Le 03/03/2012 00:20, sebb a ecrit : > 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 > > >> 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. >
Perhaps, convert it to OpenDocument (.odt) standardized file format (new default format for OpenOffice and readable directly by MS Word 2007SP2+) Milamber > >> 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. >> >
