19 - Githubissues

Tinkoff / gatling-amqp-plugin

Plugin for support performance testing with AMQP in Gatling (3.7.x)

Apache License 2.0

33 stars 20 forks source link

19 #22

Closed ehmkah closed 3 years ago

ehmkah commented 3 years ago

This is my first draft for configuring different publish and reply message brokers.

I am open for your comments. Especially for the simple test-setup I provied (which can be deleted if you are not interested in it)

Tomorrow I am going to test it with our system.

ehmkah commented 3 years ago

I tested it with our system and it works. @red-bashmak - would you be so kind and have a look?

ehmkah commented 3 years ago

Hi @jigarkhwar - maybe you can have a look at this PR? Is there a simplier way to contact one of you than those PRs?

jigarkhwar commented 3 years ago

Hi @jigarkhwar - maybe you can have a look at this PR? Is there a simplier way to contact one of you than those PRs?

Hi, Michael, We have a Christmas and New year holidays till to 11 January. I can check this PR after holidays, sorry!

red-bashmak commented 3 years ago

@ehmkah thanks for your contribution. But, I have some doubts about using 2 pools to get responses and send requests. It seems to me that there will be problems when some more intermediate brokers need to be added. Then for intermediate brokers will you need to add more storage? In my opinion, some more universal solution is needed.

ehmkah commented 3 years ago

Hi @red-bashmak - than you for your reply. I am not sure whether I understood your point. Is it possible that you describe the example you are thinking of? Because I can not see a case where intermediate brokers may be useful. The reason I dont see it is not that I think its not useful its more that I only have an good understanding of our system and the features we need.

If I understand your point I can bake it in.

Just to have an idea what I have in mind, when I made the PR:

All messages are send to the request broker and all message are taken from the response broker. It simplifies writing scenarios because its easy to check where the messages arrive.

red-bashmak commented 3 years ago

@ehmkah Hello, Michael! Okay, maybe problems during expansion will not occur. Perhaps intermediate brokers are not needed. I will accept the merge request, but please transfer the RabbitMQConsumer object to Utils. And it would be better to run RabbitMQConsumer logic in a separate thread along with the scenario in Runner. Or use some kind of client for rabbit and add it to docker compose. And i think need some refactoring in RabbitMQConsumer, i described it in comments

ehmkah commented 3 years ago

@red-bashmak - Thank you for answer. I am going to fix, your findings and write you a message if I am done.

ehmkah commented 3 years ago

Hi @red-bashmak - I hope I applied all fixed in a way which is good for you.

the client is started from the example test in beforeand at the end of the tests is deleted in after
I updated the given documentation to relflect the changes
I added directory resultsto .gitignore because after some test-runs I was a little bit afraid to commit them

Happy to hear something from you

ehmkah commented 3 years ago

Hi @red-bashmak @jigarkhwar - Some days passed, had you already time to review my changes? To give you some extra motivation: If this PR gets merged I am willing to upgrade this plugin to new gatling and scala version (issue number 23) :-)

ehmkah commented 3 years ago

Thank you a lot. Do you know when you will publish a new version of the plugin?