I am developing a client-server software in which server is developed by python. I want to call a group of methods from a java program in python. All the java methods exists in one jar file. It means I do not need to load different jars.
For this purpose, I used jpype. For each request from client, I invoke a function of python which looks like this:
def test(self, userName, password):
Classpath = "/home/DataSource/DMP.jar"
jpype.startJVM(
"/usr/local/java/jdk1.7.0_60/jre/lib/amd64/server/libjvm.so",
"-ea",
"- Xmx512m",
"-Djava.class.path=%s" % Classpath)
NCh = jpype.JClass("Common.NChainInterface")
n = NCh(self._DB_ipAddress, self._DB_Port, self._XML_SCHEMA_PATH, self._DSTDir)
jpype.shutdownJVM()
For one function it works, but for the second call it cannot start jvm.
I saw a lot of complain about it but I could not find any solution for that. I appreciate it if any body can help.
If jpype has problem in multiple starting jvm, is there any way to start and stop jvm once? The server is deployed on a Ubuntu virtual machine but I do not have enough knowledge to write for example, a script for this purpose. Could you please provide a link, or an example?
Check isJVMStarted() before startJVM().
If JVM is running, it will return True, otherwise False.
def init_jvm(jvmpath=None):
if jpype.isJVMStarted():
return
jpype.startJVM(jpype.getDefaultJVMPath())
For a real example, see here.
I have solved it by adding these lines when defining the connection:
if not jpype.isJVMStarted():
jpype.startJVM(jvmPath, args)
This issue is not resolved by et9's answer above.
The problem is explained here.
Effectively you need to start/stop the JVM at the server/module level.
I have had success with multiple calls using this method in unit tests.
Related
I try to setup an integration/API test suite with Karate and consider to use Karate Netty for mocking required services. For the test setup the system under test A (a Spring Boot app) is started up completely. The Karate tests are then executed by a Maven test run against this instance.
The service A depends on multiple other services these needs to be mocked away for the tests. To do so my idea was to configure a running Karate Netty standalone instance as HTTP proxy (done by JVM args of the service A).
Now my idea was to create one test feature file: xyz-test.feature
And the required mocks for this file are defined in an associated mock feature file: xyz-mock.feature
(The test scenarios are rather complex and the responses of the external services could vary)
This means for a full test run I need to load up a couple of mock feature files. So:
What is the matching strategy for multiple mock feature files? Which scenario wins, so to say.
Is there any way to ensure, that the right mock file is used for the associated test file?
(Clearly I can reconfigure the running standalone instance and advice it to use xyz-mock.feature next.
But this would stop me from using parallel execution for my API tests, right?)
I already thought about reusing the Correlation-Id which I can send in for each test and then match against this in the mock file (it is also sent to all called services). But:
Is there a way to define a global matcher per mock file?
It sounds like you need only one mock file. You could boot 2 on different ports if you wanted, but there is no way to "merge" them into one port - if that is what you were looking for.
In my experience, you will be able to have a single mock take care of all your edge cases. This is because Karate's approach is un-conventional: you pretty much write a stateful server. But by keeping variables in memory and some clever JSON-path, you can simulate CRUD with very few lines of code: https://github.com/intuit/karate/tree/master/karate-netty#background
You can use only one at a time, by design
Given the above limitation, here's an interesting idea: add something like an extra pathMatches('/__test/reset') scenario that cleans-up your state and sets the Background variables to things like * def cats = []. Now in each feature, just call the special "reset" URL at the start. The good thing is Karate is thread-safe. Another idea as you said is you can maintain two or three different variables and use some logic to "route" based on a header, again very easy IMO. Use a map of maps, e.g:
def data = { cats1: {}, cats2: {}, cats3: {} }
And you can get the header, e.g. if it is mode: cats1
* def mode = karate.get('requestHeaders.mode[0]')
* def cats = data[mode]
not sure if this answers your question, but if the last Scenario has an "empty" description, it is a "catch all" and can in theory delegate to another server (or mock): https://github.com/intuit/karate/tree/develop/karate-netty#proxy-mode
Your question is a little confusing, so you may have to edit and re-word it if I haven't understood.
EDIT: using multiple mock files should be possible in 1.1.0 onwards: https://github.com/intuit/karate/issues/1566
We have an embedded Apache FTP server running in a gateway for several years. It always worked without problems.
But now a customer is trying to connect with a device of a brand that we've never had before, and contrary to all other clients so far, that thing sends the ALLO command in advance to make sure the server has enough space.
But Apache FTP doesn't seem to know that command. the trace log states:
RECEIVED: ALLO 77482
SENT: 502 Command ALLO not implemented.
following which the client cuts the connection.
The command is also not present in the Apache documentation:
https://mina.apache.org/ftpserver-project/ftpserver_commands.html
So the question is, can I plug my own implementation into the server somehow?
Just to be clear, I'm not asking how to implement the functionality. Just how I can pass my own implementation to Apache FTP for use. If that is possible without touching the source code.
Since the application in question has been running very stable for a long time, I would really hate to tear the Apache FTP server out of there and embed another one...
Well, that was surprisingly simple once I dug myself through to the right code.
The implementation of a command is simple enough, in this case I've just started with a stub for testing:
class ALLO : AbstractCommand() {
override fun execute(session: FtpIoSession, context: FtpServerContext, request: FtpRequest) {
session.write(LocalizedFtpReply.translate(session, request, context,
FtpReply.REPLY_200_COMMAND_OKAY, "ALLO", "bring it!"))
}
}
Inherit AbstractCommand, override execute and write a response to the session.
The question is of course then how to make the server aware of the implementation, which also turns out to be really simple, although there sure as hell doesn't seem to be any documentation around. But you can just instantiate a CommandFactoryFactory, map your implementation, build the CommandFactory and set it in the FtpServerFactory:
val commandFactoryFactory = CommandFactoryFactory()
commandFactoryFactory.addCommand("ALLO", ALLO())
serverFactory.commandFactory = commandFactoryFactory.createCommandFactory()
I have an existing project that uses Specflow and SpecRun to run some tests against Sauce Labs. I have a BeforeSenario hook that creates a RemoteWebDriver and an AfterScenario hook that closes this down.
I've now moved this into another project (copied the files over, just changed the namespace) and the first test runs fine but then get the following error:
An exception of type 'OpenQA.Selenium.WebDriverException' occurred in WebDriver.dll but was not handled in user code
Additional information: Unexpected error. The command you just sent (POST element) has no session ID.
This is generally caused by testing frameworks trying to run commands after the conclusion of a test.
For example, you may be trying to capture a screenshot or retrieve server logs
after selenium.stop() or driver.quit() was called in a tearDown method.
Please make sure this process happens before the session is ended.
I've compared the project and it's using the same version of SpecFlow, same .Net version. I can't see any difference between the two projects.
In my steps I have the following line:
public static IWebDriver driver = (IWebDriver)ScenarioContext.Current["driver"];
which I think is the issue as instead of getting a new instance of it from the ScenarioContext it's using the previous test's version which has now been disposed.
But I can't see why this is working in another project instead?
I am using the Specflow example in Github here
UPDATE
Looks like I've found the issue. In the Default.srprofile the testThreadCount was 1 whereas the value in the working solution was 10. I've now updated this to match and it works.
Not sure what this value should be though. I assume it shouldn't be the same number of tests, but then how do I get around my original issue of the shared driver context?
TestThreadCount specifics the number of threads used by SpecFlow+Runner (aka SpecRun) to execute the tests.
Each of the threads are separated. The default is AppDomain isolation, so every thread runs in a separate AppDomain.
In the SauceLab example there are 7 scenarios and the runner is configured to use 10 threads. This means, every scenario is executed in a different thread with its own AppDomain. As no thread executes a second scenario, you get this error not in the example
With only one thread, your thread is executing more than one scenario and you get this issue.
Easiest fix would be, if you remove the static from the field. For every scenario you get a new instance of the binding class. You do not have to remember it static.
For a better example how to use Selenium with SpecFlow & SpecFlow+ have a look here: https://github.com/techtalk/SpecFlow.Plus.Examples/tree/master/SeleniumWebTest
You have to adjust the WebDriver- class for using SauceLabs over the RemoteWebDriver.
I'm creating a unittest- and Selenium-based test suite for a web application. It is reachable by several hostnames, e.g. implying different languages; but of course I want to be able to test e.g. my development instances as well without changing the code (and without fiddling with the hosts file which doesn't work for me anymore, because of network security considerations, I suppose).
Thus, I'd like to be able to specify the hostname by commandline arguments.
The test runner does argument parsing itself, e.g. for chosing the tests to execute.
What is the recommended method to handle this situation?
The solution I came up with finally is:
Have a module for the tests which fixes the global data, including the hostname, and provides my TestCase class (I added an assertLoadsOk method to simply check for the HTTP status code).
This module does commandline processing as well:
It checks for its own options
and removes them from the argument vector (sys.argv).
When finding an "unknown" option, stop processing the options, and leave the rest to the testrunner.
The commandline processing happens on import, before initializing my TestCase class.
It works well for me ...
I am putting together some ideas for our automated testing platform and have been looking at Selenium for the test runner.
I am wrapping the recorded Selenium C# scripts in an MbUnit test, which is being triggered via the MbUnit NAnt task. The Selenium test client is created as follows:
selenium = new DefaultSelenium("host", 4444, "*iexplore", "http://[url]/");
How can I pass the host, port and url settings into the test so their values can be controlled via the NAnt task?
For example, I may have multiple Selenium RC servers listening and I want to use the same test code passing in each server address instead of embedding the settings within the tests themselves.
I have an approach mocked up using a custom NAnt task I have written but it is not the most elegant solution at present and I wondered if there was an easier way to accomplish what I want to do.
Many thanks if anyone can help.
Thanks for the responses so far.
Environment variables could work, however, we could be running parallel tests via a single test assembly so I wouldn't want settings to be overwritten during execution, which could break another test. Interesting line of thought though, thanks, I reckon I could use that in other areas.
My current solution involves a custom NAnt task build on top of the MbUnit task, which allows me to specify the additional host, port, url settings as attributes. These are then saved as a config file within the build directory and then read in by the test assemblies. This feels a bit "clunky" to me as my tests need to inherit from a specific class. Not too bad but I'd like to have less dependencies and concentrate on the testing.
Maybe I am worrying too much!!
I have a base class for all test fixtures which has the following setup code:
[FixtureSetUp]
public virtual void TestFixtureSetup ()
{
BrowserType = (BrowserType) Enum.Parse (typeof (BrowserType),
System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["BrowserType"],
true);
testMachine = System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["TestMachine"];
seleniumPort = int.Parse (System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["SeleniumPort"],
System.Globalization.CultureInfo.InvariantCulture);
seleniumSpeed = System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["SeleniumSpeed"];
browserUrl = System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["BrowserUrl"];
targetUrl = new Uri (System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["TargetUrl"]);
string browserExe;
switch (BrowserType)
{
case BrowserType.InternetExplorer:
browserExe = "*iexplore";
break;
case BrowserType.Firefox:
browserExe = "*firefox";
break;
default:
throw new NotSupportedException ();
}
selenium = new DefaultSelenium (testMachine, seleniumPort, browserExe, browserUrl);
selenium.Start ();
System.Console.WriteLine ("Started Selenium session (browser type={0})",
browserType);
// sets the speed of execution of GUI commands
if (false == String.IsNullOrEmpty (seleniumSpeed))
selenium.SetSpeed (seleniumSpeed);
}
I then simply supply the test runner with a config. file:
For MSBuild I use environment variables, I create those in my CC.NET config then they would be available in the script. I think this would work for you too.
Anytime I need to integrate with an external entity using NAnt I either end up using the exec task or writing a custom task. Given the information you posted it would seem that writing your own would indeed be a good solution, However you state you're not happy with it. Can you elaborate a bit on why you don't think you current solution is an elegant one?
Update
Not knowing internal details it seems like you've solved it pretty well with a custom task. From what I've heard, that's how I would have done it.
Maybe a new solution will show itself in time, but for now be light on yourself!