On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 1:55 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 9 September 2014 12:32, Philippe Mouawad <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 1:23 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On 9 September 2014 09:00, Andrey Pohilko <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > My opinion on the cached sample handling: > >> > > >> > 1. Not returning sample is wrong. Once user has Sampler he expects > >> > sample to be generated in that place. Without a sample we will have > >> > questions "what's happening" from users. If we look into Firebug or > >> > Developer Tools, we'll see that there are "samples' for cached > content, > >> > having "from cache" as size qualifier. > >> > 2. Response code 204 is also wrong, it means different situation in > RFC. > >> > The response code should be one from cached response. I suppose server > >> > can set caching headers for any of 2xx coded responses and client > should > >> > respect that. > >> > > >> > I would suggest following: > >> > a) return the code that were present in original cached response. > >> > and the response message also > >> > b) in case of cached response add " (cached)" string to response > >> > message. Response message string is not defined as required by RFC and > >> > may contain any string in it, it is 100% informational. For example, > >> > original sample "200 OK" will look as "200 OK (cached)" > >> > c) enable this by default, no property needed since the behavior > is > >> > unambiguous > >> > >> It's a bit harder to detect the sample, which is why I was thinking > >> about defining a specific non-HTTP return code. > >> This could be done using a property to override the 200 code. > >> > >> Also JMeter does not cache the content, so the sample won't have any > data. > >> Post-Processors may need to be aware of this. > >> Though given that 204 status is also success, and was not excluded > >> previously, perhaps this is not an issue. > >> > > > > Not removing the sampleresults means erroneously impacting positively > > response time no ? > > Depends on how the response times are calculated. > > > Also regarding Andrei note on difference between browser showing 200 > > (cache) vs JMeter not showing it,for me main JMeter job is simulate > > load on server and traffic between Browser and Server, so it should not > > report anything for Browser internal traffic. > > I don't think there is an ideal solution to this. > Some people will want to see all the samples executed by JMeter, and > some will need to see only the external requests. > > There are probably at least 3 approaches: > 1) return null sample (i.e. no sample) > 2) return sample with status 200 and message containing "(ex cache)" or > similar > 3) return sample with a different status, chosen by the user >
Ok let's implement it then, would it be active through property ? What would be the default ? > > Regarding caching the content, the impact on JMeter memory would be > huge, I > > doubt it scales fine. > > Does not have to be purely a memory cache; it could be disk-based (as > most browsers use) > I think it would be IO overkill in this case. But why not some day > > > > >> > Andrey Pokhilko > >> > > >> > On 09.09.2014 00:41, sebb wrote: > >> >> On 8 September 2014 21:21, Philippe Mouawad < > [email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> >>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 10:08 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>>> On 8 September 2014 11:56, Philippe Mouawad < > >> [email protected]> > >> >>>> wrote: > >> >>>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 12:33 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>>> On 7 September 2014 19:49, Philippe Mouawad < > >> [email protected] > >> >>>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>>> On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 2:33 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> On 6 September 2014 22:44, Philippe Mouawad < > >> >>>> [email protected] > >> >>>>>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>> Hello All, > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> We could make a poll with 3 items: > >> >>>>>>>> [This should have been a new thread, and all these should be > >> separate > >> >>>>>>>> user threads] > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> 1) Ask Early users to test and give feedback on Undo/Redo > >> feature > >> >>>> in > >> >>>>>>>>> nightly build > >> >>>>>>>> +1 > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Let me just finish the Toolbar enabling/disabling > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> 2) Make a poll on the "Template" icon ? I agree with you and I > >> >>>> think > >> >>>>>> sebb > >> >>>>>>>>> had raised this when initially icon was a wizard. My concern > is > >> >>>> that > >> >>>>>>>>> current icon may not be clear or "known" in other > applications, > >> so > >> >>>> I > >> >>>>>>>> wonder > >> >>>>>>>>> if new user or even usual user have the idea of using it > >> >>>>>>>> Perhaps see if we could use the Templates icon from OpenOffice? > >> >>>>>>>> This looks like a piece of paper with a star in the top left > >> corner. > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> Here's a screenshot: > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~sebb/JMeter/Templates.png > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Nice one > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> I don't think we necessarily need a poll on this, so long as we > >> all > >> >>>>>>>> agree that the new icon is better. > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> 3) Make a poll (As sebb proposed in another thread) on the > need > >> to > >> >>>>>> add a > >> >>>>>>>>> user property for bugzilla 54778, to allow users to revert to > < > >> >>>> 2.12 > >> >>>>>>>>> behaviour. My opinion based on previous versions behaviour is > >> that > >> >>>> we > >> >>>>>>>>> should introduce this , asking community may be confusing > >> >>>>>>>> If they are confused by the choice, won't they be confused by > the > >> >>>>>>>> change in behaviour? > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> It will depend on how the information is presented. > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> What about this: > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> When using Cache Manager in JMeter. If a resource is found in > cache > >> >>>> then: > >> >>>>>>> - Up to version 2.11, no request hits the server and a 204 > response > >> >>>> code > >> >>>>>>> with empty content was returned as a SampleResult > >> >>>>>>> - Starting from 2.12, no request hits the server, but no more > >> >>>>>> SampleResult > >> >>>>>>> will be created (this is inline with what browser do) > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> This change will affect: > >> >>>>>>> - the number of Samples in results > >> >>>>>>> - the average, median response time reported > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> We propose 2 options to handle this: > >> >>>>>>> (1) Add the possibility through a JMeter property to revert back > >> to <= > >> >>>>>> 2.11 > >> >>>>>>> behaviour > >> >>>>>>> (2) No JMeter property to revert back to <= 2.11 behaviour > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Please vote depending on what would be better for you. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Or maybe we could use a doodle ? > >> >>>>>> On reflection, I agree that providing a property to select the > >> >>>>>> behaviour is the obvious thing to do. > >> >>>>>> Adding the property does not need a vote. > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> Ok > >> >>>>>> However, I'm not sure we should change the default. > >> >>>>>> There have been no external bug reports, so presumably users are > not > >> >>>>>> unhappy with the current behaviour. > >> >>>>>> Or perhaps hardly anyone uses the Cache Manager. > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>> No clearly there has been reports but not on mailing list. > >> >>>> It would help to link to these on the Bug report. > >> >>>> > >> >>>>> As far as I remember I opened this bug after a twitter discussion: > >> >>>>> https://twitter.com/Scooletz/status/317252989003915264 > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> And see this: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> > >> > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/17694151/jmeter-response-code-204-and-cant-get-content > >> >>>>> https://flood.io/blog/18-understanding-the-jmeter-cache > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> > >> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jmeter-dev/201303.mbox/%3ccah9fupyxz8+jxzp48l37yxa_vxntoq4ghmhibg6kopfofe-...@mail.gmail.com%3E > >> >>>> > >> >>>> This suggests returning a sample with a different status, rather > than > >> >>>> no sample at all. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> You mean the last one ? > >> >>> > >> >>>>> So for me returning 204 is clearly a bug that must be fixed. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>>> Also, I wonder whether the fix for the bug report is the only > >> possible > >> >>>> one. > >> >>>>>> It seems odd to drop the sample result entirely. > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>> For me dropping sample is fine as in this case , a browser would > >> lookup > >> >>>>> cache and not hit server and not return 204. > >> >>>>> 204 is a particular code that does not meet this case. > >> >>>> Perhaps, but JMeter is not a browser, and anyway a browser would > >> >>>> return the cache entry. > >> >>>> > >> >>> Yes but it would not return 204. 204 is a code that means server > >> returned > >> >>> an empty response , but server was hit so clearly wrong in this > case. > >> >>> > >> >>>> Not returning a sample is not necessarily the correct thing to do. > >> >>>> > >> >>> Why ? for me it means no request occured which is what happens for > the > >> >>> browser and on client <=> server dialog (which jmeter mimics) > >> >>> > >> >>>> There is no unique HTTP status that corresponds to a local cache > hit. > >> >>>> > >> >>> Yes because in this case , HTTP is not involved as no Request occurs > >> >>> > >> >>>> I assume that it was decided to use 204 as being the closest. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> JMeter is not a browser; it is primarily intended for testing > servers. > >> >>>> So I think what is important here is to generate results that can > be > >> >>>> analysed to show the appropriate performance figures. > >> >>>> > >> >>> Not returning any sample when cache is hit is the right option for > me > >> for > >> >>> the reason I described above. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>>> If you are only interested in the samples that hit the server, > then I > >> >>>> agree that cached responses can be ignored. > >> >>>> But if one is interested in the client load that the server can > >> >>>> support, it would be useful to be able to record cache hits. > >> >>>> > >> >>> Yes this could be useful. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>>> An alternative would be to return 200 (cache) for a local cache > hit. > >> >>>> Though this is not ideal given that JMeter does not currently cache > >> the > >> >>>> content. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Maybe JMeter could return a currently unused status? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Suppose JMeter were enhanced to cache the response content. > >> >>>> > >> >>> You mean https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53540 ? > >> >> Not really. > >> >> That issue is a consequence of not caching the content, not actually > >> >> an enhancement request to add such caching. > >> >> Indeed one solution was to cache just the embedded resource URLs, > >> >> which is quite different. > >> >> > >> >>>> What status should it return? How would one distinguish it from an > >> >>>> actual server request? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Could you give more details on this through an example ? > >> >> Seems too obvious to need explaining, but here goes: > >> >> > >> >> Assume JMeter has been enhanced to cache the full content of a URL. > >> >> Request a URL. > >> >> Assume it is cached. > >> >> Request the same URL, assume the cache entry has not expired. > >> >> JMeter can then return the entire contents, exactly as it did > >> originally. > >> >> > >> >> If it returns 200, how can one tell from the response whether it was > >> >> served from cache or from the server? > >> >> Note that a server request can have an elapsed time of zero if the > >> >> server is faster than the clock granularity > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>>>>>>>> Regards > >> >>>>>>>>> Philippe > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Milamber < > >> [email protected]> > >> >>>>>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>> Le 31/08/2014 13:22, Philippe Mouawad a ecrit : > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Hello, > >> >>>>>>>>>>> I wonder if the current icon for Templates is the right one. > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The first icon which was a kind of wizard seems to me maybe > a > >> >>>>>> better > >> >>>>>>>>>> option > >> >>>>>>>>>>> even if it's not really a wizard. > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The current icon is kind of "unknown" in the mind of users I > >> >>>> think > >> >>>>>>>> which > >> >>>>>>>>>>> does not encourage its usage. > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts ? > >> >>>>>>>>>> No problem for me for change icon, but the Wizard icon seems > >> >>>>>> introduce > >> >>>>>>>>>> some confusion to the users (the template box is just 1 box, > not > >> >>>>>> several > >> >>>>>>>>>> steps to construct a test plan like a "wizard" in a > software). > >> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps ask on user mailing list (make a poll to choice the > best > >> >>>>>> icon?) > >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Regards > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Philippe > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:52 AM, Milamber < > >> [email protected] > >> >>>>>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Le 13/07/2013 22:15, sebb a ecrit : > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 13 July 2013 22:32, Milamber <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 13/07/2013 20:58, sebb a ecrit : > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1, but I think it should be after Open; > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sincerely, I prefer the template icon after New icon. > It's > >> >>>> more > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> user-friendly in my mind. New=>New test plan from > scratch, > >> >>>>>>>>>> Template=>New > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> test(or merge) to help end / beginner user, Open=>Open a > >> test > >> >>>>>> plan > >> >>>>>>>>>> that I > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> create (I'm pass the first steps to use JMeter). > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Unless there are plenty of templates for the user, they > >> will > >> >>>>>>>> likely > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ignore the Template button very quickly.. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> The Template behavior is a new functionality of JMeter, I > >> can't > >> >>>>>> know > >> >>>>>>>> if > >> >>>>>>>>>> we > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> will have a plenty of templates (I hope this). > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> I would like commit with "New|Template|Open" in toolbar. > If in > >> >>>>>>>> future, > >> >>>>>>>>>> the > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> users brings some misunderstand on this order/toolbar, we > can > >> >>>>>> change > >> >>>>>>>>>> easily > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> the order. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Milamber > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and we need to drop the New > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> icon (Bug 55258) - so it will still be second. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 13 July 2013 19:37, Philippe Mouawad < > >> >>>>>>>> [email protected]> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 for app office > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 13, 2013, Milamber wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 13/07/2013 16:29, sebb a ecrit : > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 13 July 2013 17:05, Milamber <[email protected] > > > >> >>>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 12/07/2013 14:10, sebb a ecrit : > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12 July 2013 09:07, Milamber < > >> [email protected] > >> >>>>>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I thinks the new ability of Templates can have a > >> >>>>>> dedicated > >> >>>>>>>>>> button > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Toolbar. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Agreed. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I saw the Open Icon Library [1] to find a icon > to > >> >>>> this > >> >>>>>>>> action > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (with > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> license > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CC-BT-SA 3.0). > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CC-BY-SA > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I found two icons (the same but with two > different > >> >>>>>>>> colors), > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> magic > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wand. In the sense of "magician". > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not sure the Template system is anything like a > >> >>>> Wizard > >> >>>>>> in > >> >>>>>>>> the > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> computing sense. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it's misleading to use a wand here. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Basically it's a selection from a list. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've update with other icon (CC-BY-SA) : > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.milamberspace.net/**toolbar-template/< > >> >>>>>> http://www. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> milamberspace.net/toolbar-template/> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The open icon library provide great icons, but it's > >> very > >> >>>>>>>>>> difficult > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find a > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good icon with the good license for the "templates" > >> >>>>>> bahavior. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, indeed. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What about one of the following? > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://openiconlibrary.** > sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./** > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Icons/categories/applications-**office.png<http:// > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> openiconlibrary.sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./Icons/ > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> categories/applications-office.png> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://openiconlibrary.** > sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./** > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Icons/actions/archive-insert-**3.png< > >> >>>> http://openiconlibrary > >> >>>>>> . > >> >>>>>> sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./Icons/actions/archive-insert-3.png > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://openiconlibrary.** > sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./** > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Icons/actions/document-import-**2.pngve<http:// > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>> openiconlibrary.sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./Icons/actions/ > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> document-import-2.pngve>update > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> : > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've update the page: > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.milamberspace.net/**toolbar-template/< > >> >>>> http://www. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> milamberspace.net/toolbar-template/> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The application-office icon seems very good ? +1 for > me > >> at > >> >>>>>> this > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> position. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can see the render here and 2 proposal of > >> >>>> position in > >> >>>>>>>> the > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> toolbar: > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.milamberspace.net/**toolbar-template/< > >> >>>>>> http://www > >> >>>>>>>> . > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> milamberspace.net/toolbar-template/> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think any icon belongs either just before or > >> just > >> >>>>>> after > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Open", > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i.e. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> New, Template, Open > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> New, Open, Template > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It does not seem logical to have it between Save > >> >>>> Selection > >> >>>>>>>> and > >> >>>>>>>>>> Cut. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is your opinion? need to find a new icon? > the > >> >>>> best > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> position/color? > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Milamber > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://openiconlibrary.** > >> sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./ > >> >>>>>>>> <http:/ > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /openiconlibrary.sourceforge.net/gallery2/?./> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cordialement. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippe Mouawad. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> -- > >> >>>>>>>>> Cordialement. > >> >>>>>>>>> Philippe Mouawad. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> -- > >> >>>>>>> Cordialement. > >> >>>>>>> Philippe Mouawad. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> -- > >> >>>>> Cordialement. > >> >>>>> Philippe Mouawad. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> -- > >> >>> Cordialement. > >> >>> Philippe Mouawad. > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Cordialement. > > Philippe Mouawad. > -- Cordialement. Philippe Mouawad.
