Re: Sent bytes metric and bytes throughput

2016-10-11 Thread Antonio Gomes Rodrigues
Hi, Not for me. Sent bytes should not be considered in the bytes throughput Antonio 2016-10-11 7:46 GMT+02:00 Philippe Mouawad : > Hello, > Following the addition of sent bytes metric I wonder what wether or not > sent bytes should be considered in the bytes throughput ? > > For now it is not.

Re: BUG 53039 / Handling correctly responses that exceed Integer.MAX_VALUE

2016-10-11 Thread Philippe Mouawad
Hello, Unless there is a nogo, I'll be commiting the patch tomorrow evening. Regards Philippe On Monday, October 10, 2016, Philippe Mouawad 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. > >

Re: Sent bytes metric and bytes throughput

2016-10-11 Thread Milamber
On 11/10/2016 10:30, Antonio Gomes Rodrigues wrote: Hi, Not for me. Sent bytes should not be considered in the bytes throughput Agree with Antonio. Antonio 2016-10-11 7:46 GMT+02:00 Philippe Mouawad : Hello, Following the addition of sent bytes metric I wonder what wether or not sent b

Re: Sent bytes metric and bytes throughput

2016-10-11 Thread Philippe Mouawad
I also agree. On Tuesday, October 11, 2016, Milamber wrote: > > > On 11/10/2016 10:30, Antonio Gomes Rodrigues wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Not for me. Sent bytes should not be considered in the bytes throughput >> > > Agree with Antonio. > > >> Antonio >> >> 2016-10-11 7:46 GMT+02:00 Philippe Mouawad

Re: BUG 53039 / Handling correctly responses that exceed Integer.MAX_VALUE

2016-10-11 Thread Milamber
Ok for me for merge. But the default behavior must don't change and make some strong tests to avoid regression before 3.1 RC1. On 11/10/2016 20:37, Philippe Mouawad wrote: Hello, Unless there is a nogo, I'll be commiting the patch tomorrow evening. Regards Philippe On Monday, October 10, 20

Re: BUG 53039 / Handling correctly responses that exceed Integer.MAX_VALUE

2016-10-11 Thread Philippe Mouawad
On Tuesday, October 11, 2016, Milamber wrote: > > Ok for me for merge. But the default behavior must don't change What do you mean by default behaviour milamber ? You mean the limitation on response size ? > > > and make some strong tests to avoid regression before 3.1 RC1. I do tests on my

Re: BUG 53039 / Handling correctly responses that exceed Integer.MAX_VALUE

2016-10-11 Thread Felix Schumacher
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? Javadoc in o.a.j.protocol.http.sampler.HTTPAbstractImpl "Invokes ... InputSt

Re: BUG 53039 / Handling correctly responses that exceed Integer.MAX_VALUE

2016-10-11 Thread Philippe Mouawad
On Tuesday, October 11, 2016, 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)