I've got a Express web api using sequelize that i want to do end to end testing with. I want to be able to do end to end testing with an in memory database so i can run it on whatever machine pleases me.
I use mysql database for development and production, however i was thinking about using an in-memory sqlite database for testing but i'm not sure what the best way is to get test data into it.
There are several modules around like squelize-fixtures but none of them seem to be able to just fill the database with data without the need to write code around it to manipulate and insert it.
Anyone here doing integration tests with sequelize and sqlite that has figured out a good way of doing it without all the boilerplate code?
If you test this way it won't actually be end-to-end testing since you're using a different database.
However, what is wrong with changing your Sequelize dialect to be sqlite and then using sequelize-fixtures to ingest a file of your data? If you feel this is too onerous you could slog your way through it one time and then just save the sqlite db file for future use. You would then instantiate your Sequelize object with
storage: 'path/to/database.sqlite'
No matter what you do or what storage you choose you're going to have to do some work to seed your database.
Related
I am working on a nodejs application. The database used is cassandra. We are using https://www.npmjs.com/package/dse-driver.
I am trying to understand how to write tests for the application.
I am specifically confused about how to keep my test database separate from development database.
Can we create and destroy test databases on the fly like Django?
How are test cases for cassandra and nodejs written?
What are the best practices for the same?
You can create a testkeyspace where you initially set up all the tables before each test and drop it afterwards.
If you do so, you should keep in mind, that after truncating tables, there are still snapshots on the filesystem. You probably would want to setup a cleanup job.
I have an api written in node with a mongodb back end.
I'm using supertest to automate testing of an api. Of course this results in a lot of changes to database and I like to get some input on options for managing this. The goal is for each test to have no permanent impact on the database. The database should look exactly the same after the test is finished as it did before the test ran.
In my case, I don't want the database to be dropped or fully emptied out between tests. I need some real data maintained in the database at all times. I just want the changes by the tests themselves to be reverted.
With a relational database, I would put a transaction around each unit tests and roll it back after the test was done (pass or fail). As far as I know, this is not an option with mongo.
Some options I have considered:
Fake databases
I've heard of in-memory databases like fongo (which is a Java thing) and tingodb. I haven't used these but the issue with this type of solution is always that it requires a good parity with the actual product to maintain itself as a viable option. As soon as I used a mongo feature that the fake doesn't support I'll have a problem unit testing.
Manual cleanup
There is always the option of just having a routine that finds all the data added by the test (marked in some way) and removes it. You'd have to be careful about updates and deletes here. Also there is likely a lot of upkeep making sure the cleanup routine accurately cleans things up.
Database copying
If it were fast enough, maybe having a baseline test database and making a copy of it before each test could work. It'd have to be pretty fast though.
So how do people generally handle this?
I think this is a brand new way in testing without transaction.
imho - using mongo >=3.2, we can setup inMemory storage engine, which is perfect for this kind of scenario.
Start mongo with inMemory
restore database
create a working copy for test
perform a test on working copy
drop working copy
if more tests GOTO 3
I have NodeJS app that uses MongoDB as database. I'm using native mongo driver (not mongoess).
The application allow users to work on projects and share them and the logic that decide which projects a user is allowed to see is built as mongo criteria selector.
In order to test that I've found TingoDB which looks like a great candidate for mocking the MongoDB to be able to run the real model code and check that it is working.
My question is what is the best way to load the initial data? keep it in separate file? Keep it as another model?
Thank you,
Ido.
TingoDB actually stores it's data in flat-files, so if you want, you could just keep a copy of the database in a directory and load that.
However, if you're just testing with a small amount of data, you'd probably be better off keeping the test-data as in your testing scripts, and inserting it through your application as part of the test. That way, you can easily compare the data in the application to the data you loaded in your assertions.
Finally, if you're running MongoDB in production, then you should probably use MongoDB in your tests. While they do have nearly identical APIs, they have very different performance, which should be something you're keeping track of in testing. Unless there's a need to use TingoDB during testing, I'd try to make it as similar to the production environment as possible.
I'm currently building a rest api and I'm struggling to find the best way to unit test each route.
A route handler performs various things and one of them is to execute a query to mongodb. I can unit test the route handler by using stubs, but if I'm testing the query I cannot stub the query itself, I need to have an in-memory mongodb that I could reset and insert new data for each test.
How do you test queries? I'm thinking that the only real way to ensure that the query does what I need is to use a real mongodb database installed in the testing machine (typically in the same machine used for developing).
yes, just as for relation databases, you need to have real base. if mongo offers in-memory auto-created version then it's easy. if not, then each developer has to have running mongo before he runs integration tests. for CI you can have one single dedicated mongo but than you have to prevent concurrent access (schema creation, multiple transactions etc). you should also implement automatic creation of schema if needed and empty database before each test. in relational db rollback is usually enough. when it's not enough then trimming all tables helps. although we had to implement it manually as we couldn't find any existing tools
I currently developed an app that connects to SQL Server 2005 database, so my DAL objects where generated using information from that DB.
It will also be possible to connect to an Oracle and MySQL db, all with the same table structures (aside from the normal differences in fields, such as varbinary(max) in SQL Server and BLOB in Oracle, and so on). For this purpose, I already defined multiple connection strings and multiple SubSonic providers for the different DB's the app will run on.
My question is, if I generated my objects using a SQL Server database, should the generated objects work transparently with the other DB's or do I need to generate a different DAL for each database engine I use? Should I be aware of any possible bugs I may encounter while performing these operations?
Thanks in advance for any advice on this issue.
I'm using SubSonic 2.2 by the way....
From what I've been able to test so far, I can't see an easy way to achieve what I'm trying to do.
The ideal situation for me would have been to generate SubSonic objects using SQL Server for example, and just be able to switch dynamically to MySQL by just creating at runtime the correct Provider for it along with its connection string. I got to a point where my app would correctly connect from SQL Server to a MySQL DB, but there's a point where the app fails since SubSonic internally generates queries of the form
SELECT * FROM dbo.MyTable
which MySQL doesn't support obviously. I also noticed queries that enclosed table names with brackets ([]), so it seems that there are a number of factors that would limit the use of one Provider along multiple DB engines.
I guess my only other option is to sort it out with multiple generated providers, although I must admit it does not make me comfortable knowing that I'll have N copies of basically the same classes along my project.
I would really love to hear from anyone else if they've had similar experiences. I'll be sure to post my results once I get everything sorted out and working for my project.
Has any of this changed in 3.0? This would definitely be a worthy reason for me to upgrade if life is any easier on this matter...