In my unit tests for my entities using HRD, I simply switch that percentage completely on/off around those few places in the unit test code where I need my entity to become "fully committed" in order for the rest of the unit test to work. Yes, it is kind of contrived, but then again so is a unit test. I must consciously decide to flip it on/off around that bit of code. My unit test code looks something like this:
//read this: http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/java/tools/localunittesting.html public class SampleUnitTest { private static boolean SHOULD_APPLY = false; // set this flag appropriately in the units test below. private static final class CustomHighRepJobPolicy implements HighRepJobPolicy { @Override public boolean shouldApplyNewJob(Key arg0) { return SHOULD_APPLY; } @Override public boolean shouldRollForwardExistingJob(Key arg0) { return SHOULD_APPLY; } } private final LocalServiceTestHelper helper = new LocalServiceTestHelper(new LocalDatastoreServiceTestConfig().setAlternateHighRepJobPolicyClass(CustomHighRepJobPolicy.class)); @Before public void setUp() { helper.setUp(); } @After public void tearDown() { helper.tearDown(); } @Test public void test1() throws Exception { String orgName = "The Organization, Inc."; SHOULD_APPLY = true; // temporarily allow things to be written to datastore for real final OOrganization org = ODaoOrganization.create(orgName); SHOULD_APPLY = false; // return HRD writes back to full "failure" for remaining unit test // now do my unit test that needed my org entity to be properly persisted. } } Broc On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Jeff Schnitzer <j...@infohazard.org> wrote: > There's this: > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/NdUAY0crVjg/3fJX3Gn3cOYJ > > Some thoughts: > > * I don't think there's really anything to save you from eventuality > except careful consideration during the design of your data model. Pick > your entity groups carefully and use XG transactions sparingly to move data > "across" when you need atomicity. > > * A lot of the time eventuality is not a big deal. On the other hand, if > you're building an accounting app, it probably is a big deal. > > * There's a difference between what your users experience and what your > tests experience. Say you have a test for "add this product to the catalog > and then check to see if it's in the catalog". In the real world it > doesn't matter if your users see the new product right away. But your > tests demand it immediately. The problem is with the test. I've "fixed" > the tests by doing this in my fixture setup: > > newLocalDatastoreServiceTestConfig().setDefaultHighRepJobPolicyUnappliedJobPercentage(0.1f) > > Unfortunately a good argument can be made that this diminishes the value > of the tests. Really some tests should be run with eventuality and others > without. Anyone know if setDefaultHighRepJobPolicyUnappliedJobPercentage() > can be called repeatedly after setup to switch back and forth? > Jeff > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 6:31 AM, Aswath Satrasala < > aswath.satras...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> I am trying HRD on local dev server. I have bunch of webdriver tests for >> different parts of my application that create entities and then doing a >> list of all the entities. >> My tests are failing in several places. It is due to the eventual >> consistency of the HRD. The tests run fine on M/S and on both >> production/local environment. >> I have 20-30 KINDS, and entities are created for 1-or more KINDs >> depending on the business logic, all in a transaction. Immediately, >> various reports are done. They fail. >> >> My question: What pattern needs to be followed? My application has grown >> very large during last 1.5 years or so. Doing re-factoring at every place >> in the application for eventual consistency will be a very large effort for >> a small team. I don't even know what extra work needs to be put to get this >> fixed. >> >> Am I better of sticking with M/S. So far, I have managed and designed >> entity relationships to work within one entity group. >> >> Are there any patterns coming out from the Objectify team to handle >> Eventual consistency issue of the HRD? >> >> -Aswath >> www.AccountingGuru.in >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Google App Engine for Java" group. >> To post to this group, send email to >> google-appengine-java@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine for Java" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-java@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
