In Junit5 5.0.0 M4 I could do this:
#ParameterizedTest
#MethodSource("generateCollections")
void testCollections(Collection<Object> collection) {
assertOnCollection(collection);
}
private static Iterator<Collection<Object>> generateCollections() {
Random generator = new Random();
// We'll run as many tests as possible in 500 milliseconds.
final Instant endTime = Instant.now().plusNanos(500000000);
return new Iterator<Collection<Object>>() {
#Override public boolean hasNext() {
return Instant.now().isBefore(endTime);
}
#Override public Collection<Object> next() {
// Dummy code
return Arrays.asList("this", "that", Instant.now());
}
};
}
Or any number of other things that ended up with collections of one type or another being passed into my #ParameterizedTest. This no longer works: I now get the error
org.junit.jupiter.api.extension.ParameterResolutionException:
Error resolving parameter at index 0
I've been looking through the recent commits to SNAPSHOT and I there's a few changes in the area, but I can't see anything that definitely changes this.
Is this a deliberate change? I'd ask this on a JUnit5 developer channel but I can't find one. And it's not a bug per se: passing a collection is not a documented feature.
If this is a deliberate change, then this is a definite use-case for #TestFactory...
See https://github.com/junit-team/junit5/issues/872
The next snapshot build should fix the regression.
Related
I have a question about handling deserialization exceptions in Spring Cloud Stream while processing batches (i.e. batch-mode: true).
Per the documentation here, https://docs.spring.io/spring-kafka/docs/2.5.12.RELEASE/reference/html/#error-handling-deserializer, (looking at the implementation of FailedFooProvider), it looks like this function should return a subclass of the original message.
Is the intent here that a list of both Foo's and BadFoo's will end up at the original #StreamListener method, and then it will be up to the code (i.e. me) to sort them out and handle separately? I suspect this is the case, as I've read that the automated DLQ sending isn't desirable for batch error handling, as it would resubmit the whole batch.
And if this is the case, what if there is more than one message type received by the app via different #StreamListener's, say Foo's and Bar's. What type should the value function return in that case? Below is the pseudo code to illustrate the second question?
#StreamListener
public void readFoos(List<Foo> foos) {
List<> badFoos = foos.stream()
.filter(f -> f instanceof BadFoo)
.map(f -> (BadFoo) f)
.collect(Collectors.toList());
// logic
}
#StreamListener
public void readBars(List<Bar> bars) {
// logic
}
// Updated to return Object and let apply() determine subclass
public class FailedFooProvider implements Function<FailedDeserializationInfo, Object> {
#Override
public Object apply(FailedDeserializationInfo info) {
if (info.getTopics().equals("foo-topic") {
return new BadFoo(info);
}
else if (info.getTopics().equals("bar-topic") {
return new BadBar(info);
}
}
}
Yes, the list will contain the function result for failed deserializations; the application needs to handle them.
The function needs to return the same type that would have been returned by a successful deserialization.
You can't use conditions with batch listeners. If the list has a mixture of Foos and Bars, they all go to the same listener.
I have some parameterized tests
#ParameterizedTest
#CsvFileSource(resources = "testData.csv", numLinesToSkip = 1)
public void testExample(String parameter, String anotherParameter) {
// testing here
}
In case one execution fails, I want to ignore all following executions.
AFAIK there is no built-in mechanism to do this. The following does work, but is a bit hackish:
#TestInstance(Lifecycle.PER_CLASS)
class Test {
boolean skipRemaining = false;
#ParameterizedTest
#CsvFileSource(resources = "testData.csv", numLinesToSkip = 1)
void test(String parameter, String anotherParameter) {
Assumptions.assumeFalse(skipRemaining);
try {
// testing here
} catch (AssertionError e) {
skipRemaining = true;
throw e;
}
}
}
In contrast to a failed assertion, which marks a test as failed, an assumption results in an abort of a test. In addition, the lifecycle is switched from per method to per class:
When using this mode, a new test instance will be created once per test class. Thus, if your test methods rely on state stored in instance variables, you may need to reset that state in #BeforeEach or #AfterEach methods.
Depending on how often you need that feature, I would rather go with a custom extension.
I am building a Capacited Vehicle Routing Problem with Time Windows, but with one small difference when compared to the one provided in examples from the documentation: I don't have a depot. Instead, each order has a pickup step, and a delivery step, in two different locations.
(like in the Vehicle Routing example from the documentation, the previousStep planning variable has the CHAINED graph type, and its valueRangeProviderRefs includes both Drivers, and Steps)
This difference adds a couple of constraints:
the pickup and delivery steps of a given order must be handled by the same driver
the pickup must be before the delivery
After experimenting with constraints, I have found that it would be more efficient to implement two types of custom moves:
assign both steps of an order to a driver
rearrange the steps of a driver
I am currently implementing that first custom move. My solver's configuration looks like this:
SolverFactory<RoutingProblem> solverFactory = SolverFactory.create(
new SolverConfig()
.withSolutionClass(RoutingProblem.class)
.withEntityClasses(Step.class, StepList.class)
.withScoreDirectorFactory(new ScoreDirectorFactoryConfig()
.withConstraintProviderClass(Constraints.class)
)
.withTerminationConfig(new TerminationConfig()
.withSecondsSpentLimit(60L)
)
.withPhaseList(List.of(
new LocalSearchPhaseConfig()
.withMoveSelectorConfig(CustomMoveListFactory.getConfig())
))
);
My CustomMoveListFactory looks like this (I plan on migrating it to an MoveIteratorFactory later, but for the moment, this is easier to read and write):
public class CustomMoveListFactory implements MoveListFactory<RoutingProblem> {
public static MoveListFactoryConfig getConfig() {
MoveListFactoryConfig result = new MoveListFactoryConfig();
result.setMoveListFactoryClass(CustomMoveListFactory.class);
return result;
}
#Override
public List<? extends Move<RoutingProblem>> createMoveList(RoutingProblem routingProblem) {
List<Move<RoutingProblem>> moves = new ArrayList<>();
// 1. Assign moves
for (Order order : routingProblem.getOrders()) {
Driver currentDriver = order.getDriver();
for (Driver driver : routingProblem.getDrivers()) {
if (!driver.equals(currentDriver)) {
moves.add(new AssignMove(order, driver));
}
}
}
// 2. Rearrange moves
// TODO
return moves;
}
}
And finally, the move itself looks like this (nevermind the undo or the isDoable for the moment):
#Override
protected void doMoveOnGenuineVariables(ScoreDirector<RoutingProblem> scoreDirector) {
assignStep(scoreDirector, order.getPickupStep());
assignStep(scoreDirector, order.getDeliveryStep());
}
private void assignStep(ScoreDirector<RoutingProblem> scoreDirector, Step step) {
StepList beforeStep = step.getPreviousStep();
Step afterStep = step.getNextStep();
// 1. Insert step at the end of the driver's step list
StepList lastStep = driver.getLastStep();
scoreDirector.beforeVariableChanged(step, "previousStep"); // NullPointerException here
step.setPreviousStep(lastStep);
scoreDirector.afterVariableChanged(step, "previousStep");
// 2. Remove step from current chained list
if (afterStep != null) {
scoreDirector.beforeVariableChanged(afterStep, "previousStep");
afterStep.setPreviousStep(beforeStep);
scoreDirector.afterVariableChanged(afterStep, "previousStep");
}
}
The idea being that at no point I'm doing an invalid chained list manipulation:
However, as the title and the code comment indicate, I am getting a NullPointerException when I call scoreDirector.beforeVariableChanged. None of my variables are null (I've printed them to make sure). The NullPointerException doesn't occur in my code, but deep inside Optaplanner's inner workings, making it difficult for me to fix it:
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NullPointerException
at org.drools.core.common.NamedEntryPoint.update(NamedEntryPoint.java:353)
at org.drools.core.common.NamedEntryPoint.update(NamedEntryPoint.java:338)
at org.drools.core.impl.StatefulKnowledgeSessionImpl.update(StatefulKnowledgeSessionImpl.java:1579)
at org.drools.core.impl.StatefulKnowledgeSessionImpl.update(StatefulKnowledgeSessionImpl.java:1551)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.score.stream.drools.DroolsConstraintSession.update(DroolsConstraintSession.java:49)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.score.director.stream.ConstraintStreamScoreDirector.afterVariableChanged(ConstraintStreamScoreDirector.java:137)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.domain.variable.inverserelation.SingletonInverseVariableListener.retract(SingletonInverseVariableListener.java:96)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.domain.variable.inverserelation.SingletonInverseVariableListener.beforeVariableChanged(SingletonInverseVariableListener.java:46)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.domain.variable.listener.support.VariableListenerSupport.beforeVariableChanged(VariableListenerSupport.java:170)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.score.director.AbstractScoreDirector.beforeVariableChanged(AbstractScoreDirector.java:430)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.score.director.AbstractScoreDirector.beforeVariableChanged(AbstractScoreDirector.java:390)
at test.optaplanner.solver.AssignMove.assignStep(AssignMove.java:98)
at test.optaplanner.solver.AssignMove.doMoveOnGenuineVariables(AssignMove.java:85)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.heuristic.move.AbstractMove.doMove(AbstractMove.java:35)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.heuristic.move.AbstractMove.doMove(AbstractMove.java:30)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.score.director.AbstractScoreDirector.doAndProcessMove(AbstractScoreDirector.java:187)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.localsearch.decider.LocalSearchDecider.doMove(LocalSearchDecider.java:132)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.localsearch.decider.LocalSearchDecider.decideNextStep(LocalSearchDecider.java:116)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.localsearch.DefaultLocalSearchPhase.solve(DefaultLocalSearchPhase.java:70)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.solver.AbstractSolver.runPhases(AbstractSolver.java:98)
at org.optaplanner.core.impl.solver.DefaultSolver.solve(DefaultSolver.java:189)
at test.optaplanner.OptaPlannerService.testOptaplanner(OptaPlannerService.java:68)
at test.optaplanner.App.main(App.java:13)
Is there something I did wrong? It seems I am following the documentation for custom moves fairly closely, outside of the fact that I am using exclusively java code instead of drools.
The initial solution I feed to the solver has all of the steps assigned to a single driver. There are 15 drivers and 40 orders.
In order to bypass this error, I have tried a number of different things:
remove the shadow variable annotation, turn Driver into a problem fact, and handle the nextStep field myself => this makes no difference
use Simulated Annealing + First Fit Decreasing construction heuristics, and start with steps not assigned to any driver (this was inspired by looking up the example here, which is more complete than the one from the documentation) => the NullPointerException appears on afterVariableChanged instead, but it still appears.
a number of other things which were probably not very smart
But without a more helpful error message, I can't think of anything else to try.
Thank you for your help
I want to use something like Cucumber JVM to drive performance tests written for Gatling.
Ideally the Cucumber features would somehow build a scenario dynamically - probably reusing predefined chain objects similar to the method described in the "Advanced Tutorial", e.g.
val scn = scenario("Scenario Name").exec(Search.search("foo"), Browse.browse, Edit.edit("foo", "bar")
I've looked at how the Maven plugin executes the scripts, and I've also seen mention of using an App trait but I can't find any documentation for the later and it strikes me that somebody else will have wanted to do this before...
Can anybody point (a Gatling noob) in the direction of some documentation or example code of how to achieve this?
EDIT 20150515
So to explain a little more:
I have created a trait which is intended to build up a sequence of, I think, ChainBuilders that are triggered by Cucumber steps:
trait GatlingDsl extends ScalaDsl with EN {
private val gatlingActions = new ArrayBuffer[GatlingBehaviour]
def withGatling(action: GatlingBehaviour): Unit = {
gatlingActions += action
}
}
A GatlingBehaviour would look something like:
object Google {
class Home extends GatlingBehaviour {
def execute: ChainBuilder =
exec(http("Google Home")
.get("/")
)
}
class Search extends GatlingBehaviour {...}
class FindResult extends GatlingBehaviour {...}
}
And inside the StepDef class:
class GoogleStepDefinitions extends GatlingDsl {
Given( """^the Google search page is displayed$""") { () =>
println("Loading www.google.com")
withGatling(Home())
}
When( """^I search for the term "(.*)"$""") { (searchTerm: String) =>
println("Searching for '" + searchTerm + "'...")
withGatling(Search(searchTerm))
}
Then( """^"(.*)" appears in the search results$""") { (expectedResult: String) =>
println("Found " + expectedResult)
withGatling(FindResult(expectedResult))
}
}
The idea being that I can then execute the whole sequence of actions via something like:
val scn = Scenario(cucumberScenario).exec(gatlingActions)
setup(scn.inject(atOnceUsers(1)).protocols(httpConf))
and then check the reports or catch an exception if the test fails, e.g. response time too long.
It seems that no matter how I use the 'exec' method it tries to instantly execute it there and then, not waiting for the scenario.
Also I don't know if this is the best approach to take, we'd like to build some reusable blocks for our Gatling tests that can be constructed via Cucumber's Given/When/Then style. Is there a better or already existing approach?
Sadly, it's not currently feasible to have Gatling directly start a Simulation instance.
Not that's it's not technically feasible, but you're just the first person to try to do this.
Currently, Gatling is usually in charge of compiling and can only be passed the name of the class to load, not an instance itself.
You can maybe start by forking io.gatling.app.Gatling and io.gatling.core.runner.Runner, and then provide a PR to support this new behavior. The former is the main entry point, and the latter the one can instanciate and run the simulation.
I recently ran into a similar situation, and did not want to fork gatling. And while this solved my immediate problem, it only partially solves what you are trying to do, but hopefully someone else will find this useful.
There is an alternative. Gatling is written in Java and Scala so you can call Gatling.main directly and pass it the arguments you need to run the Gatling Simulation you want. The problem is, the main explicitly calls System.exit so you have to also use a custom security manager to prevent it from actually exiting.
You need to know two things:
the class (with the full package) of the Simulation you want to run
example: com.package.your.Simulation1
the path where the binaries are compiled.
The code to run a Simulation:
protected void fire(String gatlingGun, String binaries){
SecurityManager sm = System.getSecurityManager();
System.setSecurityManager(new GatlingSecurityManager());
String[] args = {"--simulation", gatlingGun,
"--results-folder", "gatling-results",
"--binaries-folder", binaries};
try {
io.gatling.app.Gatling.main(args);
}catch(SecurityException se){
LOG.debug("gatling test finished.");
}
System.setSecurityManager(sm);
}
The simple security manager i used:
public class GatlingSecurityManager extends SecurityManager {
#Override
public void checkExit(int status){
throw new SecurityException("Tried to exit.");
}
#Override
public void checkPermission(Permission perm) {
return;
}
}
The problem is then getting the information you want out of the simulation after it has been run.
For measuring execution time of methods, I've seen suggestions to use
public class PerformanceInterceptor {
#AroundInvoke
Object measureTime(InvocationContext ctx) throws Exception {
long beforeTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
Object obj = null;
try {
obj = ctx.proceed();
return obj;
}
finally {
time = System.currentTimeMillis() - beforeTime;
// Log time
}
}
Then put
#Interceptors(PerformanceInterceptor.class)
before whatever method you want measured.
Anyway I tried this and it seems to work fine.
I also added a
public static long countCalls = 0;
to the PerformanceInterceptor class and a
countCalls++;
to the measureTime() which also seems to work o.k.
With my newby hat on, I will ask if my use of the countCalls is o.k. i.e
that Glassfish/JEE6 is o.k. with me using static variables in a Java class that is
used as an Interceptor.... in particular with regard to thread safety. I know that
normally you are supposed to synchronize setting of class variables in Java, but I
don't know what the case is with JEE6/Glassfish. Any thoughts ?
There is not any additional thread safety provided by container in this case. Each bean instance does have its own instance of interceptor. As a consequence multiple thread can access static countCalls same time.
That's why you have to guard both reads and writes to it as usual. Other possibility is to use AtomicLong:
private static final AtomicLong callCount = new AtomicLong();
private long getCallCount() {
return callCount.get();
}
private void increaseCountCall() {
callCount.getAndIncrement();
}
As expected, these solutions will work only as long as all of the instances are in same JVM, for cluster shared storage is needed.