Consider the below example
Feature: scenario outline using a dynamic table
from a csv file
Scenario Outline: cat name:
Given url demoBaseUrl
And path 'cats'
And request { name: '#(name)', age: '#(age)' }
When method post
Then status 200
And match response == { id: '#number', name: '#(name)' }
# the single cell can be any valid karate expression
# and even reference a variable defined in the Background
Examples:
| read('kittens.csv') |
If the above kittens.csv file contains 100 rows I want to read only 50 rows to execute the scenario outline .Is there any way in karate to ready only the given n rows from csv file
Since it is pure JS, any Array operation is possible. So you can easily do this:
| read('kittens.csv').slice(0, 49) |
That said, Karate was not designed for this. You may be better off trying to do data-driven tests like this: https://stackoverflow.com/a/72388475/143475
Related
I am currently exploring karate framework. For scenario outline, trying to read a file in setup() , pass the data to Examples section and then use data in Scenario outline. Each scenario require data from different file: Ex: scenario 1 -> test1.csv scenario 2-> test2.csv. I have tried using setup() for each scenario outline as below but both scenarios reading data from first setup().
Is there a way to achieve this. Please let me know.
Feature: Test scenarios
#setup
Scenario:
* def data = read('test1.csv') # reading this file which is required in scenario outline - first scenario
Scenario Outline: first scenario
* print __row
Examples:
| karate.setup().data |
#setup
Scenario:
* def data = read('test2.csv') # reading this file which is required in scneario outline - second scenario
Scenario Outline: second scenario
* print __row
Examples:
| karate.setup().data |
Yes, read the documentation: https://github.com/karatelabs/karate#setup
You can give names to the #setup:
Feature:
#setup=myname
Scenario:
* def data = [{ a: 1 }, { a: 2}]
Scenario Outline:
* print __row
Examples:
| karate.setup('myname').data |
That said, my suggestion is don't over-complicate things when you start out with Karate. Just use separate feature files.
I just started to use Karate Gatling for performance tests and facing following problem:
I have a call for the search and would like to evaluate different types of search depending on the parameter e.G. https://example.com/search/facetedSearch
'*'
'keyword1'
'keyword1, keyword2' etc.
The feature file looks something like this:
#performance
Feature: Search
Background:
* url 'https://example.com/'
Scenario Outline: Search -> Simple search for a single word
Given path '/search/facetedSearch'
And param facetedSearchAdditionalFilter[searchAreaID] = -1
And param facetedSearchAdditionalFilter[searchKey] = '<SearchTermSimple>'
When method post
Then status 200
And assert iNumHits >= iNumHitsExpected
Examples:
| read('../testData/performanceTestData.csv') |
Scenario: Search -> Simple search for *
Given path '/search/facetedSearch'
And param facetedSearchAdditionalFilter[searchAreaID] = -1
And param facetedSearchAdditionalFilter[searchKey] = '*'
When method post
Then status 200
And assert iNumHits >= iNumHitsExpected
Scenario Outline: Search -> Search for multiple words
Given path '/search/facetedSearch'
And param facetedSearchAdditionalFilter[searchAreaID] = -1
And param facetedSearchAdditionalFilter[searchKey] = '<SearchTermMultiple>'
When method post
Then status 200
And assert iNumHits >= iNumHitsExpected
Examples:
| read('../testData/performanceTestData.csv') |
I would like to evaluate different types of search separately, as the performance is significantly different. What gatling does - it aggregates all different types of search in one result - "POST /search/facetedSearch".
Is there a possibility to let evaluate every type of search individually in one run?
Thanks in advance,
Sergej
Yes, refer the docs on using a custom nameResolver: https://github.com/karatelabs/karate/tree/master/karate-gatling#nameresolver
For your case you should be able to call req.getParam("facetedSearchAdditionalFilter[searchKey]")[0] or something similar. Or you could choose to use an additional header.
Is it possible to continue the execution of test step even if one of the assert/match fails?
Ex:
Scenario: Testing
* def detail = {"a":{"data":[{"message":["push","dash"]},{"message":["data","Test"]}]}}
* match detail contains {"a":{"data":[{"message":["push","dash"]}]}}
* print detail
Here match will fail but execution stop at that point.
is there a way to do a soft assertion so that next step gets executed?
EDIT in 2021 - a PR introducing a continueOnStepFailure flag was contributed by Joel Pramos here and is available in Karate 1.0 onwards. You can find more details here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/66733353/143475
If you use a Scenario Outline each "row" is executed even if one fails.
Scenario Outline: Testing
* def detail = { a: 1, b: 2, c: 3 }
* match detail contains <expected>
Examples:
| expected |
| { a: 1 } |
| { b: 2 } |
| { c: 3 } |
Note that the concept of "soft assertions" is controversial and some consider it a bad practice:
a) https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/q/7823
b) https://martinfowler.com/articles/nonDeterminism.html
For those looking for a way to show all mis-matches between 2 JSON objects, see this: https://stackoverflow.com/a/61349887/143475
And finally, since some people want to do "conditional" match logic in JS, see this answer also: https://stackoverflow.com/a/50350442/143475
This question already has an answer here:
How to use cucumber table when it is code driven
(1 answer)
Closed 1 year ago.
I am new to Karate API, pardon me for the mistakes if any.
I want to generate multiple random UUID and then use them in scenario outline examples
Example:
Background:
def UUID = function() {return java.util.UUID.randomUUID() + ''}
Scenario outline: to do post call
Given url 'http://localhost:8080'
def UID = UUID()
print UID
And request {CID:"", name :""}
When method POST
Then status 201
Examples:
|CID| name|
|UID1| james|
|UID2| rahul|
Here in above 'Examples' I wanted to use randomly generated UUID in data table of examples so that I can run multiple scenarios for UUID with one POST API call.
First question: How can I generate multiple random UUID ?
Second question: once multiple UUID gets generated how can i call in scenario outline examples and use them?
Can anyone suggest me on this?
Please try running the following simple example.
Feature:
Background:
* def uuid = function(){ return java.util.UUID.randomUUID() + '' }
Scenario Outline:
* url 'https://httpbin.org/anything'
* param foo = uuid()
* request { item: '#(item)' }
* method post
Examples:
| item |
| first |
| second |
It will make 2 requests, and each request will use a different param called "foo" and the URL will be like this:
https://httpbin.org/anything?foo=c1b6ab3d-5952-413b-827c-d9579a0a93b6
So it is simple. Think of the Examples: as like a "loop". Each time the Scenario Outline runs, we are calling the uuid() function again, which will return a different, random value.
I have a response with hundreds of attributes while matching the attributes the scripts getting failed and further steps are not getting executed. because of this we have to validate the same case multiple times to validate the attribute values. is they a option like #ContinueNextStepsOnException to execute all the steps and it is hard to script using karate.match(actual, expected) for more than 100 attributes I have give actual and expected values if in case of any failure to continue.
No, there is no such option. If your scripts are getting failed - it is because Karate is doing its job correctly !
If you feel you want to skip certain fields, you can easily do so by using match ... contains syntax.
I think you are using multiple lines instead of matching the entire JSON in one-line which you can easily do in Karate. For example:
* def response = { a: 1, b: 2 }
# not recommended
* match response.a == 1
* match response.b == 2
# recommended
* match response == { a: 1, b: 2 }
Is it so hard to create the above match, even in development mode ? Just cut and paste valid JSON, and you are done ! I have hardly ever heard users complain about this.