Lance, >From what I've heard through the grapevine, you can request the Quick Test Pro Flex plugin from Adobe. However I'm not exactly sure who to contact for it. Maybe someone else in the group has this info or has received the plugin before?
In regard to LoadRunner and AMF3 support, I have been working with a client that had this same question. Basically, the answer from Mercury tech support was that AMF3 encoding was not supported and the workaround was for them to downgrade to the AMF0 encoding...which of course is not an option if your using AMF3-only supported features: "AMF3 supports sending int and uint objects as integers and supports data types that are available only in ActionScript 3.0, such as ByteArray, XML, and IExternalizable."* * Taken from: http://livedocs.macromedia.com/labs/as3preview/langref/flash/net/ObjectE\ ncoding.html Here's a link if you decide to go the AMF0 route: http://livedocs.macromedia.com/flex/2/docs/wwhelp/wwhimpl/common/html/ww\ help.htm?context=LiveDocs_Parts&file=00001105.html Also, you can run "AMF" and "object encoding" searches on the Flex 2 livedocs site for more info. Hope that helps some, Jun --- In [email protected], "Lance Linder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Anyone using or had success with trying Quick Test Pro with Flex? This > was something I wanted to evaluate ever since Macromedia/Adobe announced > they were working with Mercury back in October of 2005. Since the beta > release of Flex I really haven't heard anything more about this other > than some info that there might be better support between the two once > Flex 2.1 is released. Can anyone comment on this that has tried to use > Quick Test Pro with Flex 2.0? > > > > Also I really really need a good load testing tool and LoadRunner looks > like the ticket especially since I am already interested in Quick Test > Pro. Has anyone used LoadRunner with AMF3 or does LoadRunner even work > with AMF3? Right now I am not so concerned about RTMP but AMF3 is a > must. It seems that SilkTest from Borland supports AMF3 but I would > rather stick with a vendor that has both functional GUI test tools and > load test tools that meet my requirements. > > > > Thanks! > > Lance >
