https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58506
Philippe Mouawad <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO --- Comment #4 from Philippe Mouawad <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Gordon Daugherty from comment #2) > This is a request for feedback to guide our development effort on this one. > We're considering taking the approach given in my last comment: > > When no "JNDI name Receive queue" is provided create a single temporary > queue and act as if that temp queue's name was placed in the "JNDI name > Receive queue" field. This will naturally cause receive timeouts to be > applied AND will avoid the coordinated omission error in the metrics that > JMeter collects. > > Please respond by stating whether you have significant concerns about this > approach. It'll keep the UI simple but will prevent JMeter from being able > to generate a load using a limited number of threads each doing a blocking > invocation. > > If there are no objections to this approach we'll do it as-proposed to keep > it simple. If you believe that users want to be able to generate load using > a limited number of threads each doing a blocking invocation we can try to > come up with an understandable way to present both options to users in the > UI but I think it'll end up making the UI less understandable. First thanks for your contribution. Second, if possible, I think you should keep the current possibility to generate load using a limited number of threads each doing a blocking invocation, unless this is absolutely stupid, which for now is not sure in my understanding. What would be the impact on UI of this ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
