Jonathan,
Your fix may function well under some circumstances, but is does not seem to
cater for non-gui testing where I end up with a jmeter.log full of these (I
don't think I checked the log when I was running in gui mode):
12/22/2002 9:08:27 PM ERROR - jmeter.engine: java.lang.ClassCastException
at
org.apache.jmeter.assertions.ResponseAssertion.getTestPatterns(ResponseAsser
tion.java:166)
at
org.apache.jmeter.assertions.ResponseAssertion.evaluateResponse(ResponseAsse
rtion.java:368)
at
org.apache.jmeter.assertions.ResponseAssertion.getResult(ResponseAssertion.j
ava:268)
at
org.apache.jmeter.threads.JMeterThread.checkAssertions(JMeterThread.java:179
)
at org.apache.jmeter.threads.JMeterThread.run(JMeterThread.java:144)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:536)
Can you please verify this Jonathan - I guess there is a possibility that I
miss-typed your code.
I added a couple of debug statements immediately prior to the error, these
produce:
getProperty(TEST_PATTERNS) =
org.apache.jmeter.assertions.ResponseAssertion$3@4445b5
getProperty(TEST_PATTERNS).getClass().getName() = java.lang.String
Which doesn't seem quite right to me.
I'll mark the patch as not to be applied until we sort this out.
Scott
--
Scott Eade
Backstage Technologies Pty. Ltd.
http://www.backstagetech.com.au
.Mac Chat/AIM: seade at mac dot com
On 21/12/2002 1:35 AM, "Jonathan Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks again, Scott, for preparing the patch.
>
> To answer your question on how pinned down the problem was, I was able to
> reproduce it on a run of a dozen or so requests that had 10 threads running.
> Which request and which thread that it occurred on was variable for each run,
> although it did happen on some requests more than others. I'm not sure why.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/20/02 07:06AM >>>
> Hi Michal,
>
> Short answer: No.
>
> Longer answer:
> a. in my experience issues relating to thread safety can sometimes be a
> little tricky to reproduce, let alone to reproduce consistently (I do note
> your use of 'almost unfailing'). I get the impression that Jonathan may in
> face have such an example, but whether or not he can provide it and whether
> or not it can be formulated into a test case is another story.
> b. either it is thread safe or it isn't - if it isn't then the fix is
> required (the added performance and javadoc are also beneficial). I am
> trusting Jonathan's statement that the matcher and compiler are not thread
> safe.
>
> All in all I am seeking to ensure that my test cases work correctly. To
> this end I had implemented Jonathan's patch locally. I simply volunteered
> to provide the patch for commit because Jonathan lacked the facilities to do
> so himself.
>
> Can you please clarify the motivation for your query? Are you promoting a
> "no patches without test cases" philosophy or is there something special
> about this particular change that concerns you?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Scott
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
