tag1consulting / goose-eggs

Useful snippets and common functionality for writing load tests with Goose.

Goose Eggs

Helpful in writing Goose load tests.

Documentation

• Goose Eggs
• Goose Eggs Umami example
• The Goose book

goose-eggs's Issues

Validate without `load_static_elements`

I think we need a validate function/associate_function/method that doesn't include load_static_elements. But we have a validate entity and still keep validate_and_load_static_assets.

load_static_elements() does not match assets with relative paths without leading /

When switching from the old-school umami example to the goose-eggs version, I no longer got any requests to static assets. It looks like the issue is due to changes in assumptions made in the regexps used in load_static_elements():

goose-eggs/src/lib.rs

Line 736 in 827f5ce

let src_elements = Regex::new(format!(r#"(?i)src="(({base_url}|/).*?)""#).as_str()).unwrap();

Consider an example HTML that has:

<script src="assets/foo/bar.js"></script>

This fails to match because it does not have base_url or a leading /.

I'll note that the site I am testing against also makes use of:

<base href="/howdy/">

This is a case that is also not handled here, as the base should be extracted and prepended to the extracted asset path. (/howdy/assets/foo/bar.js would be the full path to request).

make it possible to inverse validation (ie, text does NOT exist)

Currently ValidateBuilder allows you to verify things like:

• text IS on the page
• header IS set
• header IS set to value
• title IS set to

Request is to be able to inverse any/all of these. So you could also validate:

• text is NOT on the page
• header is NOT set
• header is NOT set to value
• title is NOT set to

fdsfsdfsdfsd