Is it possible to run migration and seeding once and don't refresh the testing db between the test methods?
I have couple of testing functions that depend on each other and I don't want to migrate and seed the database before and after each test in one testing file.
Example:
<?php
namespace Tests\Browser;
use Tests\DuskTestCase;
use Laravel\Dusk\Browser;
use Illuminate\Foundation\Testing\DatabaseMigrations;
use Carbon\Carbon;
class AdminTest extends DuskTestCase
{
use DatabaseMigrations;
/**
* Define hooks to migrate the database before and after each test.
*
* #return void
*/
protected function setUp(): void
{
parent::setUp();
$this->artisan('db:seed', ['--class' => 'DatabaseSeeder']);
}
public function testAdminCanLogin()
{
}
/* Create New ticket */
public function testAdminCreateTicket()
{
}
/* View the first ticket */
public function testAdminViewTicket()
{
}
/* Edit the first ticket */
public function testAdminEditTicket()
{
}
/* Assign the first Ticket to an Agent */
public function testAdminAssignTicketToAgent()
{
}
/* Unassign the first Ticket from Agent */
public function testAdminUnassignAgentFromTicket()
{
}
/* Delete the first ticket */
public function testAdminDeleteTicket()
{
}
/* Restore the first ticket */
public function testAdminRestoreTicket()
{
}
}
Yes, You can do something like this
protected static $migrationRun = false;
public function setUp(): void{
parent::setUp();
if(!static::$migrationRun){
$this->artisan('migrate:refresh');
$this->artisan('db:seed');
static::$migrationRun = true;
}
}
Include this in your dusk test class. setUp method runs before each test method, If migration has run once, It won't run it again.
don't use use DatabaseMigrations.
just:
$this->artisan('migrate:fresh');
$this->artisan('db:seed');
like:
public function setUp(): void
{
$this->appUrl = env('APP_URL');
parent::setUp();
$this->artisan('migrate:fresh');
$this->artisan('db:seed');
}
in your first browser test
Related
I'm building out my first project in Laravel and have run into a bit of a snag with a one to many relationship between two tables.
Historically, I would have done something like this in SQL to achieve my end goal:
SELECT tag_key.key
FROM tag
LEFT JOIN tag_key
ON tag.tag_key_id = tag_key.id;
With Laravel, I'm trying to do things the ORM way and am getting hung up, probably on a naming thing somewhere down the pipe. Here's the code:
Part 1: Migrations:
"tag_keys" table
use Illuminate\Database\Schema\Blueprint;
use Illuminate\Database\Migrations\Migration;
class CreateTagKeysTable extends Migration
{
/**
* Run the migrations.
*
* #return void
*/
public function up()
{
Schema::create('tag_keys', function (Blueprint $table) {
$table->increments('id');
$table->string('key', 128);
$table->timestamps();
});
}
/**
* Reverse the migrations.
*
* #return void
*/
public function down()
{
Schema::drop('tag_keys');
}
}
"tags" table
use Illuminate\Database\Schema\Blueprint;
use Illuminate\Database\Migrations\Migration;
class CreateTagsTable extends Migration
{
/**
* Run the migrations.
*
* #return void
*/
public function up()
{
Schema::create('tags', function (Blueprint $table) {
$table->increments('id');
$table->string('value', 128);
$table->integer('tag_key_id')->unsigned()->index();
$table->foreign('tag_key_id')->references('id')->on('tag_keys')->onDelete('cascade');
$table->timestamps();
});
}
/**
* Reverse the migrations.
*
* #return void
*/
public function down()
{
Schema::drop('tags');
}
}
Part 2: Models:
"TagKey" model
<?php
namespace App;
use Illuminate\Database\Eloquent\Model;
class TagKey extends Model
{
protected $fillable = [
'key'
];
protected $dates = [];
protected $table = 'tag_keys';
/**
* Tag Keys have many Tags
*/
public function values()
{
return $this->hasMany('App\Tag');
}
}
"Tag" model
<?php
namespace App;
use Illuminate\Database\Eloquent\Model;
class Tag extends Model
{
protected $fillable = [
'value',
'tag_key_id'
];
protected $dates = [];
/**
* Tag values belong to Tag Keys
*/
public function key()
{
return $this->belongsTo('App\TagKey');
}
}
Independently, they both work just fine. However, when I jump into tinker and try this (given there is a valid row in both the "tag" and "tag_key" tables and given that id 1 in the "tag" has the value of 1 in the "tag_key" table under the "tag_key_id" column):
$tag = App\Tag::first();
$tag->key;
=> null
What am I missing here? How do I build this association?
When the foreign key name doesn't follow Eloquent conventions ("snake case" name of the owning model and suffix it with _id), you should specify it in the relationship:
TagKey object:
return $this->hasMany('App\Tag', 'tag_key_id');
Key object:
return $this->belongsTo('App\TagKey', 'tag_key_id');
More info in the documentation
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 am trying to call a parent method from its child which has the same method name. Doing so results in a strict standards error. There's an easy solution of renaming the child method. However, is there a way to keep the names of the two methods identical without a standards warning? Thanks.
Strict standards: Declaration of Child::getContentFromDb() should be compatible with Parent::getContentFromDb($id) in /foo/Child.class.php on line xxx
Pseudo-code example:
class Parent {
protected function getInfoFromDb($id) {
return $infoFromDb;
}
}
class Child extends Parent {
public static $id = xx;
public $info = array();
public function __construct() {
$this->info = $this->getInfoFromDb();
}
public function getInfoFromDb() {
// the line below causes the problem
return parent::getInfoFromDb(self::$id);
}
}
Your method override should take the same parameter list as the one you are overriding.
e.g.
class ParentClass {
protected function getInfoFromDb($id) {
return "INFO FROM DB:" . $id;
}
}
class Child extends ParentClass {
public static $id = "xx";
public $info = array();
public function __construct() {
$this->info = $this->getInfoFromDb();
}
/**
* #param specific ID, or do not set for default action.
* #return string
*/
public function getInfoFromDb($id = false) {
return parent::getInfoFromDb(self::$id);
}
}
How do you implement interface for external package in Laravel? Say, I want to use Mashape/Unirest API to get analyse of text, but in future I would like to switch to other API provider and do not change to much in code.
interface AnalyzerInterface {
public function analyze(); //or send()?
}
class UnirestAnalyzer implements AnalyzerInterface {
function __constructor(Unirest unirest){
//this->...
}
function analyze($text, $lang) {
Unirest::post(.. getConfig() )
}
//some private methods to process data
}
And where to put that files interfece and UnirestAnalyzer? Make special folder for them, add to composer? Add namespace?
This is how I would go to Interface and Implement something like this:
interface AnalyzerInterface {
public function analyze();
public function setConfig($name, $value);
}
class UnirestAnalyzer implements AnalyzerInterface {
private $unirest;
private $config = [];
public function __construct(Unirest unirest)
{
$this->unirest = $unirest;
}
public function analyze($text, $lang)
{
$this->unirest->post($this->config['var']);
}
public function setConfig($name, $value)
{
$this->config[$name] = $value;
}
//some private methods to process data
}
class Analyser {
private $analizer;
public function __construct(AnalyzerInterface analyzer)
{
$this->analyzer = $analyzer;
$this->analyzer->setConfig('var', Config::get('var'));
}
public function analyze()
{
return $this->analyzer->analyze();
}
}
And you must bind it on Laravel:
App::bind('AnalyzerInterface', 'UnirestAnalyzer');
I'm effectively trying to define the relationships between users (sender and recipient) and messages.
My Messages migration is:
<?php
use Illuminate\Database\Schema\Blueprint;
use Illuminate\Database\Migrations\Migration;
class CreateMessagesTable extends Migration {
/**
* Run the migrations.
*
* #return void
*/
public function up()
{
//
Schema::create('messages', function($t){
$t->increments('id');
$t->integer('sender_user_id')->unsigned();
$t->integer('recipient_user_id')->unsigned();
$t->string('subject');
$t->text('content');
$t->timestamps();
});
}
/**
* Reverse the migrations.
*
* #return void
*/
public function down()
{
//
Schema::dropIfExists('messages');
}
}
My Message model was straightforward:
<?php
class Message extends Eloquent{
// link to sender user id
public function from(){
return $this->hasOne('User', 'sender_user_id');
}
// link to recipient user id
public function to(){
return $this->hasOne('User', 'recipient_user_id');
}
}
But I'm unsure in defining the hasMany relationships in my User model.
The docs (http://laravel.com/docs/eloquent#relationships) shows the following:
return $this->hasMany('Comment', 'foreign_key');
return $this->hasMany('Comment', 'foreign_key', 'local_key');
Now, I'm confused which key is which in the latter hasMany relationship. Which is correct for my User model?
public function sentMessages(){
return $this->hasMany('Messages', 'id', 'sender_user_id');
}
public function sentMessages(){
return $this->hasMany('Messages', 'sender_user_id', 'id');
}
You have to set your relation like this:
public function sentMessages()
{
return $this->hasMany('Messages', 'sender_user_id');
}
public function receivedMessages()
{
return $this->hasMany('Messages', 'recipient_user_id');
}