I am using Serenity-BDD with cucumber and I would like to run certain things only once per feature file. It looks like cucumber doesn't support this at the moment. I was wondering if serenity has some workaround for this.
I've also tried to use the JUnit #BeforeClass, #AfterClass hooks in the test suite class but the 2 annotations require static methods and I cannot access the serenity page objects methods at that time (there is no instance injected at that point in time).
You could try setting up a static global flag which will make sure that the before method will runs only once.
Setup the feature file with a tag.
#RunOnce
Feature: Run Once
Use the following hook in your stepdefinition.
private static boolean onceFlag = true;
#Before(value="#RunOnce")
public void beforeOnce(){
if(onceFlag) {
onceFlag = false;
//Your code to write once per feature file
}
}
You could try to implement net.thucydides.core.steps.StepListener interface and connect it via SPI. I described this in answer in this post
Related
I understand that this is because of the way proxies are created for handling caching, transaction related functionality in Spring. And the way to fix it is use AspectJ but I donot want to take that route cause it has its own problems. Can I detect self-invocation using any static analyis tools?
#Cacheable(value = "defaultCache", key = "#id")
public Person findPerson(int id) {
return getSession().getPerson(id);
}
public List<Person> findPersons(int[] ids) {
List<Person> list = new ArrayList<Person>();
for (int id : ids) {
list.add(findPerson(id));
}
return list;
}
If it would be sufficient for you to detect internal calls, you could use native AspectJ instead of Spring AOP for that and then throw runtime exceptions or log warnings every time this happens. That is not static analysis, but better than nothing. On the other hand, if you use native AspectJ, you are not limited to Spring proxies anyway and the aspects would work for self-invocation too.
Anyway, here is what an aspect would look like, including an MCVE showing how it works. I did it outside of Spring, which is why I am using a surrogate #Component annotation for demo purposes.
Update: Sorry for targeting #Component classes instead of #Cacheable classes/methods, but basically the same general approach I am showing here would work in your specific case, too, if you simply adjust the pointcut a bit.
Component annotation:
package de.scrum_master.app;
import static java.lang.annotation.ElementType.TYPE;
import static java.lang.annotation.RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME;
import java.lang.annotation.Retention;
import java.lang.annotation.Target;
#Retention(RUNTIME)
#Target(TYPE)
public #interface Component {}
Sample classes (components and non-components):
This component is to be called by other components should not lead to exceptions/warnings:
package de.scrum_master.app;
#Component
public class AnotherComponent {
public void doSomething() {
System.out.println("Doing something in another component");
}
}
This class is not a #Component, so the aspect should ignore self-invocation inside it:
package de.scrum_master.app;
public class NotAComponent {
public void doSomething() {
System.out.println("Doing something in non-component");
new AnotherComponent().doSomething();
internallyCalled("foo");
}
public int internallyCalled(String text ) {
return 11;
}
}
This class is a #Component. The aspect should flag internallyCalled("foo"), but not new AnotherComponent().doSomething().
package de.scrum_master.app;
#Component
public class AComponent {
public void doSomething() {
System.out.println("Doing something in component");
new AnotherComponent().doSomething();
internallyCalled("foo");
}
public int internallyCalled(String text ) {
return 11;
}
}
Driver application:
Please note that I am creating component instances throughout this sample code with new instead of requesting beans from the application context, like I would do in Spring. But you can ignore that, it is just an example.
package de.scrum_master.app;
public class Application {
public static void main(String[] args) {
new NotAComponent().doSomething();
new AComponent().doSomething();
}
}
Console log when running without aspect:
Doing something in non-component
Doing something in another component
Doing something in component
Doing something in another component
Now with the aspect, instead of the last message we would expect an exception or a logged warning. Here is how to do that:
Aspect:
Sorry for using native AspectJ syntax here. Of course, you could also use annotation-based syntax.
package de.scrum_master.aspect;
import de.scrum_master.app.*;
public aspect SelfInvocationInterceptor {
Object around(Object caller, Object callee) :
#within(Component) &&
call(* (#Component *).*(..)) &&
this(caller) &&
target(callee)
{
if (caller == callee)
throw new RuntimeException(
"Self-invocation in component detected from " + thisEnclosingJoinPointStaticPart.getSignature() +
" to "+ thisJoinPointStaticPart.getSignature()
);
return proceed(caller, callee);
}
}
Console log when running with aspect:
Doing something in non-component
Doing something in another component
Doing something in component
Doing something in another component
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException: Self-invocation in component detected from void de.scrum_master.app.AComponent.doSomething() to int de.scrum_master.app.AComponent.internallyCalled(String)
at de.scrum_master.app.AComponent.internallyCalled_aroundBody3$advice(AComponent.java:8)
at de.scrum_master.app.AComponent.doSomething(AComponent.java:8)
at de.scrum_master.app.Application.main(Application.java:6)
I think, you can use this solution and maybe rather log warnings instead of throwing exceptions in order to softly guide your co-workers to inspect and improve their AOP-dependent Spring components. Sometimes maybe they do not wish self-invocation to trigger an aspect anyway, it depends on the situation. You could run the Spring application in full AspectJ mode and then, after evaluating the logs, switch back to Spring AOP. But maybe it would be simpler to just use native AspectJ to begin with and avoid the self-invocation problem altogether.
Update: In AspectJ you can also make the compiler throw warnings or errors if certain conditions are met. In this case you could only statically determine calls from components to other components, but without differentiating between self-invocation and calls on other methods from other components. So this does not help you here.
Please also notice that this solution is limited to classes annotated by #Component. If your Spring bean is instantiated in other ways, e.g. via XML configuration or #Bean factory method, this simple aspect does not work. But it could easily be extended by checking if the intercepted class is a proxy instance and only then decide to flag self-invocations. Then unfortunately, you would have to weave the aspect code into all of your application classes because the check can only happen during runtime.
I could explain many more things, such as using self-injection and call internal methods on the injected proxy instance instead of via this.internallyCalled(..). Then the self-invocation problem would be solved too and this approach also works in Spring AOP.
Can I detect self-invocation using any static analysis tools?
In theory you can, but be aware of Rice's theorem. Any such tool would sometimes give false alarms.
You could develop such a tool using abstract interpretation techniques. You may need more than a year of work.
You could subcontract the development of such tools to e.g. the Frama-C team. Then email me to basile.starynkevitch#cea.fr
I am integrating Hystrix in an application. That application is already in production and we will be testing out hystrix integration work in sandbox before we will push it to production.
My question is that is there any way to turn on/off hystrix functionality using some configuration setting?
There is no single setting for this. You'll need to set multiple parameters to disable Hystrix.
See https://github.com/Netflix/Hystrix/wiki/Configuration for the configuration options:
hystrix.command.default.execution.isolation.strategy=SEMAPHORE
hystrix.command.default.execution.isolation.semaphore.maxConcurrentRequests=100000 # basically 'unlimited'
hystrix.command.default.execution.timeout.enabled=false
hystrix.command.default.circuitBreaker.enabled=false
hystrix.command.default.fallback.enabled=false
Please double check your version of Hystrix for the available parameters.
This is all what you need:
# Disable Circuit Breaker (Hystrix)
spring:
cloud:
circuit:
breaker:
enabled: false
hystrix:
command:
default:
circuitBreaker:
enabled: false
As ahus1 said, there is no single way to disable Hystrix entirely. To disable it in our application, we decided it was cleanest and safest to put a HystrixCommand in a wrapper class, and that wrapper class only exposed the parts of the HystrixCommand that we used (in our case, the execute() method). When constructing the wrapper class, we pass it a Callable that contains the code we want executed, and if Hystrix is disabled (according to our own config value), we simply call that Callable without ever creating a HystrixCommand. This avoids executing any Hystrix code whatsoever and makes it easier to say that Hystrix isn't affecting our application at all when it's disabled.
There are a couple of ways to achieve this-
Doing this for your every group including default. Although this will not disable hystrix(it will only keep the circuit closed all the time) but you will achieve the same result-
hystrix.command.{group-key}.circuitBreaker.forceClosed=false
If you are using java, you can create an around advice over #HystrixCommand annotation and bypass hystrix execution based upon a flag.
Java Code for #2-
#Pointcut("#annotation(com.netflix.hystrix.contrib.javanica.annotation.HystrixCommand)")
public void hystrixCommandAnnotationPointcut() {
}
#Around("hystrixCommandAnnotationPointcut()")
public Object methodsAnnotatedWithHystrixCommand(final ProceedingJoinPoint joinPoint) throws Throwable {
Object result = null;
Method method = AopUtils.getMethodFromTarget(joinPoint);
if ((System.getProperty(enable.hystrix).equals("true")) {
result = joinPoint.proceed();
} else {
result = method.invoke(joinPoint.getTarget(), joinPoint.getArgs());
}
return result;
}
If your Project is spring Managed you can comment the bean definition of hystrixAspect in applicationContext.xml
Comment the following line
bean id="hystrixAspect"class="com.netflix.hystrix.contrib.javanica.aop.aspectj.HystrixCommandAspect"/>
This will remove Hystrix from your project.
I ran into this situation where I wanted to completely turnoff Hystrix using a single property (We use IBM uDeploy to manage dynamic properties). We are using javanica library built on top of Hystrix
Create a Configuration class which creates the HystrixCommandAspect
#Configuration
public class HystrixConfiguration{
#Bean(name = "hystrixCommandAspect")
#Conditional(HystrixEnableCondition.class)
public HystrixCommandAspect hystrixCommandAspect(){
return new HystrixCommandAspect()}
}
2. And the conditional class would be enabled based on a system property.
public class HystrixEnableCondition implements Condition{
#Override
public boolean matches(ConditionContext context, AnnotatedTypeMetadata metadata){
return
"YES".equalsIgnoreCase(
context.getEnvironment().getProperty("circuitBreaker.enabled")) ||
"YES".equalsIgnoreCase(
System.getProperty("circuitBreaker.enabled"));
}
}
setting
hystrix.command.default.execution.isolation.strategy=SEMAPHORE
is enough.
Additionally you may or should disable also the timeout threads
with hystrix.command.default.execution.timeout.enabled=false
I've been reading through a lot of the Jabbr code to learn Nancy and trying to implement many of the same patterns in my own application. One of the things I can't seem to get working is the concept of an on application start class. The Jabbr code base has an App_Start folder with a Startup.cs file (here) in it with the following implementation.
public partial class Startup
{
public void Configuration(IAppBuilder app)
{
...
SetupNancy(kernel, app);
...
}
}
private static void SetupNancy(IKernel kernel, IAppBuilder app)
{
var bootstrapper = new JabbRNinjectNancyBootstrapper(kernel);
app.UseNancy(bootstrapper);
}
When I tried to do something similar to that in my project the Startup.cs file was just ignored. I searched the Jabbr code base to see if it was used anywhere but I wasn't able to find anything and the only differences I could see is Jabbr uses Ninject while I wanted to use AutoFac
Is there a way to register a startup class in nancy?
Take a look at my project over on GitHub, you'll be interested in the Spike branch and may have to unload the ChainLink.Web project to run I can't remember.
I had some trouble finding a way to configure the ILifetimeScope even after reading the accepted answer here by TheCodeJunkie. Here's how you do the actual configuration:
In the bootstrapper class derived from the AutofacNancyBootstrapper, to actually configure the request container, you update the ILifetimeScope's component registry.
protected override void ConfigureRequestContainer(
ILifetimeScope container, NancyContext context)
{
var builder = new ContainerBuilder();
builder.RegisterType<MyDependency>();
builder.Update(container.ComponentRegistry);
}
The application container can be updated similarly in the ConfigureApplicationContainer override.
You should install the Nancy.Bootstrappers.Autofac nuget, inherit from the AutofacNancyBootstrapper type and override the appropriate method (depending on your lifetime scope requirements: application or request). For more info check the readme file https://github.com/nancyfx/nancy.bootstrappers.autofac
HTH
After following the advice from TheCodeJunkie you can use the Update method on the ILifetimeScope container parameter which gives you a ContainerBuilder through an Action:
protected override void ConfigureRequestContainer(ILifetimeScope container, NancyContext context)
{
container.Update(builder =>
{
builder.RegisterType<MyType>();
});
}
I'm trying to mock a call to the final method ResourceBundle.getString(). With PowerMock 1.4.12 and EasyMock 3.1, the call is not being mocked; instead, the "real" method is called.
My test class:
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest(ResourceBundle.class)
public class TestSuite {
#Before
public void setUp() throws Exception {
ResourceBundle resourceBundleMock = PowerMock.createNiceMock(ResourceBundle.class);
expect(resourceBundleMock.getString(BundleConstants.QUEUE)).andReturn("Queue");
PowerMock.replay(resourceBundleMock);
beanBeingTested.setMessages(resourceBundleMock);
}
...
}
Code in BeanBeingTested:
private ResourceBundle messages;
...
String label = messages.getString(BundleConstants.QUEUE);
Error message:
java.util.MissingResourceException: Can't find resource for bundle $java.util.ResourceBundle$$EnhancerByCGLIB$$e4a02557, key Queue
at java.util.ResourceBundle.getObject(ResourceBundle.java:384)
at java.util.ResourceBundle.getString(ResourceBundle.java:344)
at com.yoyodyne.BeanBeingTested.setUpMenus(BeanBeingTested.java:87)
When I step through the test case, the debugger shows the type of beanBeingTested.messages as "EasyMock for class java.util.ResourceBundle", so the mock is injected correctly. (Also, there's no error on the call to getString() within the expect() call during set up).
With a plain mock instead of a nice mock, I get the following error:
java.lang.AssertionError:
Unexpected method call handleGetObject("Queue"):
getString("Queue"): expected: 1, actual: 0
Any idea what I'm doing wrong?
Thanks.
You are creating an instance using EasyMock. Instead, when working with static methods, you must mock the class (using PowerMock).
It should work like that (tested with EasyMock 3.0 and PowerMock 1.5, though):
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest(ResourceBundle.class)
public class TestSuite {
#Before
public void setUp() throws Exception {
// mock the class for one method only
PowerMock.mockStaticNice(ResourceBundle.class, "getString");
// define mock-behaviour on the class, when calling the static method
expect(ResourceBundle.getString(BundleConstants.QUEUE)).andReturn("Queue");
// start the engine
PowerMock.replayAll();
}
}
(I'm aware this question is a few months old, but it might help others, though)
Try using:
#PrepareForTest({ResourceBundle.class, BeanBeingTested.class})
With only ResourceBundle in the PrepareForTest the mock will work when called directly from your unit test method, but when called from BeanBeingTested you get the real method being used.
Powermock documentation is lacking in this area.
Why bother mocking the call to the resource bundle? Generally, I try to avoid mocking the nuts and bolts of java, such as ArrayList, Date, etc. Resource bundles (and MessageFormat.format()) more or less fall into the same category for me. They generally operate on strings which are fundamentals, and if these things are broken or changing their behavior enough to break a test it's definitely something I want to know :)
Just let them grab the string (which presumably is about to be set in the UI, perhaps after . Don't bother to assert the value returned since you don't want edits to the bundle to break your test. If the string gets set on a mock UI component, This is a good place for anyObject(String.class) which correctly expresses the fact you (probably) don't actually care about the specific string displayed.
I also consider it a benefit when the test fails due to a missing message key. THAT I want to know.
I am writing my first Android database backend and I'm struggling to unit test the creation of my database.
Currently the problem I am encountering is obtaining a valid Context object to pass to my implementation of SQLiteOpenHelper. Is there a way to get a Context object in a class extending TestCase? The solution I have thought of is to instantiate an Activity in the setup method of my TestCase and then assigning the Context of that Activity to a field variable which my test methods can access...but it seems like there should be an easier way.
You can use InstrumentationRegistry methods to get a Context:
InstrumentationRegistry.getTargetContext() - provides the application Context of the target application.
InstrumentationRegistry.getContext() - provides the Context of this Instrumentation’s package.
For AndroidX use InstrumentationRegistry.getInstrumentation().getTargetContext() or InstrumentationRegistry.getInstrumentation().getContext().
New API for AndroidX:
ApplicationProvider.getApplicationContext()
You might try switching to AndroidTestCase. From looking at the docs, it seems like it should be able to provide you with a valid Context to pass to SQLiteOpenHelper.
Edit:
Keep in mind that you probably have to have your tests setup in an "Android Test Project" in Eclipse, since the tests will try to execute on the emulator (or real device).
Your test is not a Unit test!!!
When you need
Context
Read or Write on storage
Access Network
Or change any config to test your function
You are not writing a unit test.
You need to write your test in androidTest package
Using the AndroidTestCase:getContext() method only gives a stub Context in my experience. For my tests, I'm using an empty activity in my main app and getting the Context via that. Am also extending the test suite class with the ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2 class. Seems to work for me.
public class DatabaseTest extends ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2<EmptyActivity>
EmptyActivity activity;
Context mContext = null;
...
#Before
public void setUp() {
activity = getActivity();
mContext = activity;
}
... //tests to follow
}
What does everyone else do?
You can derive from MockContext and return for example a MockResources on getResources(), a valid ContentResolver on getContentResolver(), etc. That allows, with some pain, some unit tests.
The alternative is to run for example Robolectric which simulates a whole Android OS. Those would be for system tests: It's a lot slower to run.
You should use ApplicationTestCase or ServiceTestCase.
Extending AndroidTestCase and calling AndroidTestCase:getContext() has worked fine for me to get Context for and use it with an SQLiteDatabase.
The only niggle is that the database it creates and/or uses will be the same as the one used by the production application so you will probably want to use a different filename for both
eg.
public static final String NOTES_DB = "notestore.db";
public static final String DEBUG_NOTES_DB = "DEBUG_notestore.db";
First Create Test Class under (androidTest).
Now use following code:
public class YourDBTest extends InstrumentationTestCase {
private DBContracts.DatabaseHelper db;
private RenamingDelegatingContext context;
#Override
public void setUp() throws Exception {
super.setUp();
context = new RenamingDelegatingContext(getInstrumentation().getTargetContext(), "test_");
db = new DBContracts.DatabaseHelper(context);
}
#Override
public void tearDown() throws Exception {
db.close();
super.tearDown();
}
#Test
public void test1() throws Exception {
// here is your context
context = context;
}}
Initialize context like this in your Test File
private val context = mock(Context::class.java)