In one of my project (.net core 3.1), I need a way to redirect System.Diagnostics.Trace.WriteLine to Serilog file. I found the SerilogTraceListener package which seems to be the right candidate.
Unfortunately until now, I haven't been able to find a way to make it works.
To reproduce it,
1) Create a .net core console project
2) Add the following nuget package : Serilog, SerilogTraceListener, Serilog.Sink.Console, Serilog.Sink.File
3) Overwrite the Program class code by the following
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
// Works fine
Log.Logger = new LoggerConfiguration()
.WriteTo.Console()
.WriteTo.File("log.txt")
.CreateLogger();
Log.Logger.Information("A string written using Logger.Information");
// Trace is written in the console but not in the file
Trace.Listeners.Add(new ConsoleTraceListener());
Trace.Listeners.Add(new global::SerilogTraceListener.SerilogTraceListener());
System.Diagnostics.Trace.WriteLine("A string written using Trace.WriteLine");
}
}
What am I doing wrong?
TL;DR; You need to set the MinimumLevel to Debug or Verbose in order to see the Trace.WriteLine messages.
SerilogTraceListener maps System.Diagnostic.TraceEventType to Serilog.LogEventLevel, and when you call Trace.WriteLine, it maps these events to the Debug log event level.
That means Serilog's logger is receiving a message of type LogEventLevel.Debug.
The minimum level configured in Serilog by default is Information, which means Debug messages are being suppressed.
You have to configure the MinimumEventLevel to Debug (or Verbose) in order to see the Trace.WriteLine messages:
Log.Logger = new LoggerConfiguration()
.MinimumLevel.Debug() // <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
.WriteTo.Console()
.WriteTo.File("log.txt")
.CreateLogger();
Currently I'm using Eclipse with Nokia/Red plugin which allows me to write robot framework test suites. Support is Python 3.6 and Selenium for it.
My project is called "Automation" and Test suites are in .robot files.
Test suites have test cases which are called "Keywords".
Test Cases
Create New Vehicle
Create new vehicle with next ${registrationno} and ${description}
Navigate to data section
Those "Keywords" are imported from python library and look like:
#keyword("Create new vehicle with next ${registrationno} and ${description}")
def create_new_vehicle_Simple(self,registrationno, description):
headerPage = HeaderPage(TestCaseKeywords.driver)
sideBarPage = headerPage.selectDaten()
basicVehicleCreation = sideBarPage.createNewVehicle()
basicVehicleCreation.setKennzeichen(registrationno)
basicVehicleCreation.setBeschreibung(description)
TestCaseKeywords.carnumber = basicVehicleCreation.save()
The problem is that when I run test cases, in log I only get result of this whole python function, pass or failed. I can't see at which step it failed- is it at first or second step of this function.
Is there any plugin or other solution for this case to be able to see which exact python function pass or fail? (of course, workaround is to use in TC for every function a keyword but that is not what I prefer)
If you need to "step into" a python defined keyword you need to use python debugger together with RED.
This can be done with any python debugger,if you like to have everything in one application, PyDev can be used with RED.
Follow below help document, if you will face any problems leave a comment here.
RED Debug with PyDev
If you are wanting to know which statement in the python-based keyword failed, you simply need to have it throw an appropriate error. Robot won't do this for you, however. From a reporting standpoint, a python based keyword is a black box. You will have to explicitly add logging messages, and return useful errors.
For example, the call to sideBarPage.createNewVehicle() should throw an exception such as "unable to create new vehicle". Likewise, the call to basicVehicleCreation.setKennzeichen(registrationno) should raise an error like "failed to register the vehicle".
If you don't have control over those methods, you can do the error handling from within your keyword:
#keyword("Create new vehicle with next ${registrationno} and ${description}")
def create_new_vehicle_Simple(self,registrationno, description):
headerPage = HeaderPage(TestCaseKeywords.driver)
sideBarPage = headerPage.selectDaten()
try:
basicVehicleCreation = sideBarPage.createNewVehicle()
except:
raise Exception("unable to create new vehicle")
try:
basicVehicleCreation.setKennzeichen(registrationno)
except:
raise exception("unable to register new vehicle")
...
I have been using Eloquent as a standalone package in Slim Framework 2 successfully.
But now that I want to make use of Illuminate\Support\Facades\DB since I need to show some statistics by getting the info from 2 tables and using a Left Join and a Counter from the database like this:
use Illuminate\Support\Facades\DB;
$projectsbyarea = DB::table('projects AS p')
->select(DB::raw('DISTINCT a.area, COUNT(a.area) AS Quantity'))
->leftJoin('areas AS a','p.area_id','=','a.id')
->where('p.status','in_process')
->where('a.area','<>','NULL')
->orderBy('p.area_id');
I get the following error:
Type: RuntimeException
Message: A facade root has not been set.
File: ...\vendor\illuminate\support\Facades\Facade.php
Line: 206
How can I solve it?
So far I have found out, in this link that I need to create a new app container and then bind it to the Facade. But I haven't found out how to make it work.
This is how I started the rest of my Eloquent and working fine:
use Illuminate\Database\Capsule\Manager as Capsule;
$capsule = new Capsule();
$capsule->addConnection([
'my' => $app->config->get('settings'),
/* more settings ...*/
]);
/*booting Eloquent*/
$capsule->bootEloquent();
How do I fix this?
Fixed
As #user5972059 said, I had to add $capsule->setAsGlobal();//This is important to make work the DB (Capsule) just above $capsule->bootEloquent();
Then, the query is executed like this:
use Illuminate\Database\Capsule\Manager as Capsule;
$projectsbyarea = Capsule::table('projects AS p')
->select(DB::raw('DISTINCT a.area, COUNT(a.area) AS Quantity'))
->leftJoin('areas AS a','p.area_id','=','a.id')
->where('p.status','in_process')
->where('a.area','<>','NULL')
->orderBy('p.area_id')
->get();
You have to change your code to:
$Capsule = new Capsule;
$Capsule->addConnection(config::get('database'));
$Capsule->setAsGlobal(); //this is important
$Capsule->bootEloquent();
And at the beginning of your class file you have to import:
use Illuminate\Database\Capsule\Manager as DB;
I have just solved this problem by uncommenting $app->withFacades(); in bootstrap/app.php
Had the same issue with laravel 8. I replaced
use PHPUnit\Framework\TestCase;
with:
use Tests\TestCase;
Try uncommenting in app.php $app->withFacades();
Do not forget to call parent::setUp(); before.
fails
public function setUp(): void {
Config::set('something', true);
}
works
public function setUp(): void {
parent::setUp();
Config::set('something', true);
}
One random problem using phpUnit tests for laravel is that the laravel facades have not been initialized when testing.
Instead of using the standard PHPUnit TestCase class
class MyTestClass extends PHPUnit\Framework\TestCase
one can use
class UserTest extends Illuminate\Foundation\Testing\TestCase
and this problem is solved.
I got this error after running:
$ php artisan config:cache
The solution for me was to delete the /bootstrap/cache/config.php file. I'm running Laravel 5.5.
The seems to arise in multiple situation, and not just about facades.
I received the following message while running tests using PHPUnit v.9.5.4, PHP v.8.0.3 and Lumen v. 8.2.2:
PHP Fatal error: Uncaught RuntimeException: A facade root has not
been set. in path_to_project/vendor/illuminate/support/Facades/Facade.php:258
And that happened although I had apparently already configured my app.php to enable facades ($app->withFacades();), still I received this error message whenever I tried to run tests using Illuminate\Support\Facades\DB. Unfortunately, none of the other answers helped me.
This error was actually been thrown due to my configs in phpunit.xml, which didn't point to my app.php file, where I actually enabled facades.
I just had to change
<phpunit (...OTHER_PARAMS_HERE) bootstrap="vendor/autoload.php">
to
<phpunit (...OTHER_PARAMS_HERE) bootstrap="bootstrap/app.php">
Hope it helps.
wrong way
public function register()
{
$this->app->bind('Activity', function($app)
{
new Activity;
});
}
right way 👍
public function register()
{
$this->app->bind('Activity', function($app)
{
return new Activity;
});
}
---------------------------------- don't forget return
Upgrade version for php, I encountered this error while calling the interface.
$ php artisan config:cache
Deleting the /bootstrap/cache/config.php file is a very effective way.
In my project, I managed to fix this issue by using Laravel Dependency Injection when instantiating the object. Previously I had it like this:
$class = new MyClass(
new Client(),
env('client_id', 'test'),
Config::get('myapp.client_secret')
);
The same error message happened when I used Laravel env() and Config().
I introduced the Client and env in the AppServiceProvider like this:
$this->app->bind(
MyClass::class,
function () {
return new MyClass(
new Client(),
env('client_id', 'test')),
Config::get('myapp.client_secret')
);
}
and then instantiated the class like this:
$class = app(MyClass::class);
See more from https://laravel.com/docs/5.8/container .
In my case, for a while a ran a PHP project in PHP version 8, and that time I used some PHP 8 features like param definition and method's multiple return type declarations supported by only PHP 8 and above. When I downgraded from PHP 8 to PHP 7.4 I faced this issue. After removing the return types and param hinting the problems are gone.
Tested on Laravel 8.78
tests/bootstrap.php
<?php
use Illuminate\Foundation\Bootstrap\RegisterFacades;
use Illuminate\Foundation\Bootstrap\LoadConfiguration;
require_once __DIR__ . '/../vendor/autoload.php';
$app = require_once __DIR__ . '/../bootstrap/app.php';
(new LoadConfiguration())->bootstrap($app);// <------- Required for next line
(new RegisterFacades())->bootstrap($app);// <------- Add this line
Here is yet another instance of this error, happened to me after upgrading Laravel 8 to 9.
I had feature tests with a #dataProvider to supply data to those tests. Some of the data supplied by the data provider methods came from an application service. It was being initialised like this:
/**
* #dataProvider myDataProvider
*/
public function testSomeStuff(...)
{
...
}
public function myDataProvider()
{
$myService = app(Service::class); // This is trouble
return [
['test1_data' => $myService::SOME_CONSTANT],
[...],
...
];
}
This worked under Laravel 8, but not in Laravel 9. All other solutions listed in this SO thread were checked and were correctly set up.
The problem is that the application is not being inititialised until after the data provider method is run. It was presumably initialised before this stage in the Laravel 8 install. So app(Service::class) was failing due to it using facades internally.
One workaround could be to force the application to initialise earlier, in the data provider function: $this->createApplication(). I would not recommend this due to potential side effects of the test parts running in the wrong order, though it does appear to work when I tried it.
Best solution is to avoid accessing any part of the application functionality in the data provider methods. In my case it was easy to replace $myService::SOME_CONSTANT with MyService::SOME_CONSTANT after making sure those constants were public.
Hopefully this will help somebody suddenly hitting this problem running feature tests after a Laravel 9 upgrade.
If you recently upgrade Laravel on Homestead & VirtualBox environment or do not find any reason that causing please be sure your Vagrant is up to date.
Referance
I had Taylor lock this thread. The past several replies have restated the solution, which is to Upgrade to Virtualbox 6.x, the thread is locked to prevent other issues that are not related from being dogpiled on here.
#melvin's answer above works correctly.
In case someone is wondering about it, the mistake people do is to choose Yes when VSCode asks them if they are making a Unit Test. Remember, Unit Tests should really be unit tests, independent of other application features (models, factories, routes; basically anything that would require the Laravel app to be fired up). In most scenarios, people really actually want to make Feature Tests and therefore should answer No to the above question. A feature test inherits from Tests\TestCase class (which takes care of firing up Laravel app before running the test) unlike unit tests that inherit from the class PHPUnit\Framework\TestCase which use just PHPUnit and are therefore much faster.
credit with thanks to #Aken Roberts's answer here.
From Laravel Documentation: Generally, most of your tests should be feature tests. These types of tests provide the most confidence that your system as a whole is functioning as intended.
How do I "tell" EF to log queries globally? I was reading this blog post: EF logging which tells in general how to log sql queries. But I still have a few questions regarding this logger.
Where would I need to place this line context.Database.Log = s =>
logger.Log("EFApp", s);?
Can it be globally set? Or do I have to place it everywhere I do DB
operations?
In the "Failed execution" section, the blogger wrote that, and I
quote:
For commands that fail by throwing an exception, the output contains the message from the exception.
Will this be logged too if I don't use the context.Database.Log?
Whenever you want the context to start logging.
It appears to be done on the context object so it should be done every time you create a new context. You could add this line of code in your constructor though to ensure that it is always enabled.
It will not log if you do not enable the logging.
I don't recommend to use that's functionality, because, it hasn't reason to exists in the real case.
Thats it use a lot of to debug code only. But, wether you wanna know more than details ... access link... https://cmatskas.com/logging-and-tracing-with-entity-framework-6/
In this case you can put code like this
public void Mylog()
{
//Thats a delegate where you can set this property to log using
//delegate type Action, see the code below
context.Database.Log = k=>Console.Write("Any query SQL")
//Or
context.Database.Log = k=>Test("Any query SQL")
}
public void Test(string x){
Console.Write(x)
}
I hope thats useufull
I want to create a jface wizard and collect credentials as I go along - password and username on page 1 and then on page 2 I want to display a list I get from an oracle database.
I am using eclipse, and have all the controls in the places I want. On page 2 I put the oracle connection details and sql statement in the createControl method of wizardpage. This seems to fail with a class not found (ojdbc6.jar included in my build path) which I can't decide whether this is an eclipse issue or my code (my code works when it is standalone, not in a wizard)
The failure happens when I start the wizardpage, which it probably will do as I havent got the correct credentials at that point. I couldn't find a method in the wizardpage documentation for running stuff when you enter that wizardpage. Is there a method that runs on entry?
I want to connect to the database to pull down a list to populate a table.
Cheers
David
The createControl method gets called on all pages when the Wizard is opened. You should use createControl only to layout SWT or JFace objects.
You probably want to initialize the JDBC connection when the second page becomes visible. At that point you would then load your list on the page. To do that, override the setVisible method on the second page as follows:
/* (non-Javadoc)
* #see org.eclipse.jface.dialogs.DialogPage#setVisible(boolean)
*/
#Override
public void setVisible(boolean visible) {
super.setVisible(visible);
if(visible){
// initialize the jdbc connection here - use a data access object
// use the connection or the DAO to populate your list
}
}
This way the connection will be initialized when the second page becomes visible. Another useful thing to do from the setVisible method is to assign the focus to the right control by calling forceFocus() on the relevant control.