On 3 March 2012 00:33, Philippe Mouawad <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 1:20 AM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 3 March 2012 00:14, Philippe Mouawad <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Hello Sebb, >> > Thanks very much for taking some time to review. >> > >> > Regarding docs usage update, as there is no impact at all on usage is >> there >> > something to update ? >> >> >> http://jmeter.apache.org/usermanual/component_reference.html#HTTP_Proxy_Server >> >> I added some text to just say it's possible to implement non native > protocols. Not sure it's useful. > > >> > A place to update would be the document jmeter_tutorial.pdf linked under >> > "Extending JMeter". >> > What's the official way to update it ? Using Open Office and editing >> > jmeter_tutorial_mike.sxw or is there a better way ? >> >> Yes, edit the sxw file. >> > I will do it within the next coming days, now I go to bed :-)
Not urgent, so long as it's done before the next release. > >> >> > Thanks >> > Regards >> > Philippe >> > >> > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 11:28 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> On 2 March 2012 12:24, Philippe Mouawad <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > Hello, >> >> > In french there is a quotation that says "Qui ne dit mot consent" :-) >> >> >> >> [That's called "lazy consensus" here, at least when applied to votes.] >> >> >> >> > Does it mean you're OK for me committing the issue >> >> > 52674<https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52674>or you >> >> > want to take some more time to review ? >> >> >> >> Just had another look. >> >> >> >> As far as I can tell, the changes only affect the Proxy code. >> >> In which case, it cannot affect existing test plans; the worst that >> >> can happen is that the Proxy behaves differently from before. >> >> I don't think that would matter much. >> >> >> >> I don't object to the code being committed. >> >> >> >> Please ensure that the Proxy usage docs are updated as necessary. >> >> >> >> > Thank you all. >> >> > Regards >> >> > Philippe >> >> > >> >> > On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Philippe Mouawad < >> >> > [email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Hello, >> >> >> To clarify a little bit what this enhancement brings: >> >> >> >> >> >> Today the Proxy can record standard HTTP sessions that are textual, >> see >> >> >> the Mail of 6 feb 2012 >> >> >> "It was designed for recording standard HTTP sessions; these are not >> >> >> binary" >> >> >> And particularly Issue 49039 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Although it is limited to Textual HTTP Sessions, lot of work in it >> can >> >> be >> >> >> reused to record AMF Sessions , Silverlight sessions or other binary >> >> >> protocols. >> >> >> >> >> >> The idea behind the enhancement is to propose the following: >> >> >> >> >> >> - Plugin implementor will be able by implementing a SampleCreator >> >> >> subclass to reuse 90% of proxy feature without duplicating lot of >> >> code: >> >> >> - All Header work >> >> >> - Sampler transmission to a Target once it's created , >> >> >> - ie, all the work done in patched HttpRequestHdr which is big >> + >> >> >> the ability to customize each of the methods in >> >> DefaultSamplerCreator (as >> >> >> Struts Base class was build for example) >> >> >> >> >> >> Another idea is to be able to customize the created Sampler, a direct >> >> use >> >> >> I see is for example is during a recording of a JSON, GWT or REST >> >> >> protocols, I as a user had to go on each sampler after recording and >> >> switch >> >> >> to RAW POST BODY (which means 40 clicks for 20 samplers), with >> current >> >> >> enhancement I can just subclass DefaultSamplerCreator and register >> it >> >> for >> >> >> GWT Content type and just set the property to switch it to RAW POST >> >> BODY. >> >> >> >> >> >> Hope it's clearer. >> >> >> Regards >> >> >> Philippe >> >> >> >> >> >> Today the Proxy feature can only be used to record HTTP Textual >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Philippe Mouawad < >> >> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> Hello, >> >> >>> I submitted a patch for 52674< >> >> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52674> >> >> >>> Hope you can have a look at it soon. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I didn't update Tests yet, if you think it's OK then I will update >> >> them. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Regards >> >> >>> Philippe >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:30 PM, Philippe Mouawad < >> >> >>> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>>> Hello Sebb, Milamber, Rainer, >> >> >>>> Did you have time to look at: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> - 52618 < >> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52618> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Do you think patch should be applied ? >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Also I would like to have your opinion regarding : >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> - 52674 < >> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52674> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> I started an implementation, should I provide a patch or commit it >> >> >>>> directly ? >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> My idea is the following: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> - Either introduce 2 interfaces: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> 1. SamplerFactory with following method: >> >> >>>> 1. createSampler(String contentType) => Called in >> >> >>>> HttpRequestHdr#getSampler() >> >> >>>> 2. SamplerCustomizer with following method: >> >> >>>> 1. customizeSampler(HttpSamplerBase sampler) => Called in >> >> >>>> HttpRequestHdr#getSampler() >> >> >>>> 2. fillBody(byte[] rawPostBody) => Called in >> >> >>>> HttpRequestHdr#getSampler() >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> - Or introduce only one SamplerProvider: >> >> >>>> - createSampler(String contentType) => Called in >> >> >>>> HttpRequestHdr#getSampler() >> >> >>>> - customizeSampler(HttpSamplerBase sampler) => Called in >> >> >>>> HttpRequestHdr#getSampler() >> >> >>>> - fillBody(byte[] rawPostBody) => Called in >> >> >>>> HttpRequestHdr#getSampler(): >> >> >>>> - Default implementation would do what is done today >> inside >> >> if >> >> >>>> ((!HTTPConstants.CONNECT.equals(getMethod())) && >> >> >>>> (!HTTPConstants.GET.equals(method))) { >> >> >>>> - Other protocols would handle it another way >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> -- >> >> >>>> Regards. >> >> >>>> Philippe Mouawad. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> -- >> >> >>> Cordialement. >> >> >>> Philippe Mouawad. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Cordialement. >> >> >> Philippe Mouawad. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Cordialement. >> >> > Philippe Mouawad. >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Cordialement. >> > Philippe Mouawad. >> > > > > -- > Cordialement. > Philippe Mouawad.
