RFC.
> The response code should be one from cached response. I suppose server
> can set caching headers for any of 2xx coded responses and client should
> respect that.
>
> I would suggest following:
>     a) return the code that were present in original cached response.
> and the response message also
>     b) in case of cached response add " (cached)" string to response
> message. Response message string is not defined as required by RFC and
> may contain any string in it, it is 100% informational. For example,
> original sample "200 OK" will look as "200 OK (cached)"
>     c) enable this by default, no property needed since the behavior is
> unambiguous

It's a bit harder to detect the sample, which is why I was thinking
about defining a specific non-HTTP return code.
This could be done using a property to override the 200 code.

Also JMeter does not cache the content, so the sample won't have any data.
Post-Processors may need to be aware of this.
Though given that 204 status is also success, and was not excluded
previously, perhaps this is not an issue.

> Andrey Pokhilko
>
> On 09.09.2014 00:41, sebb wrote:
>> On 8 September 2014 21:21, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 10:08 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8 September 2014 11:56, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 12:33 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7 September 2014 19:49, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 2:33 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 6 September 2014 22:44, Philippe Mouawad <
>>>> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hello All,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We could make a poll with 3 items:
>>>>>>>> [This should have been a new thread, and all these should
be separate
>>>>>>>> user threads]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1) Ask  Early users to test and give feedback on Undo/Redo
feature
>>>> in
>>>>>>>>> nightly build
>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let me just finish the Toolbar enabling/disabling
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2) Make a poll on the "Template" icon ? I agree with
you and I
>>>> think
>>>>>> sebb
>>>>>>>>> had raised this when initially icon was a wizard. My
concern is
>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> current icon may not be clear or "known" in other applications,
so
>>>> I
>>>>>>>> wonder
>>>>>>>>> if new user or even usual user have the idea of using
it
>>>>>>>> Perhaps see if we could use the Templates icon from OpenOffice?
>>>>>>>> This looks like a piece of paper with a star in the top left
corner.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here's a screenshot:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~sebb/JMeter/Templates.png
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nice one
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't think we necessarily need a poll on this, so long
as we all
>>>>>>>> agree that the new icon is better.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 3) Make a poll (As sebb proposed in another thread) on
the need to
>>>>>> add a
>>>>>>>>> user property for bugzilla 54778, to allow users to revert
to <
>>>> 2.12
>>>>>>>>> behaviour. My opinion based on previous versions behaviour
is that
>>>> we
>>>>>>>>> should introduce this , asking community may be confusing
>>>>>>>> If they are confused by the choice, won't they be confused
by the
>>>>>>>> change in behaviour?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It will depend on how the information is presented.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What about this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When using Cache Manager in JMeter. If a resource is found in
cache
>>>> then:
>>>>>>> - Up to version 2.11, no request hits the server and a 204 response
>>>> code
>>>>>>> with empty content was returned as a SampleResult
>>>>>>> - Starting from 2.12, no request hits the server, but no more
>>>>>> SampleResult
>>>>>>> will be created (this is inline with what browser do)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This change will affect:
>>>>>>> - the number of Samples in results
>>>>>>> - the average, median response time reported
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We propose 2 options to handle this:
>>>>>>> (1) Add the possibility through a JMeter property to revert back
to <=
>>>>>> 2.11
>>>>>>> behaviour
>>>>>>> (2) No JMeter property to revert back to <= 2.11 behaviour
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please vote depending on what would be better for you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Or maybe we could use a doodle ?
>>>>>> On reflection, I agree that providing a property to select the
>>>>>> behaviour is the obvious thing to do.
>>>>>> Adding the property does not need a vote.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok
>>>>>> However, I'm not sure we should change the default.
>>>>>> There have been no external bug reports, so presumably users are
not
>>>>>> unhappy with the current behaviour.
>>>>>> Or perhaps hardly anyone uses the Cache Manager.
>>>>>>
>>>>> No clearly there has been reports but not on mailing list.
>>>> It would help to link to these on the Bug report.
>>>>
>>>>> As far as I remember I opened this bug after a twitter discussion:
>>>>> https://twitter.com/Scooletz/status/317252989003915264
>>>>>
>>>>> And see this:
>>>>>
>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/17694151/jmeter-response-code-204-and-cant-get-content
>>>>> https://flood.io/blog/18-understanding-the-jmeter-cache
>>>>>
>>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jmeter-dev/201303.mbox/%3CCAH9fUpYXZ8+jXZP48L37yXA_vXnToQ4ghMHibG6kOpFOFe-Zag@mail.gmail.com%3E
>>>>
>>>> This suggests returning a sample with a different status, rather than
>>>> no sample at all.
>>>>
>>>> You mean the last one ?
>>>
>>>>> So for me returning 204 is clearly a bug that must be fixed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, I wonder whether the fix for the bug report is the only possible
>>>> one.
>>>>>> It seems odd to drop the sample result entirely.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> For me dropping sample is fine as in this case , a browser would lookup
>>>>> cache and not hit server and not return 204.
>>>>> 204 is a particular code that does not meet this case.
>>>> Perhaps, but JMeter is not a browser, and anyway a browser would
>>>> return the cache entry.
>>>>
>>> Yes but it would not return 204. 204 is a code that means server returned
>>> an empty response , but server was hit so clearly wrong in this case.
>>>
>>>> Not returning a sample is not necessarily the correct thing to do.
>>>>
>>> Why ? for me it means no request occured which is what happens for the
>>> browser and on client <=> server dialog (which jmeter mimics)
>>>
>>>> There is no unique HTTP status that corresponds to a local cache hit.
>>>>
>>> Yes because in this case , HTTP is not involved as no Request occurs
>>>
>>>> I assume that it was decided to use 204 as being the closest.
>>>>
>>>> JMeter is not a browser; it is primarily intended for testing servers.
>>>> So I think what is important here is to generate results that can be
>>>> analysed to show the appropriate performance figures.
>>>>
>>> Not returning any sample when cache is hit is the right option for me for
>>> the reason I described above.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> If you are only interested in the samples that hit the server, then I
>>>> agree that cached responses can be ignored.
>>>> But if one is interested in the client load that the server can
>>>> support, it would be useful to be able to record cache hits.
>>>>
>>> Yes this could be useful.
>>>
>>>
>>>> An alternative would be to return 200 (cache) for a local cache hit.
>>>> Though this is not ideal given that JMeter does not currently cache the
>>>> content.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe JMeter could return a currently unused status?
>>>>
>>>> Suppose JMeter were enhanced to cache the response content.
>>>>
>>> You mean https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53540 ?
>> Not really.
>> That issue is a consequence of not caching the content, not actually
>> an enhancement request to add such caching.
>> Indeed one solution was to cache just the embedded resource URLs,
>> which is quite different.
>>
>>>> What status should it return? How would one distinguish it from an
>>>> actual server request?
>>>>
>>>> Could you give more details on this through an example ?
>> Seems too obvious to need explaining, but here goes:
>>
>> Assume JMeter has been enhanced to cache the full content of a URL.
>> Request a URL.
>> Assume it is cached.
>> Request the same URL, assume the cache entry has not expired.
>> JMeter can then return the entire contents, exactly as it did originally.
>>
>> If it returns 200, how can one tell from the response whether it was
>> served from cache or from the server?
>> Note that a server request can have an elapsed time of zero if the
>> server is faster than the clock granularity
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>> Philippe
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Milamber <milamberspace@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Le 31/08/2014 13:22, Philippe Mouawad a ecrit :
>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>> I wonder if the current icon for Templates is
the right one.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The first icon which was a kind of wizard seems
to me maybe a
>>>>>> better
>>>>>>>>>> option
>>>>>>>>>>> even if it's not really a wizard.
>>>>>>>>>>> The current icon is kind of "unknown" in the
mind of users I
>>>> think
>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>> does not encourage its usage.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts ?
>>>>>>>>>> No problem for me for change icon, but the Wizard
icon seems
>>>>>> introduce
>>>>>>>>>> some confusion to the users (the template box is
just 1 box, not
>>>>>> several
>>>>>>>>>> steps to construct a test plan like a "wizard" in
a software).
>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps ask on user mailing list (make a poll to
choice the best
>>>>>> icon?)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>> Philippe
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:52 AM, Milamber <milamber@apache.org
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 13/07/2013 22:15, sebb a ecrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  On 13 July 2013 22:32, Milamber <milamber@apache.org>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 13/07/2013 20:58, sebb a ecrit
:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1, but I think it should be
after Open;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sincerely, I prefer the template
icon after New icon. It's
>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> user-friendly in my mind. New=>New
test plan from scratch,
>>>>>>>>>> Template=>New
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> test(or merge) to help end / beginner
user, Open=>Open a test
>>>>>> plan
>>>>>>>>>> that I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> create (I'm pass the first steps
to use JMeter).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Unless there are plenty of templates
for the user, they will
>>>>>>>> likely
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ignore the Template button very quickly..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The Template behavior is a new functionality
of JMeter, I can't
>>>>>> know
>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>>> will have a plenty of templates (I hope this).
>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like commit with "New|Template|Open"
in toolbar. If in
>>>>>>>> future,
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> users brings some misunderstand on this order/toolbar,
we can
>>>>>> change
>>>>>>>>>> easily
>>>>>>>>>>>> the order.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Milamber
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>  and we need to drop the New
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> icon (Bug 55258) - so it will
still be second.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 13 July 2013 19:37, Philippe
Mouawad <
>>>>>>>> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 for app office
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 13, 2013,
Milamber wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Le 13/07/2013 16:29, sebb
a ecrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  On 13 July 2013 17:05,
Milamber <milamber@apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Le 12/07/2013 14:10,
sebb a ecrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    On 12 July
2013 09:07, Milamber <milamber@apache.org
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I thinks
the new ability of Templates can have a
>>>>>> dedicated
>>>>>>>>>> button
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Toolbar.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Agreed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    I saw
the Open Icon Library [1] to find a icon to
>>>> this
>>>>>>>> action
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> license
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CC-BT-SA
3.0).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  CC-BY-SA
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    I found
two icons (the same but with two different
>>>>>>>> colors),
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> magic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wand.
In the sense of "magician".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Not
sure the Template system is anything like a
>>>> Wizard
>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> computing
sense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it's
misleading to use a wand here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Basically
it's a selection from a list.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  I've update
with other icon (CC-BY-SA) :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.milamberspace.net/**toolbar-template/<
>>>>>> http://www.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> milamberspace.net/toolbar-template/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The open icon
library provide great icons, but it's very
>>>>>>>>>> difficult
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good icon with
the good license for the "templates"
>>>>>> bahavior.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Yes, indeed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What about one of
the following?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://openiconlibrary.**sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./**
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Icons/categories/applications-**office.png<http://
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> openiconlibrary.sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./Icons/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> categories/applications-office.png>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://openiconlibrary.**sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./**
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Icons/actions/archive-insert-**3.png<
>>>> http://openiconlibrary
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./Icons/actions/archive-insert-3.png
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://openiconlibrary.**sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./**
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Icons/actions/document-import-**2.pngve<http://
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> openiconlibrary.sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./Icons/actions/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> document-import-2.pngve>update
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  I've update the
page:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.milamberspace.net/**toolbar-template/<
>>>> http://www.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> milamberspace.net/toolbar-template/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The application-office
icon seems very good ? +1 for me at
>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> position.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     You can see the render
here and 2 proposal of
>>>> position in
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> toolbar:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.milamberspace.net/**toolbar-template/<
>>>>>> http://www
>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> milamberspace.net/toolbar-template/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    I
think any icon belongs either just before or just
>>>>>> after
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Open",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i.e.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> New, Template,
Open
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> New, Open,
Template
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It does not
seem logical to have it between Save
>>>> Selection
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> Cut.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    What is
your opinion? need to find a new icon? the
>>>> best
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> position/color?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Milamber
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://openiconlibrary.**sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./
>>>>>>>> <http:/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /openiconlibrary.sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cordialement.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippe Mouawad.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Cordialement.
>>>>>>>>> Philippe Mouawad.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Cordialement.
>>>>>>> Philippe Mouawad.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Cordialement.
>>>>> Philippe Mouawad.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cordialement.
>>> Philippe Mouawad.
>

Mime
View raw message