+1 for mock this API.
If we can have some good test env, to preinstall third parties and service center to boot up testing is great prefereed. ------------------ ???????? ------------------ ??????: "willem.jiang"<[email protected]>; ????????: 2018??7??19??(??????) ????4:47 ??????: "dev"<[email protected]>; ????: Re: [DISCUSS]Simplify Dynamic Config (Apollo) Integration Test inJava Chassis That's problem of Apollo. We may need to find if there are any other open source configuration server can do the do too. From the test point of view, we just need to make sure the API is OK. I'm +1 for mocking the Apollo API in our test. Willem Jiang Twitter: willemjiang Weibo: ????willem On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 2:36 PM, Yang Bo <[email protected]> wrote: > No, What I mean is that Apollo itself is complex. It have multiple > components and uses eureka for registry/discovery. > So it will take a long time for booting an Apollo instance for testing, > which is the problem we are facing in our test cases. The other problem is > that if used in production, it will require extra man-power to > maintain/setup this config center. > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 2:10 PM Zen Lin <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > +1 to using this way to reduce load of integration testing. > > > > But I am also interested in what Yangbo mentioned, "apollo is too > complex > > a system for our use case". > > My doubt is is there any way to reduce this complex, any user guide blog > > for it? > > > > Best Regards, > > --- > > Zen Lin > > [email protected] > > Focused on Micro Service and Apache ServiceComb > > > > > > YangYongZheng <[email protected]> ??2018??7??18?????? ????11:24?????? > > > > > Yes, we only need test integration mechanism, not Apollo itself > > > > > > > > > Best Regards! > > > YangYongZheng > > > > > > > > > -----????????----- > > > ??????: Yang Bo [mailto:[email protected]] > > > ????????: 2018??7??18?? 11:13 > > > ??????: [email protected] > > > ????: Re: [DISCUSS]Simplify Dynamic Config (Apollo) Integration Test in > > Java > > > Chassis > > > > > > For the purpose of testing this is OK. But the real problem here is > that > > > apollo is too complex a system for our use case. > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:01 AM ?????? <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi all?? > > > > We had integration with Apollo for support dynamic config in Java > > > > Chassis, our CI will pull up apollo docker containers for test > > > > (nobodyiam/apollo-quick-start and lijasonvip/apollodb), this step is > > > > very slow and easy failed. > > > > I found that we are only use apollo openapi ( > > > > https://github.com/ctripcorp/apollo/wiki/Apollo%E5%BC%80% > E6%94%BE%E5%B > > > > 9%B3%E5%8F%B0) to get configurations from it, code below : > > > > > > > > private static RestTemplate rest = new RestTemplate(); > > > > ResponseEntity<String> exchange = rest.exchange(composeAPI(), > > > > HttpMethod.GET, entity, String.class); > > > > > > > > It is a general http GET request, so I think we only need start up > a > > > > http server and direct return a default configuration content for > this > > > > url in order to simulate the apollo server, that is enough. > > > > > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > > > > > Best Regards & Thanks! > > > > Yangyong Zheng > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Best Regards, > > > Yang. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Best Regards, > Yang. >
