This is my understanding of the discussion summary: Existing tests (qpid/cpp/src/tests/qpid-cpp-benchmark and qpid/java/tools/bin/qpid-jms-benchmark) be replaced by qpid/python/qpid-benchmark (using qpid-cpp-benchmark as a starting point). Options --qpid-send-path and --qpid-receive-path will default to "qpid-send" and "qpid-receive" and interpreted as path+binary when starting with "/" or just binary otherwise (and rely on env).
Regards, Irina. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Conway" <acon...@redhat.com> To: dev@qpid.apache.org Sent: Monday, November 11, 2013 9:26:44 AM Subject: Re: Proposal to consolidate qpid benchmark tests On 11/11/2013 05:47 AM, Gordon Sim wrote: > On 11/08/2013 07:59 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote: >> On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 14:24 -0500, Irina Boverman wrote: >>> Qpid-send (cpp) and qpid-jms-send use slightly different options, it seems >>> to >>> me it is best to add "-l <lang>" option to the driver, and then use correct >>> method/options. It will not require renaming, nor passing method name as >>> another argument. >> >> It seems to me that it would make more sense to change the different >> programs to have the same options. Or at least to have a common subset >> of options that can be used by the benchmark/interop tester. >> >> It makes much more sense to me from an engineering perspective to >> define/accept a common interface to the programs than to add a bunch of >> special cases to the driving program. > > I very much agree. > +1 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@qpid.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@qpid.apache.org
