I start to test my Django project recently. At first, I test my code by accessing my local full data DB, but it seems like not a proper way.
So , I try to create fake data in local migrated database without real data.
And pytest provide xunit style , so setup_module or setup_class .... become my insert fake data entry point.
Also , I add below code to conftest.py avoid insert #pytest.mark.django_db everywhere
#pytest.fixture(autouse=True)
def enable_db_access_for_all_tests(db):
pass
But, I still get error message, when I create fake data in setup_module or
setup_class.
def setup_module():
print('setup_module....')
HostSite.objects.create(prefix='us', vhost='www', enable_site=True, locale='en_us')
Error Message:
Failed: Database access not allowed, use the "django_db" mark, or the "db" or "transactional_db" fixtures to enable it.
Could anyone help me to figure out what I miss? please.
Related
Recently I've changed db engine from SQLite to PostgreSQL. I have successfully migrated whole db design to PostgreSQL (just simple makemigaretions, migrate). Once I ran tests some have failed for some unknown reason (errors suggest that some objects were not created). Failure doesn't apply to all tests, just selected few. Everything has been working before.
I'd start investigating what's going on on test-by-test basis, but some bizarre behavior has appeared. Let's say my test is in class MyTestClass and test is called test_do_something and in MyTestClass there are other tests as well.
When I'm running python manage.py test MyTestClass I'm getting info that test_do_something has failed.
When I'm running python manage.py test MyTestClass.test_do_something everything passes.
On SQLite both ways pass.
I'm assuming that setUpTestData() and setUp() methods work same way in SQLite and PostgreSQL. Or they don't?
Any clue why such discrepancy might be happening?
EDIT
I think I've noticed what might be wrong, but I don't understand why. The problem is because my function I've used to call to create object which is later used only once. Which differs from SQLite execution.
What I mean in my test I have something like this:
def create_object(self):
self.client.post(reverse('myurl'), kwargs={'myargs':arg})
def test_mytest1(self):
# Do something
self.create_object()
# Do something
def test_mytest2(self):
# Do something
self.create_object()
# Do something
def test_mytest3(self):
# Do something
self.create_object()
# Do something
Only for one test create_object() will be executed.
I believe I've fond cause of those failures. As a matter of fact it hasn't been an issue with one-time execution of support function as I expected. The problem has been with hardcoded ids I've used for various reasons. It appears that object I've been hoping to see didn't exist.
Let me explain a bit more what I've experienced. E.g. I had test where I've been referring to particular object passing this object id in URL kwargs. Before this operation I've created object and passed id=1 as kwargs, because I assumed that if this is only place within this test and setUp() it will be 1. It appears that with PostgreSQL it's not so clear. It seems that ids are incremented despite DB flush. Which is completely different behavior then SQLite has been providing.
I'd very much appreciate if someone could provide some more detailed answer why is this happening. Is ID counter not zeroed in PostgreSQL on flush? It would look so.
We've changed our database, using django migrations (django v1.7+).
The data that exists in the database is no longer valid.
Basically I want to test a migration by, inside a unittest, constructing the pre-migration database, adding some data, applying the migration, then confirming everything went smoothly.
How does one:
hold back the new migration when loading the unittest
I found some stuff about overriding settings.MIGRATION_MODULES but couldn't work out how to use it. When I inspect executor.loader.applied_migrations it still lists everything. The only way I could prevent the new migration was to actually remove the file; not a solution I can use.
create a record in the unittest database (using the old model)
If we can prevent the migration then this should be pretty straightforward. myModel.object.create(...)
apply the migration
I think I can probably work this out now that I've found the test_executor: set a plan pointing to the migration file and execute it? Um, right? Got any code for that :-D
confirm the old data in the database now matches the new model
Again, I expect this should be pretty easy: just fetch the instance created before the migration and confirm it has changed in all the right ways.
So the challenge is really just working out how to prevent the unittest from applying the latest migration script and then applying it when we're ready?
Perhaps I have the wrong approach? Should I create fixtures, and just confirm that they're all good at the end? Do fixtures get loaded before the migrations are applied, or after they're all done?
By using the MigrationExecutor and picking out specific migrations with .migrate I've been able to, maybe?, roll it back to a specific state, then roll forward one-by-one. But that is popping up doubts; currently chasing down sqlite fudging around due to the lack of an actual ALTER TABLE instruction. Jury still out.
I wasn't able to prevent the unittest from starting with the current database schema, but I did find it is quite easy to revert to earlier points in the migration history:
Where "0014_nulls_permitted" is a file in the migrations directory...
from django.db.migrations.executor import MigrationExecutor
executor.migrate([("workflow_engine", "0014_nulls_permitted")])
executor.loader.build_graph()
NB: running the executor.loader.build_graph between invocations of executor.migrate seems to be a very important part of completing the migration and making things behave as one might expect
The migrations which are currently applicable to the database can be checked with something like:
print [x[1] for x in sorted(executor.loader.applied_migrations)]
[u'0001_initial', u'0002_fix_foreignkeys', ... u'0014_nulls_permitted']
I created a model instance via the ORM then ensured the database was in the old state by running some SQL directly:
job = Job.objects.create(....)
from django.db import connection
cursor = connection.cursor()
cursor.execute('UPDATE workflow_engine_job SET next_job_state=NULL')
Great. Now I know I have a database in the old state, and can test the forwards migration. So where 0016_nulls_banished is a migration file:
executor.migrate([("workflow_engine", "0016_nulls_banished")])
executor.loader.build_graph()
Migration 0015 goes through the database converting all the NULL fields to a default value. Migration 0016 alters the schema. You can scatter some print statements around to confirm things are happening as you think they should be.
And now the test can confirm that the migration has worked. In this case by ensuring there are no nulls left in the database.
jobs = Job.objects.all()
self.assertTrue(all([j.next_job_state is not None for j in jobs]))
We have used the following code in settings_test.py to ignore the migration for the tests:
MIGRATION_MODULES = dict(
(app.split('.')[-1], '.'.join([app, 'nonexistent_django_migrations_module']))
for app in INSTALLED_APPS
)
The idea here being that none of the apps have a nonexistent_django_migrations_module folder, and thus django will simply find no migrations.
I'm having trouble moving away from django_nose.FastFixtureTestCase to django.test.TestCase (or even the more conservative django.test.TransactionTestCase). I'm using Django 1.7.11 and I'm testing against Postgres 9.2.
I have a Testcase class that loads three fixtures files. The class contains two tests. If I run each test individually as a single run (manage test test_file:TestClass.test_name), they each work. If I run them together, (manage test test_file:TestClass), I get
IntegrityError: Problem installing fixture '<path>/data.json': Could not load <app>.<Model>(pk=1): duplicate key value violates unique constraint "<app_model_field>_49810fc21046d2e2_uniq"
To me it looks like the db isn't actually getting flushed or rolled back between tests since it only happens when I run the tests in a single run.
I've stepped through the Django code and it looks like they are getting flushed or rolled back -- depending on whether I'm trying TestCase or TransactionTestCase.
(I'm moving away from FastFixtureTestCase because of https://github.com/django-nose/django-nose/issues/220)
What else should I be looking at? This seems like it should be a simple matter and is right within what django.test.TestCase and Django.test.TransactionTestCase are designed for.
Edit:
The test class more or less looks like this:
class MyTest(django.test.TransactionTestCase): # or django.test.TestCase
fixtures = ['data1.json', 'data2.json', 'data3.json']
def test1(self):
return # I simplified it to just this for now.
def test2(self):
return # I simplified it to just this for now.
Update:
I've managed to reproduce this a couple of times with a single test, so I suspect something in the fixture loading code.
One of my basic assumptions was that my db was clean for every TestCase. Tracing into the django core code I found instances where an object (in one case django.contrib.auth.User) already existed.
I temporarily overrode _fixture_setup() to assert the db was clean prior to loading fixtures. The assertion failed.
I was able to narrow the problem down to code that was in a TestCase.setUpClass() instead of TestCase.setUp(), and so the object was leaking out of the test and conflicting with other TestCase fixtures.
What I don't understand completely is I thought that the db was dropped and recreated between TestCases -- but perhaps that is not correct.
Update: Recent version of Django includes setUpTestData() that should be used instead of setUpClass()
I have some tables containing a lot of data (imported from geonames using django-cities: https://github.com/coderholic/django-cities) that I want to preserve in tests (since loading them via fixtures will be very slow)… how can I keep those tables and their data during tests?
I think I have to write a custom TestRunner, but I have no idea about where to start :P
It's possible, here is a way :
1) Define your own test runner look here to see how.
2) For your custom test runner look in the default test runner, you can just copy and past the code and just comment this line : connection.creation.destroy_test_db(old_name, verbosity) which is responsible for destroying the test database, and i think you should put the connection.creation.create_test_db(..) line in a try except something like this maybe:
try:
# Create the database the first time.
connection.creation.create_test_db(verbosity, autoclobber=not interactive)
except ..: # Look at the error that this will raise when create a database that already exist
# Test database already created.
pass
3) Bound TEST_RUNNER in setting.py to your test runner.
4) Now run your test like this: ./manage.py test
I'm using the entity framework.
In one of my unit tests I have a line like:
this.Set<T>().Add(entity);
On executing that line I get:
System.InvalidOperationException : The model backing the
'InvoiceNewDataContext' context has changed since the database was
created. Either manually delete/update the database, or call
Database.SetInitializer with an IDatabaseInitializer instance. For
example, the DropCreateDatabaseIfModelChanges strategy will
automatically delete and recreate the database, and optionally seed it
with new data.
Well I've actually deleted the database and removed the connection string.
I'm surprised this error is happening on adding as I wouldn't expect it to happen until I saved the data and it discovered there was no database.
In previous projects/solutions I created during unit tests I have been able to add to the context for test purposes without actually calling SaveChanges.
Would anyone know why this would be happening in my latest projects/solutions?
Are you sure it really didn't use database in your previous projects? If you do not specify any connection string it will silently use a default one to SQLExpress database with local .mdf file so make sure that isn't happening now.