On Wednesday, March 26, 2014, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 25 March 2014 23:02, Philippe Mouawad > <[email protected]<javascript:;>> > wrote: > > On Wednesday, March 26, 2014, sebb <[email protected] <javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > >> On 25 March 2014 22:31, Philippe Mouawad > >> <[email protected]<javascript:;> > <javascript:;>> > >> wrote: > >> > They differ because in Test Action case, there is a sleep which is > taken > >> > as processing of Sampler. > >> > >> If you set the Test Action sleep to zero, it won't affect the TC output. > >> > >> But my aim was to control better pause time. > > So ok it answers other needs but not my main one. > > See below. > > >> > While with my strategy the timer being a child of DebugSampler it will > >> act > >> > as TestAction but as time is within a timer it will not affect time > taken > >> > by DebugSampler. > >> > Make the test sebb you will see. > >> > >> I have, and I did not see a problem. > >> > >> Set it to > 0 and you will see the difference > > Well of course, but the suggestion from Shmuel was to use a dummy Test > Action as the parent for the Timer. > > Simply replace the Debug Sampler with a Test Action Sampler that does > nothing. > > Okay, thanks Shmuel and sebb for this tip, didn't think about it !
>> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:26 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On 25 March 2014 21:53, Philippe Mouawad <[email protected] > > > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Shmuel Krakower < > [email protected] > >> >> >wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> Regarding the timer just put it under A Test Action which is > already > >> >> hidden > >> >> >> from results... > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > No it is not the same, because I usually use a Transaction > Controller > >> >> and > >> >> > have HTTP Sampler as its children . > >> >> > Using Test Action will make Transaction Sampler report time taken > by > >> HTTP > >> >> > Sampler + Test Action which I don't want. > >> >> > While using Timer will give correct time. > >> >> > >> >> The Debug Sampler is a sampler, the same as the Test Action sampler. > >> >> So I don't see how they differ when used under a TC. > >> >> Note that the Test Action controller itself does not have to wait. > >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> www.beatsoo.org - free application performance monitoring from > world > >> >> wide > >> >> >> locations. > >> >> >> On Mar 25, 2014 11:38 PM, "Philippe Mouawad" < > >> >> [email protected]> > >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:30 PM, sebb <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > On 25 March 2014 21:27, Philippe Mouawad < > >> >> [email protected]> > >> >> >> > > wrote: > >> >> >> > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, sebb <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > >> On 25 March 2014 07:42, Shmuel Krakower < > [email protected]> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> > > >> > Maybe we can go with simple approach of adding a boolean > >> data > >> >> >> member > >> >> >> > > to > >> >> >> > > >> the > >> >> >> > > >> > sampler base class of Hidden and all listeners add a > piece > >> of > >> >> code > >> >> >> > to > >> >> >> > > >> > ignore those who are marked hidden? > >> >> >> > > >> > >> >> >> > > >> The boolean would have to be added to the SampleEvent / > >> >> SampleResult > >> >> >> > > >> class, as Listeners only operate on them. > >> >> >> > > >> > >> >> >> > > >> It would be possible to check this flag before invoking the > >> file > >> >> >> > output > >> >> >> > > >> section. > >> >> >> > > >> > >> >> >> > > >> However the sample would still be sent to all Listener > GUIs, > >> even > >> >> >> ones > >> >> >> > > >> that operate on "real" data, such as the Summariser. > >> >> >> > > >> Yes, one could amend all of these as well to reject "debug" > >> data, > >> >> >> but > >> >> >> > > >> what about all the 3rd party code? > >> >> >> > > >> > >> >> >> > > >> It has long been a fundamental design feature of -- Cordialement. Philippe Mouawad.
