In my integration test I'm using BlockHound to capture any blocking call.
For setting up the data I am doing a blocking call because I want the data to be persisted in the DB when running each test.
When running the integration test Blockhound is throwing an error at the set up method: reactor.blockhound.BlockingOperationError: Blocking call! java.io.FileInputStream#readBytes
How to avoid this?
#BeforeAll
public static void blockHoundSetup() {
BlockHound.install();
}
#BeforeEach
public void setUp() {
stagingAreaAdapter.deleteAll()
.thenMany(Flux.fromIterable(data))
.flatMap(stagingAreaAdapter::save)
.blockLast();
}
Check BlockHound customizations for allowing and disallowing blocking calls inside methods:
https://github.com/reactor/BlockHound/blob/master/docs/customization.md#dis-allowing-blocking-calls-inside-methods
1. using builder in a #BeforeAll method (as per #KrisKris1):
#BeforeAll
public static void blockHoundSetup() {
BlockHound.builder().allowBlockingCallsInside(
TestClass.class.getName(), "setUp").install();
}
or
2. via implementing the BlockHoundIntegration interface (still applies globally):
public class BlockHoundCustomConfiguration implements BlockHoundIntegration {
#Override
public void applyTo(BlockHound.Builder builder) {
builder.allowBlockingCallsInside("java.base/java.io.RandomAccessFile", "readBytes");
}
}
and create the following file:
<project dir>/src/test/resources/META-INF/services/reactor.blockhound.integration.BlockHoundIntegration
with your custom class:
com.example.config.BlockHoundCustomConfiguration
You need to allow blocking method calls inside java.util.zip.InflaterInputStream#read down the callstack.
Add in your BlockHound customization config.
public class ReactorBlockHoundIntegration implements BlockHoundIntegration {
#Override
public void applyTo(BlockHound.Builder builder) {
builder.allowBlockingCallsInside(InflaterInputStream.class.getName(), "read");
}
}
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/index.html?java/util/zip/package-summary.html
Related
I will try to show my problem with a sample code easier to understand.
I have used WebApplicationFactory to develop my acceptance tests. Let's say that I have the typical minimal Program.cs with the following line to register one of my modules:
builder.Services.RegisterModule<StartupRegistrationModule>(builder.Configuration, builder.Environment);
And this module is declared like this:
internal sealed class StartupRegistrationModule : IServiceRegistrationModule
{
public static Dictionary<string, string> _dictionary = new();
public void Register(IServiceCollection services, IConfiguration configuration, IHostEnvironment hostEnvironment)
{
// Lot of modules being registered
_dictionary.Add("key", "value");
}
}
One of my tests file is like this:
public sealed class MyTests : AcceptanceTestBase
{
[Fact]
public void Test1()
{
// arrange
// act
// assert
}
[Fact]
public void Test2()
{
// arrange
// act
// assert
}
[Fact]
public void Test3()
{
// arrange
// act
// assert
}
}
And AcceptanceTestBase is:
public abstract class AcceptanceTestBase : IDisposable
{
protected HttpClient _httpClient;
protected WebApplicationFactory<Program> _webApplicationFactory;
public AcceptanceTestBase()
{
_webApplicationFactory = new WebApplicationFactory<Program>()
.WithWebHostBuilder(builder =>
{
// ... Configure test services
});
_httpClient = _webApplicationFactory.CreateClient();
}
public void Dispose()
{
_httpClient.Dispose();
_webApplicationFactory.Dispose();
}
}
If I try to execute all these tests my tests will fail in the second test run because the WebApplicationFactory is trying to build again the Application but it already has the key in the dictionary and it will fail. See the image for more understanding on the problem.
So my question is, how can I build the application in different scopes to do not share this dictionary state?
Thanks :)
Update:
The real static dictionary is saved behind this nuget package that keeps the track of all my circuit breaker policies state. I do not actually need even the HttpClients for my tests but did not find a way to remove them and not load this. I tried removing all the HttpClients to see if it also removes their dependencies, but it does not seem to make the trick.
It is because you are using:
internal sealed class StartupRegistrationModule : IServiceRegistrationModule
{
/// .. static here
public static Dictionary<string, string> _dictionary = new();
public void Register(IServiceCollection services, IConfiguration configuration, IHostEnvironment hostEnvironment)
{
// Lot of modules being registered
_dictionary.Add("key", "value");
}
}
The static Dictionary is shared over all your tests because they run in the same process.
Each test starts a new (Test-)WebHost but the dictionary remains untouched.
My proposal is to not use statics anywhere in DI context to prevent such hidden traps.
I don't know the purpose of your Dictionary here but maybe you can extract this to a singleton registration which you can replace in your (Test.)WebHost on each new test / startup?
I want to perform same action for every class (just like #BeforeClass). I guess listeners can do things where you don't have to write code individually, but I did not find in each method/class but can be executed via a listener. Is there a way to execute my method before every class or just once before method of that class?
Check the beforeConfiguration() method in TestListenerAdapter.
#Override
public void beforeConfiguration(ITestResult tr) {
if(tr.getMethod().getMethodName().equals("methodNameForBeforeClass")) {
//...
}
}
Try configuration related methods in TestListenerAdapter:
class TestNGListener extends TestListenerAdapter {
#Override
public void beforeConfiguration(ITestResult tr) {
super.beforeConfiguration(tr);
logger.info("=========== Configuration method '{}' started ===========", tr.getMethod().getMethodName());
}
#Override
public void onConfigurationSuccess(ITestResult tr) {
super.onConfigurationSuccess(tr);
logger.info("=========== Configuration method '{}' finished ===========", tr.getMethod().getMethodName());
}
#Override
public void onConfigurationFailure(ITestResult tr) {
super.onConfigurationFailure(tr);
logger.error("!!!!!!!!!!! Configuration method '{}' failed !!!!!!!!!!!", tr.getMethod().getMethodName());
}
}
Extend TestListenerAdapter and override onTestStart(ITestResult result) method. This will help you to run something everytime a test starts
I'm playing with a simple handler that implements IWantToRunWhenBusStartsAndStops and in the start, it schedules a task like so:
public void Start()
{
_schedule.Every(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5), Moo);
}
_schedule is injected via the constructor. The test I'm trying write is to make sure the task is scheduled when the handler starts. But I can't find a way to mock Schedule as it doesn't have a no-arg constructor and it doesn't implement an interface. I tried creating an actual instance of it with a mocked IBuilder but can't figure out what expectations to set on the IBuilder. Also, I looked at the source to see how they were testing Schedule but it looks like we're on an earlier version (v5.0.0 via nuget) because we don't have a DefaultScheduler which appears to be what they use in their current tests.
In fact NServiceBus team has already covered the scheduler with unit/acceptance test, i.e. there is no need to check whether the task was actually scheduled when your handler is executed. Instead you would probably want to unit test your handler itself, thus check if call to scheduler.Every() has been made. Here is simple example of how your unit test might look like:
[TestClass]
public class Tests
{
[TestMethod]
public void When_executing_handler_the_task_should_be_scheduled()
{
//arrange
var scheduler = new FakeSheduler();
//act
var handler = new TestHandler(scheduler);
handler.Start();
//assert
Assert.IsTrue(scheduler.WasCalled);
}
}
The handler itself:
class TestHandler: IWantToRunWhenBusStartsAndStops
{
readonly IMyScheduler _scheduler;
public TestHandler(IMyScheduler scheduler)
{
_scheduler = scheduler;
}
public void Start()
{
_scheduler.Every(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5), () => { });
}
public void Stop() { }
}
Finally, you have to abstract from direct usage of NServiceBus scheduler in order to make it testable, here is the idea:
interface IMyScheduler
{
void Every(TimeSpan interval, Action action);
}
//your real implementation
class MySheduler: IMyScheduler
{
readonly Schedule _schedule;
public MySheduler(Schedule schedule)
{
_schedule = schedule;
}
public void Every(TimeSpan interval, Action action)
{
_schedule.Every(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5), () => { });
}
}
//fake for the testing
class FakeSheduler: IMyScheduler
{
public bool WasCalled { get; set; }
public void Every(TimeSpan interval, Action action)
{
WasCalled = true;
}
}
I have a simply interface:
public interface ITest
{
void Method1();
void Method2();
}
and implementation:
public class Test:ITest
{
public void Method1()
{
}
public void Method2()
{
//Method1();
}
}
The custom interceptor:
public class CustomInterceptor:IInterceptor
{
public void Intercept(IInvocation invocation)
{
invocation.Proceed();
}
}
Now, when I execute there two methods:
ITest obj = getting through ninject
obj.Method1();
obj.Method2();
my interceptor is calling twice what is ok.
But when I uncomment the body of Method2(), then the interceptor for the Method1() is not called. I'm looking for what to do, because I want the interceptor to be fired.
When I call the Method1 from the second, I understand this is not called by the generated proxy and that's why it doesn't work. But is it possible to do it in same way?
Ninject creates a proxy object around the actual instance of the Test class. Your methods aren't virtual, so any override for the proxy should be created with 'new' rather than 'override'. Thus, if you call Method1 from Method2, there is no virtual lookup to find the proxy and invoke it.
New poster here, hope I don't brake any rules :)
I am using PrivateModule in google-guice in order to have multiple DataSource's for the same environment. But I am having a hard time getting MethodInterceptor's to work inside the private modules.
Below is a simple test case that explains the "problem".
A simple service class would be:
interface Service {
String go();
}
class ServiceImpl implements Service {
#Override #Transactional
public String go() {
return "Test Case...";
}
}
The MyModule class would be:
class MyModule extends AbstractModule {
#Override
protected void configure() {
install(new PrivateModule() {
#Override
protected void configure() {
bind(Service.class).to(ServiceImpl.class);
bindInterceptor(
Matchers.any(),
Matchers.annotatedWith(Transactional.class),
new MethodInterceptor() {
#Override
public Object invoke(MethodInvocation i)
throws Throwable {
System.out.println("Intercepting: "
+ i.getMethod().getName());
return i.proceed();
}
});
expose(Service.class);
}
});
}
}
And the final test case:
public class TestCase {
#Inject Service service;
public TestCase() {
Guice.createInjector(new MyModule()).injectMembers(this);
}
public String go() {
return service.go();
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
TestCase t = new TestCase();
System.out.println(t.go());
}
}
You would expect the output to be:
Intercepting: go
Test Case...
But it doesn't happen, the interceptor is not used, ant only Test Case... is output.
If I bind/expose the ServiceImpl instead of the interface then it works.
Thanks in advance,
Regards,
LL
Well... I figured it out shortly after I posted the question :)
The problem is that you also need to expose() the ServiceImpl class.
So the bind/expose would be.
bind(ServiceImpl.class); // ServiceImpl annotated with #Singleton
bind(Service.class).to(ServiceImpl.class);
expose(ServiceImpl.class);
expose(Service.class);
Regards,
LL
You need to explicitly bind ServiceImpl in the private module. The problem with your existing code is that it inherits the binding for ServiceImpl from the parent module. From the PrivateModule docs,
Private modules are implemented using parent injectors. When it can satisfy their dependencies, just-in-time bindings will be created in the root environment. Such bindings are shared among all environments in the tree.
Adding this line should fix the problem:
bind(ServiceImpl.class);