https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48889
--- Comment #3 from JottKa <j.kalsb...@jk-itberatung.de> 2010-03-11 15:55:35 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Thanks for the suggested patch, which should help. > > However, I think the threadGroup is still needed, otherwise unrelated threads > in different thread groups will be aggregated, leading to the same problem. Yes but at least with the current implementation the event.getResult().getThreadName() call already contains the threadGroup name. A typical key would be "NameOfSampler-NameOfThreadGroup 1-10". I just verified the proper working with two threadgroups. But an explicit call to getThreadGroup would make it more robust. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: jmeter-dev-unsubscr...@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: jmeter-dev-h...@jakarta.apache.org
