On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Felix Schumacher < felix.schumac...@internetallee.de> wrote:
> > > Am 12. Oktober 2016 11:19:08 MESZ, schrieb Philippe Mouawad < > philippe.moua...@gmail.com>: > >On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Felix Schumacher < > >felix.schumac...@internetallee.de> wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> Am 12. Oktober 2016 10:10:30 MESZ, schrieb Philippe Mouawad < > >> philippe.moua...@gmail.com>: > >> >Hello, > >> >I commited r1764397 taking into account feedback, at least what I > >> >understood. > >> >Please find details inline below. > >> > > >> >Regards > >> > > >> >On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:16 PM, Felix Schumacher < > >> >felix.schumac...@internetallee.de> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Am 11.10.2016 um 21:37 schrieb Philippe Mouawad: > >> >> > >> >>> Hello, > >> >>> Unless there is a nogo, I'll be commiting the patch tomorrow > >> >evening. > >> >>> > >> >> Is old public method o.a.j.samplers.SampleResult#setBodySize(int) > >> >missing > >> >> after the patch? > >> >> > >> >Fixed > >> > >> I can't see setBodySize(int) in the current source. > >> > >Ok, I see. Fixed. > > > >> > >> > > >> >> > >> >> Javadoc in o.a.j.protocol.http.sampler.HTTPAbstractImpl "Invokes > >... > >> >> InputStream, int) ...", shouldn't it be "...InputStream, > >long)..."? > >> >> > >> >Fixed , please check > >> > > >> >> > >> >> Comment in > >> > >>o.a.j.protocol.http.sampler.HTTPFileImpl#MAX_BYTES_TO_STORE_PER_REQUEST > >> >> ... default value: *false*; shouldn't it be 10 MB? > >> >> > >> >Fixed , please check > >> > > >> >> > >> >> Could a o.a.commons.io.input.BoundedInputStream help to shorten > >our > >> >new > >> >> code in o.a.j.protocol.http.sampler.HTTPFileImpl? > >> >> > >> >I don't think so as we need to compute the size of the file even if > >we > >> >only > >> >load part of it. AFAIU, BoundedInputStream does not allow that. > >> > > >> > > >> >> > >> >> Comments in o.a.j.protocol.http.sampler.HTTPSamplerBase same as > >those > >> >in > >> >> HTTPFileImpl. > >> >> > >> > > >> >I didn't understand the problem here. > >> > >> The default values are partly wrong; false instead of 10mb. > >> > >Are you sure ? > >I don't see where . Thx > > I don't see it anymore either. > > On the other hand, the limited storing is slightly wrong. It might store > less then the given limit. > Good catch if I understood correctly. Fixed (I hope) in r1764422 Please double check. Thanks > > Felix > > > > >> > >> Felix > >> > >> > > >> >> > >> >> Thanks for your work on this, > >> >> Felix > >> >> > >> >>> > >> >>> Regards > >> >>> Philippe > >> >>> > >> >>> On Monday, October 10, 2016, Philippe Mouawad < > >> >>> p.moua...@ubik-ingenierie.com> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> Hello , > >> >>>> Any feedback on this ? > >> >>>> I think it should be fixed before next release as it appears for > >> >now that > >> >>>> we cannot handle big downloads. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Regards > >> >>>> Philippe > >> >>>> > >> >>>> On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 9:25 PM, Philippe Mouawad < > >> >>>> p.moua...@ubik-ingenierie.com > >> >>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','p.moua...@ubik-ingenierie.com');>> > >> >wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Hello, > >> >>>>> I have attached to BUG 53039 a first patch to handle the bug. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> There are several decisions to take regarding this piece of > >work: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> - Introduce a new property that controls how much data from > >> >the > >> >>>>> response we store > >> >(httpsampler.max_bytes_to_store_per_request). > >> >>>>> Indeed we are limited by array size which is lower than > >> >>>>> Integer.MAX_VALUE > >> >>>>> and even without that, JMeter would not scale if we really > >> >save the > >> >>>>> whole > >> >>>>> response. I consider that if response is bigger than a > >certain > >> >>>>> limit, the > >> >>>>> response is most probably a binary where assertion will be > >a > >> >size > >> >>>>> of a md5 > >> >>>>> hash. > >> >>>>> - Introduce a new property to protect JMeter from big > >content > >> >length > >> >>>>> (httpsampler.max_buffer_size). Today we would fail even > >> >without > >> >>>>> this issue > >> >>>>> with an OOM due to size of array to allocate. > >> >>>>> - backward compatibility of return methods, I think we need > >to > >> >>>>> introduce getBytesAsLong and deprecate getBytes(). I'll > >update > >> >>>>> patch with > >> >>>>> this. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Regards > >> >>>>> Philippe M. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> -- > >> >>>> Cordialement. > >> >>>> Philippe Mouawad. > >> >>>> Ubik-Ingénierie > >> >>>> > >> >>>> UBIK LOAD PACK Web Site <http://www.ubikloadpack.com/> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> UBIK LOAD PACK on TWITTER <https://twitter.com/ubikloadpack> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >> > >> > >> > > -- Cordialement. Philippe Mouawad.
