[Bug 62887] Customized SampleLabel is ignored and overwritten by JMeter 5.0

2018-11-13 Thread bugzilla 
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62887

--- Comment #14 from Artem Fedorov  ---
Created attachment 36260
  --> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36260=edit
Benchmark test class

I created a benchmark test for equals and compareTo methods. 
Dependencies:

org.openjdk.jmh
jmh-core
1.19


org.openjdk.jmh
jmh-generator-annprocess
1.19


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 62887] Customized SampleLabel is ignored and overwritten by JMeter 5.0

2018-11-13 Thread bugzilla 
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62887

--- Comment #15 from Artem Fedorov  ---
Benchmark results:

# Run complete. Total time: 00:37:59

Benchmark   (index)   Mode  Cnt  Score   Error   Units
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark0  thrpt   20  0.823 ± 0.013  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark1  thrpt   20  0.829 ± 0.007  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark2  thrpt   20  0.822 ± 0.012  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark3  thrpt   20  0.822 ± 0.017  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark4  thrpt   20  0.817 ± 0.012  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark5  thrpt   20  0.829 ± 0.003  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark6  thrpt   20  0.828 ± 0.009  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   0  thrpt   20  0.829 ± 0.002  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   1  thrpt   20  0.745 ± 0.006  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   2  thrpt   20  0.745 ± 0.006  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   3  thrpt   20  0.818 ± 0.013  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   4  thrpt   20  0.738 ± 0.013  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   5  thrpt   20  0.744 ± 0.008  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   6  thrpt   20  0.828 ± 0.003  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark0   avgt   20  1.208 ± 0.009   ns/op
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark1   avgt   20  1.218 ± 0.017   ns/op
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark2   avgt   20  1.236 ± 0.021   ns/op
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark3   avgt   20  1.203 ± 0.005   ns/op
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark4   avgt   20  1.211 ± 0.011   ns/op
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark5   avgt   20  1.234 ± 0.029   ns/op
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark6   avgt   20  1.208 ± 0.012   ns/op
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   0   avgt   20  1.203 ± 0.003   ns/op
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   1   avgt   20  1.353 ± 0.024   ns/op
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   2   avgt   20  1.342 ± 0.008   ns/op
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   3   avgt   20  1.209 ± 0.003   ns/op
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   4   avgt   20  1.341 ± 0.015   ns/op
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   5   avgt   20  1.351 ± 0.019   ns/op
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   6   avgt   20  1.209 ± 0.014   ns/op


# Run complete. Total time: 00:37:54

Benchmark   (index)   Mode  Cnt  Score   Error   Units
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark0  thrpt   20  0.802 ± 0.028  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark1  thrpt   20  0.807 ± 0.032  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark2  thrpt   20  0.802 ± 0.022  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark3  thrpt   20  0.794 ± 0.043  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark4  thrpt   20  0.808 ± 0.019  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark5  thrpt   20  0.826 ± 0.007  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark6  thrpt   20  0.807 ± 0.011  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   0  thrpt   20  0.822 ± 0.011  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   1  thrpt   20  0.743 ± 0.007  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   2  thrpt   20  0.722 ± 0.026  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   3  thrpt   20  0.815 ± 0.016  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   4  thrpt   20  0.736 ± 0.019  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   5  thrpt   20  0.719 ± 0.023  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   6  thrpt   20  0.815 ± 0.017  ops/ns
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark0   avgt   20  1.221 ± 0.013   ns/op
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark1   avgt   20  1.258 ± 0.058   ns/op
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark2   avgt   20  1.250 ± 0.044   ns/op
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark3   avgt   20  1.254 ± 0.061   ns/op
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark4   avgt   20  1.229 ± 0.022   ns/op
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark5   avgt   20  1.216 ± 0.016   ns/op
StringBenchmark.compareToBenchmark6   avgt   20  1.273 ± 0.075   ns/op
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   0   avgt   20  1.244 ± 0.049   ns/op
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   1   avgt   20  1.376 ± 0.045   ns/op
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   2   avgt   20  1.377 ± 0.040   ns/op
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   3   avgt   20  1.220 ± 0.032   ns/op
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   4   avgt   20  1.348 ± 0.010   ns/op
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   5   avgt   20  1.375 ± 0.041   ns/op
StringBenchmark.equalsBenchmark   6   avgt   20  1.232 ± 0.040   ns/op

So 'equals()' looks a little bit slower than 'compareTo()', but the difference
between them is not bigger than ~10%

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 62861] httpclient.reset_state_on_thread_group_iteration doesn't reuse connection for think time > 1second

2018-11-13 Thread bugzilla 
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62861

--- Comment #10 from Abhishek Rao  ---
(In reply to Philippe Mouawad from comment #9)
> Requalifying to enhancement.
> 
> Note there is a relation with this topic:
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jmeter-dev/201811.mbox/%3CCAH9fUpau-
> 3YWao86yU2DhM6mCAwssa61Wqew_iMYtFbmrioRiQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> 
> 
> @Reporter, it would be really nice from you (since I spent time answering
> and providing workaround ) to answer comment 3 and confirm provided
> information fixed issue 2 and it is now an enhancement request and not a bug.

Thought I confirmed in comment#7. Agree that this isn't necessarily a bug and
just a behavior of setting TTL at HC level. It looks like we can go with the
workaround for now:
a. Set TTL to desired value (long enough that connection persists throughout
test) on specific jmeter-servers and leave to default for the rest
b. Configure run-time thread group enablement as mentioned in comment#5

Thanks for qualifying this as an enhancement. 

Quick question - will the enhancement be a PoolingHttpClientConnectionManager
or httpclient.reset_state_on_thread_group_iteration just made threadgroup local
and UI configurable?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.