Have a requirement where before running the feature "abfeatureTest1" few initial data setup required for validation needs to be created through UI and is available in method "beforeFeatureTest1".
I need to execute the method "beforeFeatureTest1" only once before running the feature "abfeatureTest1" and discard the data after feature execution.
I am aware of After/Before all hooks and After/Before scenario hooks, But i need something like After/Before feature hook.
Any suggestions on how this can be achieved?
Thanks.
For Cypress-Cucumber, following hooks will run before and after each feature file but not after each scenario
before(()=>{
cy.log('======before=====')
})
after(()=>{
cy.log('======after=====')
cy.wait(5000)
})
You can have tags at FeatureFile level and at Scenario level.
So #FeatureFile3 tag will run all the cases in your FeatureFile3
and #FF1scenario2 tag will run only particular scenario
You can specify these tags in your runner class for execution as per your requirement.
#CucumberOptions(features= "src/main/resources/publish", tags="#FeatureFile3", format = {"pretty"} )
Related
I'm starting with BDD (cucumber + capybara + selenium chromedriver) and TDD (rspec) with factory_bot and I'm getting an error on cucumber features - step_definitions.
uninitialized constant User (NameError)
With TDD, everything is ok, the factory bot is working fine. The problem is with the cucumber.
factories.rb
FactoryBot.define do
factory :user_role do
name {"Admin"}
query_name {"admin"}
end
factory :user do
id {1}
first_name {"Mary"}
last_name {"Jane"}
email {"mary_jane#gmail.com"}
password {"123"}
user_role_id {1}
created_at {'1/04/2020'}
end
end
support/env.rb
require 'capybara'
require 'capybara/cucumber'
require 'selenium-webdriver'
require 'factory_bot_rails'
Capybara.register_driver :selenium do |app|
Capybara::Selenium::Driver.new(app, browser: :chrome)
end
Capybara.configure do |config|
config.default_driver = :selenium
end
Capybara.javascript_driver = :chrome
World(FactoryBot::Syntax::Methods)
And the problem is happening here
support/hooks.rb
Before '#admin_login' do
#user = create(:user)
end
step_definitions/admin_login.rb
Given("a registered user with the email {string} with password {string} exists") do |email, password|
#user
end
I don't know why, but I can't access the user using cucumber and factory_bot.
Anybody could help me please?
I think I need to configure something on the cucumber.
What do you think guys?
First of all Luke is correct about this being a setup issue. The error is telling you that the User model cannot be found which probably means Rails is not yet loaded. I can't remember the exact details of how cucumber-rails works but one of the things it does is to make sure that each scenario becomes an extension of a Rails integration test. This ensures that all of the Rails auto-loading has taken place and that these things are available.
Secondly I'd suggest you start simpler and use a step to create your registered user rather than using a tag. Using tags for setup is a Cucumber anti-pattern.
Finally, and more controversially I'd suggest that you don't use factory-bot when cuking. FactoryBot uses a separate configuration to create model objects directly in the datastore. This bypasses any application logic around the creation of these objects, which means the objects created by FactoryBot are going to end up being different from the objects created by your application. In real life object creation involves things like auditing, sending emails, conditional logic etc. etc. To use FactoryBot you either have to duplicate that additional creation logic and behavior or ignore it (both choices are undesirable).
You can create objects for cuking much more effectively (and quicker) by using the following pattern.
Each create method in the Rails controller delegates its work to a service object e.g.
UserController
def create
#user = CreateUserService.new(params).call
end
end
Then have your cukes use a helper module to create things for you. This module will provide tools for your steps to create users, using the above service
module UserStepHelper
def create_user(params)
CreateUserService.new(default_params.merge(params))
end
def default_params
{
...
}
end
end
World UserStepHelper
Given 'there is a registered user' do
#registered_user = create_user
end
and then use that step in the background of your feature e.g.
Background:
Given there is a registered user
And I am an admin
Scenario: Admin can see registered users
When I login and view users
Then I should see a user
Notice the absence of tagging here. Its not desirable or necessary here.
You can see an extension of this approach in a sample application I did for a CukeUp talk in 2013 here https://github.com/diabolo/cuke_up/commits/master. If you follow this commit by commit starting from first commit at the bottom you will get quite a good guide to setting up a rails project with cucumber in just the first 4 or 4 commits. If you follow it through to the end (22 commits) you'll get a basic powerful framework for creating and using model objects when cuking. I realize the project is ancient and that obviously you will have to use modern versions of everything, but the principles still apply, and I use this approach in all my work and having been doing so for at least 10 years.
So if you're using rails, it's probably advised to use cucumber-rails over cucumber. This is probably an issue where your User models have not been auto-loaded in.
Cucumber auto-loads all ruby files underneath features, with env.rb first, it's almost certainly an issue with load order / load location
I am trying to do setproperty across multiple threads in the same threadgroup, the postprocessor set new variable using setproperty, so that It can be accessed across multiple threads.
In Beanshell preprocessor, I'm having below line of code.
${__setProperty("url", "youtube")};
Under thread Group I'm having Beanshell post processor, having below one line in postprocessor.
${__setProperty("url", "google")};
under thread group, I have Http Sampler, in hostname field I have given ${__property(url)}.com
The Aim is, when it executes first time, the URL will be google.com and when first threads complete than
the URL becomes youtube.com
But the setProperty only set google, and the second one in postprocessor was not working.
Refer the below Image for details, it shows how I created the element in Jmeter.
enter image description here
Note: This was just a sample use case, but I have complex example, but answering to this question will help me to add the logic in complex script.
Thanks
So is the goal that the very first thread to complete will change the URL for all subsequently created threads?
My understanding of the documentation is that you can't change the value of a property inside the thread-group:
Properties can be referenced in test plans - see Functions - read a property - but cannot be used for thread-specific values.
(see http://jmeter.apache.org/usermanual/test_plan.html#properties)
My assumption is that each thread in a thread-group gets a copy of the properties. If you change the value of the property inside the thread group, then you are actually changing the copy for that particular thread. Since you are changing it in the post-processor, the thread is very likely just about to be disposed, resulting in your change being lost. After disposal a new thread is created but with the original value of the property.
So what you need to do is figure out how to change the value outside of the thread-group.
I have done something similar in my own tests whereby I am changing the value of a property in the middle of the test, and the value is picked up immediately by all of the active thread-groups, resulting in each new thread created from that point forward getting the new value. I am doing this by using the Beanshell Server: https://jmeter.apache.org/usermanual/best-practices.html#beanshell_server
In my specific case I use jenkins job that calls a shell-script which connects to the beanshell-service running on the local-host:
java -jar ${jmeter_home}/apache-jmeter-5.0/lib/bshclient.jar localhost 9000 ${test_plan_home}/update_Prop.bsh "${property}" "${value}"
where my update_prop.bash file is simply:
import org.apache.jmeter.util.JMeterUtils;
JMeterUtils.getJMeterProperties().setProperty(args[0],args[1]);
You would not need to use Jenkins or anything like that, though - if you setup your JMeter Process to include the Beanshell-server (see the link above) then you can simply replace the code in your post-processor:
${__setProperty("url", "google")};
with the code to connect to the beanshell server and execute that command there instead:
exec("./updateprop.bash url google");
JMeter properties are global therefore once you set the property it is available for all threads
Each JMeter thread (virtual user) executes Samplers. Pre and Post processors are obeying JMeter Scoping Rules Looking into your test plan the execution order is following:
Beanshell PreProcessor
HTTP Request Sampler
Beanshell PostProcessor
therefore HTTP Request sampler will never hit youtube (unless you run into a race condition due to concurrency) because PreProcessor will set the URL back to google
It is recommended to use JSR223 Test Elements and Groovy language for scripting since JMeter 3.1
It is NOT recommended to inline JMeter Functions and/or variables into scripts, you need to either use "Parameters" section or go for code-based equivalents instead so you need to replace this line:
${__setProperty("url", "youtube")};
with this one:
props.put("url", "youtube");
I have a transacted Camel route with a number of processors
from(Constant.RouteA)
.transacted()
.process(processor1)
.process(processor2)
.process(processor3)
.wireTap(Constant.RouteB)
.wireTap(Constant.RouteC)
.end()
My problem is that I don't want the final part of the route (the wiretaps) to be part of the transaction i.e. I want them to be executed once processor3 has finished and the transaction committed.
Initially I looked at using onCompletion() but it doesn't seem to work together with transacted().
So I found another way which requires using policy() to limit the transaction scope i.e.
from(Constant.RouteA)
.policy("PROPAGATION_REQUIRED")
.process(processor1)
.process(processor2)
.process(processor3)
.end()
.wireTap(Constant.RouteB)
.wireTap(Constant.RouteC)
.end()
The problem is that this solution requires to define the SpringTransactionPolicy in the Spring configuration, but the software I'm working on doesn't use Spring. Transactions are managed by Bitronix and everything works just by using the transacted() method, which as far as I can tell doesn't allow you to limit the scope of a transaction.
Is there a simple way to achieve my goal? Hopefully without bringing Spring into the picture. Thank you!
Try to create two routes. For example:
from(direct:startRoute)
.to(Constant.RouteA)
.wireTap(Constant.RouteB)
.wireTap(Constant.RouteC);
from(Constant.RouteA)
.transacted()
.process(processor1)
.process(processor2)
.process(processor3);
Once route "Constant.RouteA" is finished all changes will committed.
I have a bit of structural dilemma in soap. When running tests, it can be possible to run tests at project, test suite or test case level.
Now currently what happens is that we can run a whole project via project level and it will display a prompt box to select an endpoint (through a project level setup script and produces a project report using the project level tear down script).
However, it may be possible that the tester may not want to run a whole project and only wants to run a test suite or even a test case. Now it may be possible that the tester may only want to run only a test suite or even only a test case. Now it would be a hassle disabling suites or cases you don't want to run.
Now the problem i have is that if I start putting prompt boxes to select endpoints at suite or case level, everytime we hit a suite or case, it will always ask for an endpoint. Another thing is that I am thinking not creating suite or test case reposts because if running many suites or cases one by one, it is just an overkill on reporting.
I like your thinking on this, but I was speaking with my professional colleague and what we're thinking is this:
Add the below code for all test suites and test case level in their relevant setup scripts where it asks for endpoint (this is same code used in project set up script for selecting endpoint):
import com.eviware.soapui.support.*
def alert = com.eviware.soapui.support.UISupport
def urls = []
project.properties.each
{
if (it.value.name.startsWith("BASE_URL_"))
{
urls.push(it.value.name.replace("BASE_URL_", ""))
}
}
def urlName = alert.prompt("Please select the environment URL", "Enter URL", urls)
if (urlName)
{
def url = project.getPropertyValue("BASE_URL_" + urlName)
def urlBase = "BASE_URL_" + urlName
project.setPropertyValue("BASE_URL", url)
switch (urlBase){
case "BASE_URL_TEST":
project.setPropertyValue("DOMAIN_NAME", "TEST");
break;
case "BASE_URL_STAGE":
project.setPropertyValue("DOMAIN_NAME", "STAGE");
break;
default:
project.setPropertyValue("DOMAIN_NAME", "NO DOMAIN");
break;
}
}
else
{
log.warn 'haven\'t received user input'
log.warn 'No base URL is selected or cancelled, try again'
assert false
}
Now what we add is the following and we may need to use properties but again see what you think is best:
If test is ran at project level, it will prompt to select endpoint through project setup script but it will not ask for selecting endpoint through test suite or test case setup script. So it's only a single endpoint selection
If test is ran at suite level, it will prompt to select endpoint through project setup script but it will not ask for selecting endpoint through test case setup script. So it's only a single endpoint selection
For running at test case level, well it only runs for that test case so it's at the lowest level as it asks for an endpoint for that test case.
We can't have setup scripts disabled at any level because there maybe over code in those setup script that will need to be exectued, we just need a way to say depending on which level, don't ask for selecting endpoints at lower levels.
Seems complicated to implement but does anyone know best way to implement this or do they even have a better idea than this theory?
Thanks
For a moment, let us assume you get it done for all levels (project, suite, and each case). May be you forgot about the step level ;-)
Do you have any Pros in your approach?, for me, NO.
Cons in your approach:
Each time user executes a test (be it project / suite / any test case), engineer needs to select value from the drop down, which is unwanted though testing against the same server as previous test case & little annoying.
Test execution requires manual intervention each time test execution is invoked.
User Interface is required as drop down being used.
Will be come road block / hurdle for end to end automation or to achieve automation.
Test execution can't done in headless mode. And this is important if you need to use Continuous Integration tools.
Proposed Approach :-
If I have to do the above, I would do the following. That would be clean, damn simple, no such complications would arise that you had mentioned in the long summary.
Looks there are following project properties defined with addresses of the test servers:
BASE_URL_TEST
BASE_URL_STAGE
There is also another project property defined BASE_URL and all the above logic is to allow the user to select the value from above properties to base URL value.
Now all user have to do is change the value for project property BASE_URL. I would think just user have to set one of the below value by hand what he / she needed as (one of them) before proceeding with their tests.
${#Project#BASE_URL_TEST} or
${#Project#BASE_URL_STAGE}
NOTE that a property value can be referred into another property by the use of Property Expansion like above.
With the above, user can set whatever is needed and change only if required or have to change the test server.
No setup script at any level is required any more, and just simply change the value of the property.
Properties are given to make to life simple, which can be used in N number of places and maintain the project easily.
Most Importantly, overcome the Cons mentioned in the beginning.
It is general practice that SoapUI is used to design the tests, and SOAPUI_HOME/bin/testrunner.bat or .sh utility to execute the tests in command line mode and that is the way to achieve Continuous Integration.
That's why use of properties helps here to achieve the above without any issues.
Even simple:
Just have one project property BASE_URL (remove others), user have to just edit the property value and have the test server name / IP address and is done for once, say http://testjuniper. Isn't it dead simple?
And I believe, the engineer would definitely know which server he / she is using to execute the tests.
Having said that, now user do not have to bother at all, irrespective of executing a project / suite / test case, as long as testing is carried out against the same server / environment.
Once, the test execution is finished against TEST environment, the engineer may move on to other environment say STAGING, just change BASE_URL property value accordingly.
I would like to retrieve the scenario state in the "After" scenario hook. I noticed that the .failed? method does not consider pending steps as failed steps.
So How can I determine that a scenario did not execute completely, because it failed OR because some steps were not implemented/defined.
You can use status method. The default value of status is :skipped, the failed one is :failed and the passed step is :passed. So you can write something like this:
do sth if step.status != :passed
Also, if you use !step.passed? it does the same thing because it only checks for the :passed status.
http://cukes.info/api/cucumber/ruby/yardoc/Cucumber/Ast/Scenario.html#failed%3F-instance_method
On that subject, you can also take a look at this post about demoing your feature specs to your customers: http://multifaceted.io/2013/demo-feature-tests/
LiohAu, you can use the 'status' method on a scenario itself rather than on individual steps. Try this: In hooks, add
After do |scenario|
p scenario.status
end
This will give the statuses as follows:
Any step not implemented / defined, it'll give you :undefined
Scenario fails (when all steps are defined) :failed
Scenario passes :passed
Using the same hook, it'll give you the status for scenario outline, but for each example row (since for each example row, it is an individual scenario). So if at all you want the result of an entire outline, you'll need to capture result for all example rows and compute the final result accordingly.
Hope this helps.