Same here, +1 for test containers and a more holistic testing approach
On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 7:30 PM Hans Van Akelyen <hans.van.akel...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Sergio, > > I am a big fan of test containers and you have a +1 from me on the proposal > to start using them for a more holistic testing approach. > > Cheers, > Hans > > On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 at 00:40, Sergio De Lorenzis < > sergio.deloren...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Context: > > > > At present, the bulk of Java tests in the Hop codebase are unit tests. > > These tests simulate interactions with external components like > persistence > > layers or messaging systems, using mocks. However, this reliance on unit > > tests and mocks during development may not accurately reflect real-world > > scenarios, potentially leading to compatibility issues with the actual > > target systems. > > Let me elaborate on my current use case and why I advocate for the > adoption > > of Testcontainers to enhance compatibility and stability. In my ongoing > > task, I am establishing a new database connection to CrateDB. CrateDB is > > essentially a fork of PostgreSQL tailored for specific purposes like time > > series and blob storage. Consequently, some PostgreSQL features deemed > > non-essential for CrateDB's goals have been omitted. During development, > I > > replicated the functionality of PostgreSqlDatabaseMetaTest for CrateDB. > > This test suite verifies whether each method of the API inherited from > > BaseDatabaseMeta executes the expected SQL statement against the target > > DBMS. However, it became apparent that certain unit tests in > > CrateSqlDatabaseMetaTest, derived from PostgreSQL tests, are irrelevant > due > > to CrateDB's lack of support for sequences. > > > > Proposal: > > To address the inefficiency of such tests, which ultimately incur > > unnecessary costs in terms of time and resources, I propose introducing > > test classes that evaluate the execution of the aforementioned API > against > > their actual targets, beyond simply validating the expected code > > generation. These tests would leverage Testcontainers to create > disposable > > instances of the actual targets. > > For instance, in this Merge Request (MR) [ > > https://github.com/apache/hop/pull/3791] (see CrateDBDatabaseMetaIT), an > > example of using the CrateDB Testcontainer is provided, demonstrating its > > utility for achieving my objectives. > > > > Benefits: > > - Enhanced reliability of developed integrations > > - Safeguarding against regressions > > - The disposable nature of Testcontainers allows for short-lived > component > > instantiation > > - Facilitates comprehensive integration testing with diverse scenarios > > > > Drawback: > > - Potential increase in resources and time consumption on CI, albeit > > optimizable in most cases > > > > Conclusion: > > This proposed approach does not seek to replace existing integration > tests, > > which validate specific scenarios within a comprehensive suite > encompassing > > Hop and third-party components (DBMSs, Message brokers, etc.). Instead, > it > > complements these tests by offering early validation of communication > > between Hop and individual components, one by one, thereby fostering > > improved system reliability and stability. > > >
