Remote Testing Trouble

2004-10-27 Thread Christian Schwanke
Hi, I successfully ran a testplan locally. Now I want to run the testplan on a remote machine. I followed the instructions from the manual and started the jmeter-server--Skript (which - as I understand - launches the rmiregistry). The log file on the remote machine states: 2004/10/27 18:10:27

Re: Remote Testing Trouble

2004-10-27 Thread sebb
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 18:07:56 +0200 (MEST), Christian Schwanke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I successfully ran a testplan locally. Now I want to run the testplan on a remote machine. I followed the instructions from the manual and started the jmeter-server--Skript (which - as I understand -

Re: Remote Testing Trouble

2004-10-27 Thread Christian Schwanke
Hi sebb, thanks for your quick reply. I have definitly removed the 127.0.0.1 entry from the remote_hosts property setting. I just tried a jmeter-setup on my local network and it work exactly the way it should. What I noticed is this: Watching the jmeter.log file of my server-machine, it

Re: Remote Testing Trouble

2004-10-27 Thread sebb
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 22:49:29 +0200, Christian Schwanke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi sebb, thanks for your quick reply. I have definitly removed the 127.0.0.1 entry from the remote_hosts property setting. I just tried a jmeter-setup on my local network and it work exactly the way it should.

Re: Remote Testing Trouble

2004-10-27 Thread Christian Schwanke
Interesting that the server log changes on different systems. I can't say I've looked at them closely, because we never use remote mode - non-GUI (batch) is a lot more efficient. OK, maybe I'll consider this as well - but that would be workaround not a solution ;-) But I still don't understand

Re: Remote Testing Trouble

2004-10-27 Thread sebb
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 01:28:35 +0200, Christian Schwanke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Interesting that the server log changes on different systems. I can't say I've looked at them closely, because we never use remote mode - non-GUI (batch) is a lot more efficient. OK, maybe I'll consider this