I have a method which connects to a websocket and gets stream messages from some really outside system.
The simplified version is:
def watchOrders(): Var[Option[Order]] = {
val value = Var[Option[Order]](None)
// onMessage( order => value.update(Some(order))
value
}
When I test it (with scalatest), I want to make it connect to the real outside system, and only check the first 4 orders:
test("watchOrders") {
var result = List.empty[Order]
val stream = client.watchOrders()
stream.foreach {
case Some(order) =>
result = depth :: result
if (result.size == 4) { // 1.
assert(orders should ...) // 2.
stream.kill() // 3.
}
case _ =>
}
Thread.sleep(10000) // 4.
}
I have 4 questions:
Is it the right way to check the first 4 orders? there is no take(4) method found in scala.rx
If the assert fails, the test still passes, how to fix it?
Is it the right way to stop the stream?
If the thread doesn't sleep here, the test will pass the code in case Some(order) never runs. Is there a better way to wait?
One approach you might consider to get a List out of a Var is to use the .fold combinator.
The other issue you have is dealing with the asynchronous nature of the data - assuming you really want to talk to this outside real world system in your test code (ie, this is closer to the integration test side of things), you are going to want to look at scalatest's support for async tests and will probably do something like construct a future out of a promise that you can complete when you accumulate the 4 elements in your list.
See: http://www.scalatest.org/user_guide/async_testing
Related
I will start mentioning I am very new to Scala but I have now to maintain a legacy code where some new feature are being tried to be include.
I have the following code:
Where a list is coming as a parameter where a new output needs to be processed. However it seems like code is not waiting for the response to the external service when processing.
def historyBet(jackpotListUser : List[JackpotBetHistory])(implicit MC: AppMarkerContext) : List[LegacyJackpotHistoryResponse] =
for {
bet <- jackpotListUser
prize = jackpotIntegratorService.findJackpotByJackpotHumanId(bet.jackpotHumanId) match {
case Some(jackpot : JackpotResponse) =>
...
extra code extracting price from jackpot : JackpotResponse
...
extra code generating result with prize
} yield result
How can I do a call to jackpotIntegratorService.findJackpotByJackpotHumanId to execute at that time. instead of returning something that F[Option....?
def findJackpotByJackpotHumanId(
jackpotHumanId: JackpotHumanId
)(implicit MC: AppMarkerContext): F[Option[JackpotResponse]] =
jackpotIntegratorRepo.findJackpotByJackpotHumanId(jackpotHumanId)
where it is finally implemented as:
override def findJackpotByJackpotHumanId(
jackpotHumanId: JackpotHumanId
)(implicit mc: AppMarkerContext): IO[Option[JackpotResponse]] =
... code calling an API which return the IO.
Thanks!
I thought I could do IO.await somewhere... but not sure where or how...
because in the "historyBet" function I got a F[] when it was an IO... so what is the syntax to be able to wait for the response and the continue?
Extra Comment:
The real issue we notice is that the method call is starting (the logs shows part of it) but the caller with in the maps continues too.
prize = jackpotIntegratorService.findJackpotByJackpotHumanId
this part of the code continues even when prize, which we want the final object JackpotResponse, not the IO or F.
So, if your method needs to call an IO then it must return an IO unless you unsafeRunSync them... but, as the name suggest, you should not do that.
So the return type is now: IO[List[LegacyJackpotHistoryResponse]
And can be implemented like this:
def historyBet(jackpotListUser: List[JackpotBetHistory])(implicit MC: AppMarkerContext): IO[List[LegacyJackpotHistoryResponse]] =
jackpotListUser.traverse { bet =>
jackpotIntegratorService.findJackpotByJackpotHumanId(bet.jackpotHumanId).map {
case Some(jackpot) =>
// ...
case None =>
// ...
}
}
I'm writing Selenium tests with ScalaTest's Selenium DSL and I'm running into timeouts I can't explain. To make matters more complicated, they only seem to happen some of the time.
The problem occurs whenever I access an Element after a page load or some Javascript rendering. It looks like this:
click on "editEmployee"
eventually {
textField(name("firstName")).value = "Steve"
}
My PatienceConfig is configured like this:
override implicit val patienceConfig: PatienceConfig =
PatienceConfig(timeout = Span(5, Seconds), interval = Span(50, Millis))
The test fails with the following error:
- should not display the old data after an employee was edited *** FAILED ***
The code passed to eventually never returned normally. Attempted 1 times over 10.023253653000001 seconds.
Last failure message: WebElement 'firstName' not found.. (EditOwnerTest.scala:24)
It makes sense that it doesn't succeed immediately, because the click causes some rendering, and the textfield may not be available right away. However, it shouldn't take 10 seconds to make an attempt to find it, right?
Also, I find it very interesting that the eventually block tried it only once, and that it took almost precisely 10 seconds. This smells like a timeout occurred somewhere, and it's not my PatienceConfig, because that was set to time out after 5 seconds.
With this workaround, it does work:
click on "editEmployee"
eventually {
find(name("firstName")).value // from ScalaTest's `OptionValues`
}
textField(name("firstName")).value = "Steve"
I did some digging in the ScalaTest source, and I've noticed that all calls that have this problem (it's not just textField), eventually call webElement at some point. The reason why the workaround works, is because it doesn't call webElement. webElement is defined like this:
def webElement(implicit driver: WebDriver, pos: source.Position = implicitly[source.Position]): WebElement = {
try {
driver.findElement(by)
}
catch {
case e: org.openqa.selenium.NoSuchElementException =>
// the following is avoid the suite instance to be bound/dragged into the messageFun, which can cause serialization problem.
val queryStringValue = queryString
throw new TestFailedException(
(_: StackDepthException) => Some("WebElement '" + queryStringValue + "' not found."),
Some(e),
pos
)
}
}
I've copied that code into my project and played around with it, and it looks like constructing and/or throwing the exception is where most of the 10 seconds are spent.
(EDIT Clarification: I've actually seen the code actually spend its 10 seconds inside the catch block. The implicit wait is set to 0, and besides, if I remove the catch block everything simply works as expected.)
So my question is, what can I do to avoid this strange behaviour? I don't want to have to insert superfluous calls to find all the time, because it's easily forgotten, especially since, as I said, the error occurs only some of the time. (I haven't been able to determine when the behaviour occurs and when it doesn't.)
It is clear that the textField(name("firstName")).value = "Steve" ends up calling the WebElement as you have found out.
Since the issue in the op is happening where ever web elements are involved (which in turn implies that webdriver is involved), I think it is safe to assume that the issue is related to the implicit wait on the Web driver.
implicitlyWait(Span(0, Seconds))
The above should ideally fix the issue. Also, making implicit wait to be 0 is a bad practice. Any web page might have some loading issues. The page load is handled by Selenium outside its wait conditions. But slow element load (may be due to ajax calls) could result in failure. I usually keep 10 seconds as my standard implicit wait. For scenarios which require more wait, explicit waits can be used.
def implicitlyWait(timeout: Span)(implicit driver: WebDriver): Unit = {
driver.manage.timeouts.implicitlyWait(timeout.totalNanos, TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS)
}
Execution Flow:
name("firstName") ends up having value as Query {Val by = By.className("firstName") }.
def name(elementName: String): NameQuery = new NameQuery(elementName)
case class NameQuery(queryString: String) extends Query { val by = By.name(queryString) }
Query is fed to the textField method which calls the Query.webElement as below.
def textField(query: Query)(implicit driver: WebDriver, pos: source.Position): TextField = new TextField(query.webElement)(pos)
sealed trait Query extends Product with Serializable {
val by: By
val queryString: String
def webElement(implicit driver: WebDriver, pos: source.Position = implicitly[source.Position]): WebElement = {
try {
driver.findElement(by)
}
catch {
case e: org.openqa.selenium.NoSuchElementException =>
// the following is avoid the suite instance to be bound/dragged into the messageFun, which can cause serialization problem.
val queryStringValue = queryString
throw new TestFailedException(
(_: StackDepthException) => Some("WebElement '" + queryStringValue + "' not found."),
Some(e),
pos
)
}
}
}
I don't know ScalaTest's specifics, but such strange timeouts usually occur when you're mixing up implicit and explicit waits together.
driver.findElement uses implicit waits internally. And depending on specified explicit waits timeout, you may face with summing both together.
Ideally, implicit waits should be set to 0 to avoid such issues.
Coming from a Java background, I have been trying to teach myself Scala for some time now. As part of that, I am doing a small pet project that exposes a HTTP endpoint that saves the registration numberof a vehicle against the owner and returns the status.
To give more context, I am using Slick as FRM which performs DB operations asynchronously and returns a Future.
Based on the output of this Future, I want to set the status variable to return back to the client.
Here, is the code
def addVehicleOwner(vehicle: Vehicle): String = {
var status = ""
val addFuture = db.run((vehicles returning vehicles.map(_.id)) += vehicle)
addFuture onComplete {
case Success(id) => {
BotLogger.info(LOGTAG, s"Vehicle registered at $id ")
status = String.format("Registration number - '%s' mapped to owner '%s' successfully", vehicle.registration,
vehicle.owner)
println(s"status inside success $status") //--------- (1)
}
case Failure(e: SQLException) if e.getMessage.contains("SQLITE_CONSTRAINT") => {
status = updateVehicleOwner(vehicle)
BotLogger.info(LOGTAG, s"Updated owner='${vehicle.owner}' for '${vehicle.registration}'")
}
case Failure(e) => {
BotLogger.error(LOGTAG, e)
status = "Sorry, unable to add now!"
}
}
exec(addFuture)
println(s"Status=$status") //--------- (2)
status
}
// Helper method for running a query in this example file:
def exec[T](sqlFuture: Future[T]):T = Await.result(sqlFuture, 1 seconds)
This was fairly simple in Java. With Scala, I am facing the following problems:
The expected value gets printed at (1), but (2) always prints empty string and same is what method returns. Can someone explain why?
I even tried marking the var status as #volatile var status, it still evaluates to empty string.
I know, that the above is not the functional way of doing things as I am muting state. What is the clean way of writing code for such cases.
Almost all the examples I could find described how to map the result of Success or handle Failure by doing a println. I want to do more than that.
What are some good references of small projects that I can refer to? Specially, that follow TDD.
Instead of relying on status to complete inside the closure, you can recover over the Future[T] which handle the exception if they occur, and always returns the result you want. This is taking advantage of the nature of expressions in Scala:
val addFuture =
db.run((vehicles returning vehicles.map(_.id)) += vehicle)
.recover {
case e: SQLException if e.getMessage.contains("SQLITE_CONSTRAINT") => {
val status = updateVehicleOwner(vehicle)
BotLogger.info(
LOGTAG,
s"Updated owner='${vehicle.owner}' for '${vehicle.registration}'"
)
status
}
case e => {
BotLogger.error(LOGTAG, e)
val status = "Sorry, unable to add now!"
status
}
}
val result: String = exec(addFuture)
println(s"Status = $result")
result
Note that Await.result should not be used in any production environment as it synchronously blocks on the Future, which is exactly the opposite of what you actually want. If you're already using a Future to delegate work, you want it to complete asynchronously. I'm assuming your exec method was simply for testing purposes.
I am quite an unexperienced spray/scala developer, I am trying to properly use spray.io LruCache. I am trying to achieve something very simple. I have a kafka consumer, when it reads something from its topic I want it to put the value it reads to cache.
Then in one of the routings I want to read this value, the value is of type string, what I have at the moment looks as follows:
object MyCache {
val cache: Cache[String] = LruCache(
maxCapacity = 10000,
initialCapacity = 100,
timeToLive = Duration.Inf,
timeToIdle = Duration(24, TimeUnit.HOURS)
)
}
to put something into cache i use following code:
def message() = Future { new String(singleMessage.message()) }
MyCache.cache(key, message)
Then in one of the routings I am trying to get something from the cache:
val res = MyCache.cache.get(keyHash)
The problem is the type of res is Option[Future[String]], it is quite hard and ugly to access the real value in this case. Could someone please tell me how I can simplify my code to make it better and more readable ?
Thanks in advance.
Don't try to get the value out of the Future. Instead call map on the Future to arrange for work to be done on the value when the Future is completed, and then complete the request with that result (which is itself a Future). It should look something like this:
path("foo") {
complete(MyCache.cache.get(keyHash) map (optMsg => ...))
}
Also, if singleMessage.message does not do I/O or otherwise block, then rather than creating the Future like you are
Future { new String(singleMessage.message) }
it would be more efficient to do it like so:
Future.successful(new String(singleMessage.message))
The latter just creates an already completed Future, bypassing the use of an ExecutionContext to evaluate the function.
If singleMessage.message does do I/O, then ideally you would do that I/O with some library (like Spray client, if it's an HTTP request) that returns a Future (rather than using Future { ... } to create another thread which will block).
I have two methods that both return an IObservable
IObservable<Something[]> QueryLocal();
and
IObservable<Something[]> QueryWeb();
QueryLocal is always successful. QueryWeb is susceptible to both a timeout and possible web errors.
I wish to implement a QueryLocalAndWeb() that calls both and combines their results.
So far I have:
IObservable<Something[]> QueryLocalAndWeb()
{
var a = QueryLocal();
var b = QueryWeb();
var plan = a.And(b).Then((x, y) => x.Concat(y).ToArray());
return Observable.When(plan).Timeout(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10), a);
}
However, I'm not sure that it handles the case where QueryWeb yields an error.
In the future I might have a QueryWeb2() that also needs to be taken into account.
So, how do I combine the results from a number of IObservables ignoring the ones that throw errors (or time out)?
I guess OnErrorResumeNext should be able to handle this scenario:
From MSDN:
Continues an observable sequence that is terminated normally or by an
exception with the next observable sequence.
IObservable<Something[]> QueryLocalAndWeb()
{
var a = QueryLocal();
var b = QueryWeb().Timeout(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10));
return Observable.OnErrorResumeNext(b, a);
}
You can do concat of array by using Aggregation on the returned observable.
I am assuming that both local and web are cold observable i.e they start producing values only when someone subscribes to them.
How about:
var plan = a.And(b).Then((x, y) => x.Concat(y.Catch(Observable.Empty<Something[]>()).ToArray());