Dnia czw 23. styczeń 2003 17:46, Mike Stover napisał: > I disagree. The point of the output is that you can load it into any of > the listeners. If you want to see the Aggregate view of the data, load it > into the Aggregate view. But, you still have the option of looking at the
Now my 2 cents :-) Of course I see your point, data collection done by listener on it's own is a bad idea. But I think more intuitive method will be setting this file *globally* for the whole tree. When you load your test results it will be visible in all the visualizers and you can append new results to that. And this hasn't to be xml file - it can be xml, csv, relational database - everything that will support particular, call it Logger interface. This interface will allow to store results and return results to visualizers. The problem with that is some logging backends can be very slow for some operation. Consider aggregate reports. For DBLogger it's simple "select .. group by" and executed in milliseconds, but for XMLLogger it could take ages and all the machine's memory ;). This is also the reason, that complicated repords should not be done by the visualizer which has no direct acces to data source (e.g. JDBC connection object). At least I'm trying to implement that :-) Moreover I thought about another feature - every Sampler and Controller (not visualizer) will have flag "log request" so you can switch particular requests or groups of requests to exclude not interesting requests and to save the disk space. Another feature can be "test results desktop" and "test results metadata" - with that you can describe/view/erase your test results. I've encoured this problem in jdbc logging, when I can't just log test to named file - there has to be some key to distinguish tests (in jdbc logging it's implemented as test_id field). It will also helps to keep test results in order. What do you think about it? Michal -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
