I'm trying a simple sequence of tests on an API:
Create a user resource with a POST
Request the user resource with a GET
Delete the user resource with a DELETE
I've a single frisby test spec file mytest_spec.js. I've broken the test into 3 discrete steps, each with their own toss() like:
f1 = frisby.create("Create");
f1.post(post_url, {user_id: 1});
f1.expectStatus(201);
f1.toss();
// stuff...
f2 = frisby.create("Get");
f2.get(get_url);
f2.expectStatus(200);
f2.toss();
//Stuff...
f3 = frisby.create("delete");
f3.get(delete_url);
f3.expectStatus(200);
f3.toss();
Pretty basic stuff, right. However, there is no guarantee they'll execute in order as far as I can tell as they're asynchronous, so I might get a 404 on test 2 or 3 if the user doesn't exist by the time they run.
Does anyone know the correct way to create sequential tests in Frisby?
As you correctly pointed out, Frisby.js is asynchronous. There are several approaches to force it to run more synchronously. The easiest but not the cleanest one is to use .after(() -> ... you can find more about after() in Fisby.js docs.
Related
There are some discrepancies on the way the Celery canvas works in async and eager mode. I've noticed that a group followed by a chain in a dynamic task that replaces itself does not send the results along to the next on the chain.
Well, that seems complicated, let me show an example:
Given the following task:
#shared_task(bind=True)
def grouped(self, val):
task = (
group(asum.s(val, n) for n in range(val)) | asum.s(val)
)
raise self.replace(task)
when it's grouped in another canvas like this:
#shared_task(bind=True)
def flow(self, val):
workflow = (asum.s(1, val) |
asum.s(2) |
grouped.s() |
amul.s(3))
return self.replace(workflow)
the task amul will not receive the results from grouped when in eager mode.
To really ilustrate the issue, I've created a sample project on github where you can dive in into problem and help-me out with some quick solutions and possibly, some PR's on the celery project.
https://github.com/gutomaia/celery_equation
---- edited ----
On the project, I state the different behavior in both ways of using celery. In async mode, thouse tasks works as expected.
>>> from equation.main import *
>>> from equation.tasks import *
>>> flow.delay(1).get()
78
>>> flow.delay(2).get()
120
>>> flow.delay(100).get()
47895
I was struggling with this situation in a test case. For future readers, at least as of celery 4.4.0, the following idiom will work in all contexts, including synchronous, in-process execution:
return self.replace(...)
Using raise or simply letting the function end right after Task.replace will only work in asynchronous mode. The relevant code is right at the end of Task.replace:
if self.request.is_eager:
return sig.apply().get()
else:
sig.delay()
raise Ignore('Replaced by new task')
Sadly, eager mode will never be the same as running an actual worker. There's too many intricacies while running an actual worker for eager mode to be the exact same thing.
I agree that things like this should fall into special cases when using eager mode but some discrepancy is expected.
Please submit a PR if you know how to fix this issue and we can review the fix there. Thank you!
grouped() is not returning anything, so how do you expect amul to get the result??
I am using the following code, in an attempt to batch upload the changes made on a table:
onConfirmActionPressed: function() {
var oModel = this.getModel();
oModel.setUseBatch(true);
oModel.submitChanges();
}
I am using setProperty() to set the new values, like this:
onSingleSwitchChange: function(oControlEvent) {
var oModel = this.getView().getModel();
var rowBindingContext = oControlEvent.getSource().getBindingContext();
oModel.setProperty(rowBindingContext.sPath + "/Zlspr", "A");
}
When onConfirmActionPressed is executed, I get a server error, saying that "Commit work during changeset processing not allowed" on SAP R3.
When I upload the lines of the table one-by-one, it works fine. However, uploading this way is very slow, and in some cases it takes more than 10 minutes for the process to complete.
Am I doing something wrong while batch submitting? Is there a chance the issue is due to server (R3) misconfiguration?
You need to override methods:
/IWBEP/IF_MGW_APPL_SRV_RUNTIME~CHANGESET_BEGIN
/IWBEP/IF_MGW_APPL_SRV_RUNTIME~CHANGESET_END
Keep track of the errors across all calls to update methods and if everything went OK then in changeset_end perform commit on the database
edit:
To clarify:
In your Data Provider Class Extension in SAP Gateway you need to find your YOURENTITY_UPDATE_ENTITY method and get rid off any COMMIT WORK statements.
Then you need to redefine /IWBEP/IF_MGW_APPL_SRV_RUNTIME~CHANGESET_BEGIN method and, which is a method which is fired before any batch operation. You could define a class attribute such as table mt_batch_errors which would be emptied in this method.
When you post batch changes from UI5 using oModel.submitChanges() all single changes to Entities are directed to appropriate ..._UPDATE_ENTITY methods. You need to keep track of any possible errors and if any occurs then fill your mt_batch_errors table.
After all entities have been updated /IWBEP/IF_MGW_APPL_SRV_RUNTIME~CHANGESET_END method is fired in which you are able to check mt_batch_errors table if any errors occurred during the batch process. If there were errors then you should probably ROLLBACK WORK, and if not then you are free to COMMIT WORK.
That is just an example of how it could be done, I'm curious of other suggestions.
Good luck!
I'm using a GivenStories for executing Login scenario which is located in different story.
I was wondering if there is a way to use something similar in order to execute a logout story which is also located in different story than one I actually executing.
I know that I can do some tricks with #before/after annotations , but the question is if I can execute a "post" story
Thanks
Based on the jBehave annotation documentation a post story step can be implemented by annotating a step class method with #AfterStory (or #AfterStories if you want to execute only after all stories complete). The #AfterStory method will execute regardless of whether your executing story contains a step from the related step class (i.e. is guaranteed to execute after every story - see below for restricting to given stories).
The #BeforeStory and #AfterStory annotations allow the corresponding
methods to be executed before and after each story, either a
GivenStory or not:
#AfterStory // equivalent to #AfterStory(uponGivenStory=false)
public void afterStory() {
// ...
}
#AfterStory(uponGivenStory=true)
public void afterGivenStory() {
// ...
}
This is the answer I got from the jbehave dev channel.
Hi,
there is no such mechanism, but you could:
use the Lifecycle to execute steps (not stories) after the execution
of a scenario (executed after each scenario) have a final scenario
which invokes the given stories
I am using Tastypie, Django for my project.
To Update a many to many field I have used save_m2m hook.
def save_m2m(self, bundle):
for field_name, field_object in self.fields.items():
if not getattr(field_object, 'is_m2m', False):
continue
if not field_object.attribute:
continue
if field_object.readonly:
continue
related_mngr = getattr(bundle.obj, field_object.attribute)
related_objs = []
print bundle.data[field_name]
for related_bundle in bundle.data[field_name]:
try:
stock = Stock.objects.get(nse_symbol = related_bundle.obj.nse_symbol)
print stock.__dict__
except Stock.DoesNotExist as e:
dataa = {"error_message": e}
raise ImmediateHttpResponse(response=HttpBadRequest(content=json.dumps(dataa), content_type="application/json; charset=UTF-8"))
related_objs.append(stock)
related_mngr.add(*related_objs)
Now I want to remove elements from the same many to many field.
How should I achieve this. Do I have to send a patch request or delete request and how to handle this.
I am begineer in tastypie. I googled it some time and I couldn't find a proper way. Please guide me how to complete this.
Thanks.
I've thought a lot about handing m2m relationships, since most of our app depends on m2m links.
I've settled for the approach of an update method. Pass in the all the references of the relationships you want changed (add and remove), then update the db accordingly. We only pass in the changed values, since if you have a paginated list, you only want to update the items the user has identified. Generally I use a custom hook for this defined in override_urls.
I used to have a separate add and remove method, which worked well until we changed the gui and allowed users simply to change checkboxes. In that approach having an update method was much more useful. You'll have to decide on which method suits your application the best.
I'm trying to better understand common strategies regarding results and errors in Celery.
I see that results have statuses/states and stores results if requested -- when would I use this data? Should error handling and data storage be contained within the task?
Here is a sample scenario, in case it helps better understand my objective:
I have a geocoding task that goeocodes user addresses. If the task fails or succeeds, I'd like to update a field in the database letting the user know. (Error handling) On success I'd like the geocoded data to be inserted into the database (Data storage)
What approach should take?
Let me preface this by saying that I'm still getting a feel for Celery myself. That being said, I have some general inclinations about how I'd go about tackling this, and since no one else has responded, I'll give it a shot.
Based on what you've written, a relatively simple (though I suspect non-optimized) solution is to follow the broad contours of the blog comment spam task example from the documentation.
app.models.py
class Address(models.Model):
GEOCODE_STATUS_CHOICES = (
('pr', 'pre-check'),
('su', 'success'),
('fl', 'failed'),
)
address = models.TextField()
...
geocode = models.TextField()
geocode_status = models.CharField(max_length=2,
choices=GEOCODE_STATUS_CHOICES,
default='pr')
class AppUser(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=100)
...
address = models.ForeignKey(Address)
app.tasks.py
from celery import task
from app.models import Address, AppUser
from some_module import geocode_function #assuming this returns a string
#task()
def get_geocode(appuser_pk):
user = AppUser.objects.get(pk=appuser_pk)
address = user.address
try:
result = geocode_function(address.address)
address.geocode = result
address.geocode_status = 'su' #set address object as successful
address.save()
return address.geocode #this is optional -- your task doesn't have to return anything
on the other hand, you could also choose to decouple the geo-
code function from the database update for the object instance.
Also, if you're thinking about chaining tasks together, you
might think about if it's advantageous to pass a parameter as
an input or partial input into the child task.
except Exception as e:
address.geocode_status = 'fl' #address object fails
address.save()
#do something_else()
raise #re-raise the error, in case you want to trigger retries, etc
app.views.py
from app.tasks import *
from app.models import *
from django.shortcuts import get_object_or_404
def geocode_for_address(request, app_user_pk):
app_user = get_object_or_404(AppUser, pk=app_user_pk)
...etc.etc. --- **somewhere calling your tasks with appropriate args/kwargs
I believe this meets the minimal requirements you've outlined above. I've intentionally left the view undeveloped since I don't have a sense of how exactly you want to trigger it. It sounds like you also may want some sort of user notification when their address can't be geocoded ("I'd like to update a field in a database letting a user know"). Without knowing more about the specifics of this requirement, I would it sounds like something that might be best accomplished in your html templates (if instance.attribute value is X, display q in template) or by using a django.signals (set up a signal for when a user.address.geocode_status switches to failure -- say, by emailing the user to let them know, etc.).
In the comments to the code above, I mentioned the possibility of decoupling and chaining the component parts of the get_geocode task above. You could also think about decoupling the exception handling from the get_geocode task, by writing a custom error handler task, and using the link_error parameter (for instance., add.apply_async((2, 2), link_error=error_handler.s(), where error_handler has been defined as a task in app.tasks.py ). Also, whether you choose to handle errors via the main task (get_geocode) or via a linked error handler, I would think that you would want to get much more specific about how to handle different sorts of errors (e.g., do something with connection errors different than with address data being incorrectly formatted).
I suspect there are better approaches, and I'm just beginning to understand how inventive you can get by chaining tasks, using groups and chords, etc. Hope this helps at least get you thinking about some of the possibilities. I'll leave it to others to recommend best practices.