After Reading the official flink testing documentation (https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.9/dev/stream/testing.html)
I was able to develop tests for a ProcessFunction, using a Test Harness, something like this:
pendingPartitionBuilder = new PendingPartitionBuilder(":::some_name", "")
testHarness =
new OneInputStreamOperatorTestHarness[StaticAdequacyTilePublishedData, PendingPartition](
new ProcessOperator[StaticAdequacyTilePublishedData, PendingPartition](pendingPartitionBuilder)
)
testHarness.open()
now, I’m trying to do the same for a ProcessAllWindowFunction, that looks like this:
class MapVersionValidationDistributor(batchSize: Int) extends
ProcessAllWindowFunction[MapVersionValidation, Seq[StaticAdequacyTilePublishedData],TimeWindow] {
lazy val state: ValueState[Long] = getRuntimeContext .getState(new ValueStateDescriptor[Long]("latestMapVersion", classOf[Long]))
(...)
First I realized I can’t use TestHarness for ProcessAllWindowFunction, because it doesn’t have a processElement method. In this case, what unit test strategy should I follow?
EDIT: At the moment my test code looks like this:
val collector = mock[Collector[Seq[StaticAdequacyTilePublishedData]]]
val mvv = new MapVersionValidationDistributor(1)
val input3 = Iterable(new MapVersionValidation("123",Seq(TileValidation(1,true,Seq(1,3,4)))))
val ctx = mock[mvv.Context]
val streamContext = mock[RuntimeContext]
mvv.setRuntimeContext(streamContext)
mvv.open(mock[Configuration])
mvv.process(ctx,input3,collector)
and I'm getting this error:
Unexpected call: <mock-3> RuntimeContext.getState[T](ValueStateDescriptor{name=latestMapVersion, defaultValue=null, serializer=null}) Expected: inAnyOrder { }
You don't really need test harness to unit test the process method of the ProcessAllWindowFunction. The process function takes 3 arguments: Context, Iterable[IN], Collector[OUT]. You can use some library depending on the language used to mock the Context. You can also easily implement or mock the Collector depending on your prerefences here. And the Iterable[IN] is just an Iterable containing the elements of Your window, that would be passed to the function after the window is triggered.
Related
I'm using other teams api(let's name it otherTeamAPI) to call data, so in my function, my code looks like this:
def getData(host:String, port:Int, date: String): Map[String, String] = {
val data = new otherTeamAPI(host,port)
val latestData = data.getLatestData(date)
}
Could someone teach me how to use Mockito to do the same thing to get data in unit test? I'm not sure whether to use something like below to new an api:
val otherTeamAPI = Mock[otherTeamAPI]
otherTeamAPI.getLatestData(date)
How to get data everytime i trigger my function getData? Do i need to do somthing new a mock otherTeamAPI?
Your code, written as is, is not testable. You have to be able to pass your method an instance of the OtherTeamAPI so that your production code uses a real instance but test code can use a fake one (a "mock").
How you pass this instance depends on the structure of the rest of your code: either as a parameter of this method getData or as an attribute of the class that contains it.
The first one would look like this:
def getData(api: OtherTeamApi, date: String): Map[String, String] = {
val latestData = api.getLatestData(date)
// ...
}
And then in your test, you can do something like:
val fakeApi = mock[OtherTeamAPI]
when(fakeApi.getLatestData(anyString())).the return(...)
val result = getData(fakeApi, ...)
// Then assert on result
This is a high level answer. You'll need to learn more about Mockito to find out what you want to do.
I'm running a ScalaTest (FlatSpec) suite programmatically, like so:
new MyAwesomeSpec().execute()
Is there some way I can figure out if all tests passed? Suite#execute() returns Unit here, so does not help. Ideally, I'd like to run the whole suite and then get a return value indicating whether any tests failed; an alternative would be to fail/return immediately on any failed test.
I can probably achieve this by writing a new FlatSpec subclass that overrides the Scalatest Suite#execute() method to return a value, but is there a better way to do what I want here?
org.scalatest.Suite also has run function, which returns the status of a single executed test.
With a few tweaking, we can access the execution results of each test. To run a test, we need to provide a Reporter instance. An ad-hoc empty reporter will be enough in our simple case:
val reporter = new Reporter() {
override def apply(e: Event) = {}
}
So, let's execute them:
import org.scalatest.events.Event
import org.scalatest.{Args, Reporter}
val testSuite = new MyAwesomeSpec()
val testNames = testSuite.testNames
testNames.foreach(test => {
val result = testSuite.run(Some(test), Args(reporter))
val status = if (result.succeeds()) "OK" else "FAILURE!"
println(s"Test: '$test'\n\tStatus=$status")
})
This will produce output similar to following:
Test: 'This test should pass'
Status=OK
Test: 'Another test should fail'
Status=FAILURE!
Having access to each test case name and its respective execution result, you should have enough data to achieve your goal.
I have:
val observable: Observable[Int] = Observable.from(List(5))
and I can test that the input list is indeed passed on to the observable by testing:
materializeValues(observable) should contain (5)
where materializeValues is:
def materializeValues[T](observable: Observable[T]): List[T] = {
observable.toBlocking.toIterable.toList
}
Now, if I create an observable from a future, I can't seem to use materializeValues for the test as the test times out. So if I have:
val futVal = Future.successful(5)
val observable: Observable[Int] = Observable.from(futVal)
materializeValues(observable) should contain(5)
it times out and does not pass the test. What is different in the process of materializing these two observables, which leads to me not being able to block on it?
Also, what is the idomatic way of testing an observable? Is there any way of doing it without calling toBlocking?
I think the problem is that you use AsyncWordSpecLike (by the way why AsyncWordSpecLike instead of AsyncWordSpec?). AsyncWordSpecLike/AsyncWordSpec are designed to simplify testing Future. Unfortunately Observable is a more powerful abstraction that can't be easily mapped onto a Future.
Particularly AsyncWordSpecLike/AsyncWordSpec allow your tests to return Future[Assertion]. To make it possible it provides custom implicit ExecutionContext that it can force to execute everything and know when all scheduled jobs have finished. However the same custom ExecutionContext is the reason why your second code doesn't work: processing of the scheduled jobs starts only after execution of your test code has finished but your code blocks on the futVal because unlucklily for you callback registered in Future.onComplete is scheduled to be run on the ExecutionContext. It means that you have a kind of dead-lock with your own thread.
I'm not sure what is the official way to test Observable on Scala. In Java I think TestSubscriber is the suggested tool. As I said Observable is fundamentally more powerful thing than Future so I think to test Observable you should avoid using AsyncWordSpecLike/AsyncWordSpec. If you switch to use FlatSpec or WordSpec, you can do something like this:
class MyObservableTestSpec extends WordSpec with Matchers {
import scala.concurrent.ExecutionContext.Implicits.global
val testValue = 5
"observables" should {
"be testable if created from futures" in {
val futVal = Future.successful(testValue)
val observable = Observable.from(futVal)
val subscriber = TestSubscriber[Int]()
observable(subscriber)
subscriber.awaitTerminalEvent
// now after awaitTerminalEvent you can use various subscriber.assertXyz methods
subscriber.assertNoErrors
subscriber.assertValues(testValue)
// or you can use Matchers as
subscriber.getOnNextEvents should contain(testValue)
}
}
}
I have some code that requires an Environment Variable to run correctly. But when I run my unit tests, it bombs out once it reaches that point unless I specifically export the variable in the terminal. I am using Scala and sbt. My code does something like this:
class something() {
val envVar = sys.env("ENVIRONMENT_VARIABLE")
println(envVar)
}
How can I mock this in my unit tests so that whenever sys.env("ENVIRONMENT_VARIABLE") is called, it returns a string or something like that?
If you can't wrap existing code, you can change UnmodifiableMap System.getenv() for tests.
def setEnv(key: String, value: String) = {
val field = System.getenv().getClass.getDeclaredField("m")
field.setAccessible(true)
val map = field.get(System.getenv()).asInstanceOf[java.util.Map[java.lang.String, java.lang.String]]
map.put(key, value)
}
setEnv("ENVIRONMENT_VARIABLE", "TEST_VALUE1")
If you need to test console output, you may use separate PrintStream.
You can also implement your own PrintStream.
val baos = new java.io.ByteArrayOutputStream
val ps = new java.io.PrintStream(baos)
Console.withOut(ps)(
// your test code
println(sys.env("ENVIRONMENT_VARIABLE"))
)
// Get output and verify
val output: String = baos.toString(StandardCharsets.UTF_8.toString)
println("Test Output: [%s]".format(output))
assert(output.contains("TEST_VALUE1"))
Ideally, environment access should be rewritten to retrieve the data in a safe manner. Either with a default value ...
scala> scala.util.Properties.envOrElse("SESSION", "unknown")
res70: String = Lubuntu
scala> scala.util.Properties.envOrElse("SECTION", "unknown")
res71: String = unknown
... or as an option ...
scala> scala.util.Properties.envOrNone("SESSION")
res72: Option[String] = Some(Lubuntu)
scala> scala.util.Properties.envOrNone("SECTION")
res73: Option[String] = None
... or both [see envOrSome()].
I don't know of any way to make it look like any/all random env vars are set without actually setting them before running your tests.
You shouldn't test it in unit-test.
Just extract it out
class F(val param: String) {
...
}
In your prod code you do
new Foo(sys.env("ENVIRONMENT_VARIABLE"))
I would encapsulate the configuration in a contraption which does not expose the implementation, maybe a class ConfigValue
I would put the implementation in a class ConfigValueInEnvVar extends ConfigValue
This allows me to test the code that relies on the ConfigValue without having to set or clear environment variables.
It also allows me to test the base implementation of storing a value in an environment variable as a separate feature.
It also allows me to store the configuration in a database, a file or anything else, without changing my business logic.
I select implementation in the application layer.
I put the environment variable logic in a supporting domain.
I put the business logic and the traits/interfaces in the core domain.
I am trying out ScalaMock in my scala application
What i have is an RSSReader which reads data from XML using XML.load(<urlString>), like in the code below
class ScalaRssFinancialDataReader
....
def fetchRSS(url:String) = XML.load(url)
....
}
I am mocking it like this
"fetching global economics mocking XML trait" should "return data" in {
val xmlFragment = <item><title>foo</title><author>a</author></item>
val xmlMock = mock[scala.xml.XML]
val tradingEconomicsUrl = "http://www.tradingeconomics.com/russia/rss"
(xmlMock.load_).expects(tradingEconomicsUrl).returns(xmlFragment)
val rssReader = new com.worldcorpservices.rss.reader.ScalaRssFinancialDataReader()
val res = rssReader.fetchRssData("http://www.tradingeconomics.com/russia/rss", "RUSSIA")
assert(res.size() == 1)
}
the problem is that i keep on getting exception that 'XML is not part of p ackage scala.xml
What am i doing wrong here? is it possible to mock XML.load method?
kind regards
marco
scala.xml.XML is an object, Mockito cannot mock objects, you may want to check ScalaMock (expecially here) for that. What I usually do is create a test file and use that as test case, you don't really need to mock the method.
Check also this question and this question.