I am creating a service on top of a Ktor client. My payload is XML, and as such a simplified version of my client looks like this :
class MavenClient(private val client : HttpClient) {
private suspend fun getRemotePom(url : String) =
try{ MavenClientSuccess(client.get<POMProject>(url)) }catch (e: Exception) { MavenClientFailure(e)
}
companion object {
fun getDefaultClient(): HttpClient {
return HttpClient(Apache) {
install(JsonFeature) {
serializer = JacksonSerializer(jackson = kotlinXmlMapper)
accept(ContentType.Text.Xml)
accept(ContentType.Application.Xml)
accept(ContentType.Text.Plain)
}
}
}
}
}
Note the use of a custom XMLMapper, attached to a custom data class.
I want to test this class, and follow the documentation.
I end up with the following code for my test client :
private val mockClient = HttpClient(MockEngine) {
engine {
addHandler { request ->
when (request.url.fullUrl) {
"https://lengrand.me/minimal/1.2/minimal-1.2.pom" -> {
respond(minimalResourceStreamPom.readBytes()
, headers = headersOf("Content-Type" to listOf(ContentType.Application.Xml.toString())))
}
"https://lengrand.me/unknown/1.2/unknown-1.2.pom" -> {
respond("", HttpStatusCode.NotFound)
}
else -> error("Unhandled ${request.url.fullUrl}")
}
}
}
// TODO : How do I avoid repeating this again ? That's my implementation?!
install(JsonFeature) {
serializer = JacksonSerializer(jackson = PomParser.kotlinXmlMapper)
accept(ContentType.Text.Xml)
accept(ContentType.Application.Xml)
accept(ContentType.Text.Plain)
}
}
private val Url.hostWithPortIfRequired: String get() = if (port == protocol.defaultPort) host else hostWithPort
private val Url.fullUrl: String get() = "${protocol.name}://$hostWithPortIfRequired$fullPath"
private val mavenClient = MavenClient(mockClient)
Now, I am not worried about the Mapper itself, because I test it directly.
However what bothers me is that I essentially have to duplicate the complete logic of my client to test behaviour?
This seems very brittle, because for example it will cause my tests to fail and have to be updated if I move to Json tomorrow. Same if I start using Response Validation for example.
This is even more true for another client where I am using a defaultRequest, which I have to completely copy over as well:
private val mockClient = HttpClient(MockEngine) {
install(JsonFeature) {
serializer = JacksonSerializer(mapper)
accept(ContentType.Application.Json)
}
defaultRequest {
method = HttpMethod.Get
host = "api.github.com"
header("Accept", "application/vnd.github.v3+json")
if (GithubLogin().hasToken()) header("Authorization", GithubLogin().authToken)
}
Am I doing things wrong? Am I testing too much ? I am curious as to how I can improve this.
Thanks a lot for your input!
P.S : Unrelated but the page about testing on Ktor mentions adding the dependency to the implementation. Sounds like I should use testImplementation instead to avoid shipping the lib with my application ?
The MockEngine is designed for stubbing real HTTP client implementation to test objects that use it. The duplication problem, you encounter, lies in the fact that transforming response body responsibility belongs to the client. So I suggest either use Jackson directly to transform a response body (in this case you don't need to use JsonFeature) or extract common configuration in a extension function and call it for both engines.
Related
Currently I am working on one of the BLE communication-related app, Where BLE device sending data in JSON format. I have one requirement to make sure that received data should be in JSON format before passing to the caller method.
So, I have created one JSON Validator which is going to validate received response should have expected field name and JSON Object and Array symbols. Here is JSONValidator Kotlin code which is testing JSON Object and Array symbol in response.
class JSONValidator: StringValidator() {
private val jsonArray = "(^\\[|]\$)"
private val jsonObject = "([{}])"
private val jsonArrayAndObject = "(^\\[\\{|}]\$)"
override fun isStringValid(s: String?): Boolean {
return if (s == null || s.isEmpty()) {
false
} else {
doesPacketContainJson(s)
}
}
private fun doesPacketContainJson(s: String): Boolean {
return Regex(jsonObject).containsMatchIn(s) ||
Regex(jsonArray).containsMatchIn(s) ||
Regex(jsonArrayAndObject).containsMatchIn(s)
}
}
JSONValidator Test Class
class JSONValidatorTest {
private val packetValidator: StringValidator = JSONValidator()
// Other Test cases
#Test
fun `validate contains json`() {
val partialJson1 = "{"
val partialJson2 = "}"
val partialJson3 = "[{"
val partialJson4 = "]}"
val partialJson5 = "]"
//Issue: These test cases always failed
assert(packetValidator.isStringValid(partialJson1))
assert(packetValidator.isStringValid(partialJson2))
assert(packetValidator.isStringValid(partialJson3))
assert(packetValidator.isStringValid(partialJson4))
assert(packetValidator.isStringValid(partialJson5))
}
}
I have cross verified Regular expression on below sites and It's working fine over there. I hope I am doing things right. :
https://regex101.com/
https://www.freeformatter.com/java-regex-tester.html
I did google but unable to find any help around my use-case. Can anyone have any experience or idea around this issue? Thanks in advance.
I have a method I need to refactor, as F.Promise has been deprecated in Play 2.5. It's pretty readable actually. It sends a request and authenticates via a custom security token and returns true if the response is 200.
public boolean verify(final String xSassToken){
WSRequest request = WS.url(mdVerifyXSassTokenURL)
.setHeader("X-SASS", xSassToken)
.setMethod("GET");
final F.Promise<WSResponse> responsePromise = request.execute();
try {
final WSResponse response = responsePromise.get(10000);
int status = response.getStatus();
if(status == 200 ) { //ok
return true;
}
} catch (Exception e) {
return false;
}
return false;
}
First thing I had to do was change this line:
final F.Promise<WSResponse> responsePromise = request.execute();
To this:
final CompletionStage<WSResponse> responsePromise = request.execute();
However, CompletionStage(T) doesn't have an equivalent get() method so I'm not sure the quickest and easiest way to get a WSResponse that I can verify the status of.
Yes, it does not. At least not directly.
What you are doing is "wrong" in the context of PlayFramework. get is a blocking call and you should avoid blocking as much as possible. That is why WS offers a non blocking API and a way to handle asynchronous results. So, first, you should probably rewrite your verify code to be async:
public CompletionStage<Boolean> verify(final String xSassToken) {
return WS.url(mdVerifyXSassTokenURL)
.setHeader("X-SASS", xSassToken)
.setMethod("GET")
.execute()
.thenApply(response -> response.getStatus() == Http.Status.OK);
}
Notice how I'm using thenApply to return a new a java.util.concurrent.CompletionStage instead of a plain boolean. That means that the code calling verify can also do the same. Per instance, an action at your controller can do something like this:
public class MyController extends Controller {
public CompletionStage<Result> action() {
return verify("whatever").thenApply(success -> {
if (success) return ok("successful request");
else return badRequest("xSassToken was not valid");
});
}
public CompletionStage<Boolean> verify(final String xSassToken) { ... }
}
This way your application will be able to handle a bigger workload without hanging.
Edit:
Since you have to maintain compatibility, this is what I would do to both evolve the design and also to keep code compatible while migrating:
/**
* #param xSassToken the token to be validated
* #return if the token is valid or not
*
* #deprecated Will be removed. Use {#link #verifyToken(String)} instead since it is non blocking.
*/
#Deprecated
public boolean verify(final String xSassToken) {
try {
return verifyToken(xSassToken).toCompletableFuture().get(10, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
} catch (Exception e) {
return false;
}
}
public CompletionStage<Boolean> verifyToken(final String xSassToken) {
return WS.url(mdVerifyXSassTokenURL)
.setHeader("X-SASS", xSassToken)
.setMethod("GET")
.execute()
.thenApply(response -> response.getStatus() == Http.Status.OK);
}
Basically, deprecate the old verify method and suggest users to migrate to new one.
I have created a class and published it as web service. I have created a web method like this:
public void addNewRow(MyObject cob) {
MyAppModule myAppModule = new MyAppModule();
try {
ViewObjectImpl vo = myAppModule.getMyVewObject1();
================> vo object is now null
Row r = vo.createRow();
r.setAttribute("Param1", cob.getParam1());
r.setAttribute("Param2", cob.getParam2());
vo.executeQuery();
getTransaction().commit();
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
As I have written in code, myAppModule.getMyVewObject1() returns a null object. I do not understand why! As far as I know AppModule has to initialize the object by itself when I call "getMyVewObject1()" but maybe I am wrong, or maybe this is not the way it should be for web methods. Has anyone ever faced this issue? Any help would be very appreciated.
You can check nice tutorial: Building and Using Web Services with JDeveloper
It gives you general idea about how you should build your webservices with ADF.
Another approach is when you need to call existing Application Module from some bean that doesn't have needed environment (servlet, etc), then you can initialize it like this:
String appModuleName = "org.my.package.name.model.AppModule";
String appModuleConfig = "AppModuleLocal";
ApplicationModule am = Configuration.createRootApplicationModule(appModuleName, appModuleConfig);
Don't forget to release it:
Configuration.releaseRootApplicationModule(am, true);
And why you shouldn't really do it like this.
And even more...
Better aproach is to get access to binding layer and do call from there.
Here is a nice article.
Per Our PM : If you don't use it in the context of an ADF application then the following code should be used (sample code is from a project I am involved in). Note the release of the AM at the end of the request
#WebService(serviceName = "LightViewerSoapService")
public class LightViewerSoapService {
private final String amDef = " oracle.demo.lightbox.model.viewer.soap.services.LightBoxViewerService";
private final String config = "LightBoxViewerServiceLocal";
LightBoxViewerServiceImpl service;
public LightViewerSoapService() {
super();
}
#WebMethod
public List<Presentations> getAllUserPresentations(#WebParam(name = "userId") Long userId){
ArrayList<Presentations> al = new ArrayList<Presentations>();
service = (LightBoxViewerServiceImpl)getApplicationModule(amDef,config);
ViewObject vo = service.findViewObject("UserOwnedPresentations");
VariableValueManager vm = vo.ensureVariableManager();
vm.setVariableValue("userIdVariable", userId.toString());
vo.applyViewCriteria(vo.getViewCriteriaManager().getViewCriteria("byUserIdViewCriteria"));
Row rw = vo.first();
if(rw != null){
Presentations p = createPresentationFromRow(rw);
al.add(p);
while(vo.hasNext()){
rw = vo.next();
p = createPresentationFromRow(rw);
al.add(p);
}
}
releaseAm((ApplicationModule)service);
return al;
}
Have a look here too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDBd3JuroMQ
I am using shiro security in my grail application.
Grails version : 2.2.1
shiro : 1.2.0
I have a problem in writing grails unit test case for the controller with filter enabled. When the test case run without filters then it is working fine, if it runs withFilters then it is failing for accessControl() method not found in the controller. I dont know how to make Shiro's api to be visible while running the test case.I referred shiro unit test case link http://shiro.apache.org/testing.html but I couldn't get any info regarding accessControl().I have given sample code how my classes and test case looks like
MyController.groovy
def create() {
// getting request parameters and validation
String emailId = params.emailId
def ret = myService.createUser(emailId)
return ret
}
MyControllerFilters.groovy
def filters = {
loginCheck(controller: 'user') {
before = {
//do some business checks
// Access control by convention.
accessControl() // This is a dynamic method injected by ShiroGrailsPlugin to FilterConfig, but this is not visible during the test case.
}
}
MyControllerTests.groovy
#TestFor(MyController)
#Mock(MyControllerFilters)
class MyControllerTests {
#Before
void setup() {
// initializing some variables
}
void testCreateUserWithFilter() {
request.accessAllowed = true
withFilters(action:"create") {
controller.create()
}
assert response.message == "success"
}
}
Try to use:
ControllerOrService.metaClass.method = {
return "" //what you need to be returned
}
Add parameters to closure if method take parameters:
ControllerOrService.metaClass.method = { def a, def b ->
return a + b
}
Don't forget to use full name of method when you mock them in that way.
I'm having some problems with making my tests insert fake data in my database. I've tried a few approaches, without luck. It seems that Global.onStart is not run when running tests within a FakeApplication, although I think I read that it should work.
object TestGlobal extends GlobalSettings {
val config = Map("global" -> "controllers.TestGlobal")
override def onStart(app: play.api.Application) = {
// load the data ...
}
}
And in my test code:
private def fakeApp = FakeApplication(additionalConfiguration = (
inMemoryDatabase().toSeq +
TestGlobal.config.toSeq
).toMap, additionalPlugins = Seq("plugin.InsertTestDataPlugin"))
Then I use running(fakeApp) within each test.
The plugin.InsertTestDataPlugin was another attempt, but it didn't work without defining the plugin in conf/play.plugins -- and that is not wanted, as I only want this code in the test scope.
Should any of these work? Have anyone succeeded with similar options?
Global.onStart should be executed ONCE (and only once) when the application is launched, whatever mode (dev, prod, test) it is in. Try to follow the wiki on how to use Global.
In that method then you can check the DB status and populate. For example in Test if you use an in-memory db it should be empty so do something akin to:
if(User.findAll.isEmpty) { //code taken from Play 2.0 samples
Seq(
User("guillaume#sample.com", "Guillaume Bort", "secret"),
User("maxime#sample.com", "Maxime Dantec", "secret"),
User("sadek#sample.com", "Sadek Drobi", "secret"),
User("erwan#sample.com", "Erwan Loisant", "secret")
).foreach(User.create)
}
I chose to solve this in another way:
I made a fixture like this:
def runWithTestDatabase[T](block: => T) {
val fakeApp = FakeApplication(additionalConfiguration = inMemoryDatabase())
running(fakeApp) {
ProjectRepositoryFake.insertTestDataIfEmpty()
block
}
}
And then, instead of running(FakeApplication()){ /* ... */}, I do this:
class StuffTest extends FunSpec with ShouldMatchers with CommonFixtures {
describe("Stuff") {
it("should be found in the database") {
runWithTestDatabase { // <--- *The interesting part of this example*
findStuff("bar").size must be(1);
}
}
}
}