I recently updated to actix web 4, I had some tests that used the actix-web test module that stopped working as expected in the process. I'm sure it's something simple but I'm having trouble figuring out what changed. Here is a minimal example of the issue:
use actix_web::{test, web, App, HttpResponse, HttpRequest};
#[actix_rt::test]
async fn says_hello() {
let req = test::TestRequest::get().uri("/index.html").to_request();
let mut server =
test::init_service(App::new().service(web::scope("/").route("index.html", web::get().to(|_req: HttpRequest| async {
println!("Hello?");
HttpResponse::Ok()
})))).await;
let _resp = test::call_and_read_body(&mut server, req).await;
}
running this test I would expect to see "Hello?" output to my console, however, the request handler function I have defined at "/index.html" doesn't seem to be called and I receive no output.
To be clear, the tests are more complicated and have assertions etc, this is just a working example of the main issue I am trying to resolve
actix-web = { version = "4.1.0", default-features = false }
note:
if I change all paths to the root path it will call the handler, I.E.
let req = test::TestRequest::get().uri("/").to_request();
let mut server =
test::init_service(App::new().service(web::scope("/").route("/", web::get().to(|_req: HttpRequest| async {
println!("Hello?");
HttpResponse::Ok()
})))).await;
let _resp = test::call_and_read_body(&mut server, req).await;
// prints "Hello?" to the console
However no other route combination I have tried calls the request handler.
Rust tests capture the output and only output them for failed tests.
If you want to show output on all tests you have to tell them to do so with either testbinary --nocapture or cargo test -- --nocapture.
I was able to make things work by changing the path in the scope to an empty string
let req = test::TestRequest::get().uri("/index.html").to_request();
let mut server =
test::init_service(App::new().service(web::scope("").route("index.html", web::get().to(|_req: HttpRequest| async {
println!("Hello?");
HttpResponse::Ok()
})))).await;
let _resp = test::call_and_read_body(&mut server, req).await;
// prints "Hello?"
Related
I have been mulling on ways to end-to-end test an API call, with the likes of POST/PUT/DELETE troubling me the most.
The reason being, nunits don't run in order - and if they are asked to explicitly, they do not necessary wait for the previous test to finish. So how does one test against test data? e.g.
Post a testdata json
Put a testdata update
Get the testdata
Delete the testdata
so that by the end of my test I have not polluted my DB, and I have made sure all my endpoints provide with end to end functionality?
Between injecting the actual repository to set up and tear down DB entries, and what not, in the end I decided on:
[Test]
public void PostAndPutAndDeleteWorkWithoutErrors()
{
//setup
var client = JsonClient.GetClient();
var request = GenerateNewRequest();
//act post
var httpResponse = client.PostJson(uri, request );
//assert
httpResponse.StatusCode.ShouldBe(HttpStatusCode.OK);
//act put
httpResponse = client.PutJson(uri, request );
//assert
httpResponse.StatusCode.ShouldBe(HttpStatusCode.OK);
//act delete
httpResponse = client.DeleteJson(uri, request .Name);
//assert
httpResponse.StatusCode.ShouldBe(HttpStatusCode.OK);
}
Now this test tests more things than one (Post/Put/Delete), which breaks the idea of a single unit of work...
Or could one say : this does test a single unit of work - the entire cycle of posting, putting, and deleting.
Is there a better way to do this?
Thanks
Thank you for your help-
I'd like to know if my app successfully adds a document to the database using a unit test in Meteor. I'm using practicalmeteor:mocha and chai. The issue I'm running into is that I don't know how to mock a this.userId, it keeps telling me I'm not logged in.
it('inserts the draft agenda document into the collection', function() {
// TODO: mock document to insert into collection
// TODO: mock userId and Agenda.insert
this.userId = "Not an empty string";
console.log("before spec, changing this.userId: " + this.userId) //is "Not an empty string"
Meteor.call('createAgenda', mockAgenda, function(res) {
console.log("callback with response: " + res); //You're not logged-in. [not-logged-in]
console.log("this.userId: " + this.userId) //is undefined
}
}
see https://docs.meteor.com/api/methods.html#DDPCommon-MethodInvocation-userId for more info on user id
test runner fails to import files in client directory
MochaRunner.runServerTests: failures: 1 when meteor methods are called
I have to call the server side meteor methods that have been declared in the testing context as if I am on the client, but I can't import the client files or operate as if I'm a client
MochaRunner.runServerTests: Starting server side tests with run id R7ocZh3Qva3rExTL9 runs basically every time
This seems useful but hasn't worked for me yet https://forums.meteor.com/t/testing-methods-which-use-this-userid/2292/8
Thank you for your help, any code examples would be great.
Remarks
I wanted to post a comment but do not have enough reputation. So here are some remarks. Since you are testing on the server, you can call a Meteor method without a callback. This will result in a synchronous execution and simplify your test. Otherwise you will have to let the test know it is finished by calling the done function in your callback, see mocha docs.
Using mdg:validated-method
You can call a valited method and provide the context in which they execute using the _execute function. Below is an example taken from the todos sample project. For more examples you can take a look at their Lists and Todos tests.
it('makes a list private and updates the todos', function() {
// Check initial state is public
assert.isFalse(Lists.findOne(listId).isPrivate());
// Set up method arguments and context
const methodInvocation = {
userId
};
const args = {
listId
};
// Making the list private adds userId to the todo
makePrivate._execute(methodInvocation, args);
assertListAndTodoArePrivate();
// Making the list public removes it
makePublic._execute(methodInvocation, args);
assert.isUndefined(Todos.findOne(todoId).userId);
assert.isTrue(Todos.findOne(todoId).editableBy(userId));
});
Using standard methods
Another possiblity would be to bind the standard call function to the correct context. Note that this is just a thought and not tested.
var methodInvocation = {
userId: "some user id"
};
Meteor.call.bind(methodInvocation)('createAgenda', mockAgenda);
I'm trying to unit test a Workflow Service by using Microsoft.Activities.UnitTesting
The goal is to mock the service's extensions in order to ensure that all steps are executed.
The mock objects don't seem to get called even though the extensions are registered in the Host. As expected, if the extensions are not registered an exception is thrown.
WorkflowServiceTestHost host = null;
try
{
Mock<ISubscriber> publisher = new Mock<ISubscriber>();
Mock<IWebWorker> webWorker = new Mock<IWebWorker>();
var voucher = new Voucher();
using (host = new WorkflowServiceTestHost(workflowServiceFile, serviceAddress))
{
host.WorkflowExtensions.Add<ISubscriber>(() => publisher.Object);
host.WorkflowExtensions.Add<IWebWorker>(() => webWorker.Object);
host.Open();
using (var factory = new ChannelFactory<IServiceInterface>(clientBinding, serviceAddress))
{
var proxy = factory.CreateChannel() as IServiceInterface;
proxy.Process(voucher);
}
}
**//These validations fail...**
publisher.Verify(m => m.Push(It.IsAny<Voucher>()), Times.Once(), "ISubscriber.Push was not called.");
webWorker.Verify(m => m.Done(It.IsAny<Voucher>()), Times.Once(), "IWebWorker.Done was not called.");
// The host must be closed before asserting tracking
// Explicitly call host.Close or exit the using block to do this.
}
finally
{
if (host != null)
{
host.Tracking.Trace(TrackingOptions.All);
}
}
The workflow runs as expected in IIS.
Thanks!
Edit: This error is being written in the Workflow Host output:
WorkflowInstance "Sequential Service" Unhandled Exception Source "Receive Process Message"
Exception <System.NotSupportedException: Expression Activity type 'CSharpReference`1' requires compilation in order to run.
Please ensure that the workflow has been compiled.
at System.Activities.Expressions.CompiledExpressionInvoker.InvokeExpression(ActivityContext activityContext)
at Microsoft.CSharp.Activities.CSharpReference`1.Execute(CodeActivityContext context)
at System.Activities.CodeActivity`1.InternalExecuteInResolutionContext(CodeActivityContext context)
at System.Activities.Runtime.ActivityExecutor.ExecuteInResolutionContext[T](ActivityInstance parentInstance, Activity`1 expressionActivity)
at System.Activities.OutArgument`1.TryPopulateValue(LocationEnvironment targetEnvironment, ActivityInstance targetActivityInstance, ActivityExecutor executor)
at System.Activities.RuntimeArgument.TryPopulateValue(LocationEnvironment targetEnvironment, ActivityInstance targetActivityInstance, ActivityExecutor executor, Object argumentValueOverride, Location resultLocation, Boolean skipFastPath)
at System.Activities.ActivityInstance.InternalTryPopulateArgumentValueOrScheduleExpression(RuntimeArgument argument, Int32 nextArgumentIndex, ActivityExecutor executor, IDictionary`2 argumentValueOverrides, Location resultLocation, Boolean isDynamicUpdate)
at System.Activities.ActivityInstance.ResolveArguments(ActivityExecutor executor, IDictionary`2 argumentValueOverrides, Location resultLocation, Int32 startIndex)
at System.Activities.Runtime.ActivityExecutor.ExecuteActivityWorkItem.ExecuteBody(ActivityExecutor executor, BookmarkManager bookmarkManager, Location resultLocation)>
I've just realized WorkflowServiceTestHost is a Microsoft.Activities.UnitTesting class and not yours.
So, let's see if this is possible. As I saw on its source code you can pass to the constructor the WorkflowService's object itself instead of the XAMLX file. Something like this:
// Load WorkflowService from .xamlx
// Actually this is the method WorkflowserviceTestHost uses when you pass a
// .xamlx so we're taking a step back to be able to compile the body
var wfService = XamlServices.Load("c:\\workflowservice.xamlx") as WorkflowService;
// Compile workflow body
CompileExpressions(wfService.Body);
// Now you can use WorkflowServiceTestHost
using (host = new WorkflowServiceTestHost(wfService, serviceAddress))
{
// ... do your thing
}
CompileExpressions is taken from the link that I gave you earlier.
That being said, it seems odd consider testing a WCF service as unit-testing. Unit tests should be focused on small activities of your service, those are truly unit-testable. Integration tests (or functional tests) is where you test services with all its dependencies (IIS\WAS, network, DBs, etc).
I'm learnin about remote actors in Akka 2.1 and I tried to adapt the counter example provided by Typesafe.
I implemented a quick'n'dirty UI from the console to send ticks. And to quit with asking(and showing the result) the current count.
The idea is to start a master node that will run the Counter actor and some client node that will send messages to it through remoting. However I'd like to achieve this through configuration and minimal changes to code. So by changing the configuration local actors could be used.
I found this blog entry about similar problem where it was necessary that all API calls go through one actor even though there are many instances running.
I wrote similar configuration but I cant get it to work. My current code does use remoting but it creates a new actor on the master for each new node and I can't get it to connect to existing actor without explicitly giving it the path(and defying the point of configuration). However this is not what I want since state cannot be shared between JVMs this way.
Full runnable code available through a git repo
This is my config file
akka {
actor {
provider = "akka.remote.RemoteActorRefProvider"
deployment {
/counter {
remote = "akka://ticker#127.0.0.1:2552"
}
}
}
remote {
transport = "akka.remote.netty.NettyRemoteTransport"
log-sent-messages = on
netty {
hostname = "127.0.0.1"
}
}
}
And full source
import akka.actor._
import akka.pattern.ask
import scala.concurrent.duration._
import akka.util.Timeout
import scala.util._
case object Tick
case object Get
class Counter extends Actor {
var count = 0
val id = math.random.toString.substring(2)
println(s"\nmy name is $id\ni'm at ${self.path}\n")
def log(s: String) = println(s"$id: $s")
def receive = {
case Tick =>
count += 1
log(s"got a tick, now at $count")
case Get =>
sender ! count
log(s"asked for count, replied with $count")
}
}
object AkkaProjectInScala extends App {
val system = ActorSystem("ticker")
implicit val ec = system.dispatcher
val counter = system.actorOf(Props[Counter], "counter")
def step {
print("tick or quit? ")
readLine() match {
case "tick" => counter ! Tick
case "quit" => return
case _ =>
}
step
}
step
implicit val timeout = Timeout(5.seconds)
val f = counter ? Get
f onComplete {
case Failure(e) => throw e
case Success(count) => println("Count is " + count)
}
system.shutdown()
}
I used sbt run and in another window sbt run -Dakka.remote.netty.port=0 to run it.
I found out I can use some sort of pattern. Akka remote allows only for deploying on remote systems(can't find a way to make it look up on remote just through configuration..am I mistaken here?).
So I can deploy a "scout" that will pass back the ActorRef. Runnable code available on the original repo under branch "scout-hack". Because this feels like a hack. I will still appreciate configuration based solution.
The actor
case object Fetch
class Scout extends Actor{
def receive = {
case Fetch => sender ! AkkaProjectInScala._counter
}
}
Counter actor creating is now lazy
lazy val _counter = system.actorOf(Props[Counter], "counter")
So it only executes on the master(determined by the port) and can be fetched like this
val counter: ActorRef = {
val scout = system.actorOf(Props[Scout], "scout")
val ref = Await.result(scout ? Fetch, timeout.duration) match {
case r: ActorRef => r
}
scout ! PoisonPill
ref
}
And full config
akka {
actor {
provider = "akka.remote.RemoteActorRefProvider"
deployment {
/scout {
remote = "akka://ticker#127.0.0.1:2552"
}
}
}
remote {
transport = "akka.remote.netty.NettyRemoteTransport"
log-sent-messages = on
netty {
hostname = "127.0.0.1"
}
}
}
EDIT: I also found a clean-ish way: check configuration for "counterPath" anf if present actorFor(path) else create actor. Nice and you can inject the master when running and code is much cleaner than with the "scout" but it still has to decide weather to look up or create an actor. I guess this cannot be avoided.
I tried your git project and it actually works fine, aside from a compilation error, and that you must start the sbt session with -Dakka.remote.netty.port=0 parameter to the jvm, not as parameter to run.
You should also understand that you don't have to start the Counter actor in both processes. In this example it's intended to be created from the client and deployed on the server (port 2552). You don't have to start it on the server. It should be enough to create the actor system on the server for this example.
I am a play2.0-Scala-beginner and have to call several Webservices to generate a HTML page.
After reading the The Play WS API page and a very interesting article from Sadek Drobi I am still unsure what's the best way to accomplish this.
The article shows some code snippets which I don't fully understand as a Play beginner.
Figure 2 on page 4:
val response: Either[Response,Response] =
WS.url("http://someservice.com/post/123/comments").focusOnOk
val responseOrUndesired: Either[Result,Response] = response.left.map {
case Status(4,0,4) => NotFound
case Status(4,0,3) => NotAuthorized
case _ => InternalServerError
}
val comments: Either[Result,List[Comment]] =
responseOrUndesired.right.map(r => r.json.as[List[Comment]])
// in the controller
comment.fold(identity, cs => Ok(html.showComments(cs)))
What does the last line with the fold do? Should comment be comments? Haven't I group the last statement in an Async block?
Figure 4 shows how to combine several IO calls with a single for-expression:
for {
profile <- profilePromise
events <- attachedEventsPromise
articles <- topArticlesPromise
} yield Json.obj(
"profile" -> profile,
"events" -> events,
"articles" -> articles )
}
// in the controller
def showInfo(...) = Action { rq =>
Async {
actorInfo(...).map(info => Ok(info))
}
}
How can I use this snippet? (I am a bit confused by the extra-} after the for-expression.)
Should I write something like this?
var actorInfo = for { // Model
profile <- profilePromise
events <- attachedEventsPromise
articles <- topArticlesPromise
} yield Json.obj(
"profile" -> profile,
"events" -> events,
"articles" -> articles )
def showInfo = Action { rq => // Controller
Async {
actorInfo.map(info => Ok(info))
}
}
What's the best way to combine the snippets from figure 2 and 4 (error handling + composition of IO non-blocking calls)? (f.ex. I want to produce a Error 404 status code if any of the called webservice produce an Error 404).
Maybe someone knows a complete example of calling webservices in the play framework (cannot find an example in the play Sample applications or anywhere else).
I have to say that the article is wrong in the example you show in Figure 2. The method focusOnOk does not exist in Play 2.0. I assume the author of the article used a pre-release version of Play 2 then.
Regarding comment, yes it should be comments. The fold in the statement is operating on an Either. It takes 2 functions as parameters. The first is a function to apply if it is a left value. The second is a function to apply if it is a right value. A more detailed explanation can be found here: http://daily-scala.blogspot.com/2009/11/either.html
So what the line does is. If I have a left value (which meant I got an undesired response), apply the built-in identity function which just gives you back the value. If it has a right value (which means I got an OK response), make a new result that shows the comments somehow.
Regarding Async, it's not actually asynchronous. focusOnOk is a blocking function (a remnant from the old Java days of Play 1.x). But remember, that's not valid Play 2 code.
As for Figure 4, the trailing } is actually because it's a partial alternative of what's in Figure 3. Instead of the numerous promise flatMaps. You can do a for comprehension instead. Also, I think it should be userInfo(...).map instead of actorInfo(...).map.
The Play documentation you linked to actually already shows you a full example.
def feedTitle(feedUrl: String) = Action {
Async {
WS.url(feedUrl).get().map { response =>
Ok("Feed title: " + (response.json \ "title").as[String])
}
}
}
will get whatever is at feedUrl, and you map it to do something with the response which has a status field you can check to see if it was a 404 or something else.
To that end, the Figure 3 and 4 of your linked article should give you a starting point. So you'd have something like,
def getInfo(...) : Promise[String] = {
val profilePromise = WS.url(...).get()
val attachedEventsPromise = WS.url(...).get()
val topArticlesPromise = WS.url(...).get()
for {
profile <- profilePromise
events <- attachedEventsPromise
articles <- topArticlesPromise
} yield {
// or return whatever you want
// remember to change String to something else in the return type
profile.name
}
}
def showInfo(...) = Action { rq =>
Async {
getInfo(...).map { info =>
// convert your info to a Result
Ok(info)
}
}
}