Hi On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 3:54 PM, Joao De Almeida Pereira < jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> Hello, > Definitely running single tests is something that would be great, > specially if you are TDDing something waiting 30-40 seconds to get feedback > is a little cumbersome when the test you are concerned with take less then > a second. > > In the process: > 1. Write a test > 2. Make the test pass > 3. Refactor > Sure, makes sense for development. As I spend 99% of my time reviewing and testing these days, I was just relaying my pain points :-) > > in between each step you run the test more then 1 time, and depending on > the refactoring you might need to run it several times. So imagine waiting > 30 seconds per run to get results. To run a subset of tests is a pain > because you need to be always changing the way you run the tests..... > > I believe we could archive a better granularity and choosing what test to > run if we used a runner like pytest or nose to do it. What was the reason > behind handrolling a test runner script? I am asking this because in a > previous job I decided to handroll a unittest loader script and that was > something that I regretted every time I had to touch it, and eventually was > in the process of changing it to pytest. > Pure newbie-ism. I have no objections to changing to something else, if it reduces our tech debt. > > I looked into pytest to replace the current the current runtest, and the > major problem I found was the testscenarios integration(See Note 1). It can > be done but we would need to change all the test functions to receive the > scenario variables through arguments on the function. Also didn't dug much > into setting all the variables that we need there and all the environment. > The other issue that I do not like very much about pytest is the fact that > you loose the unittest assertion that is not so bad because there are some > neat libraries like: https://github.com/grappa-py/grappa, https:// > github.com/ActivisionGameScience/assertpy, https://github.com/dgilland/ > verify. Personally I really like the syntax of Grapa, but the Veridfy one > is pretty similar to Jasmine too. > > What are your thoughts? > Huh, I also really like the grappa syntax. It's nice and readable. > > > > Note 1: As an example of what our functions would have to look like you > can see: https://github.com/OriMenashe/pytest-scenario/ > blob/master/tests/test_parametrize.py > As a example this class: > Without a diff, it's hard to be sure, but it looks like the only change was BaseTestGenerator to object on the first line? > class ServersWithServiceIDAddTestCase(BaseTestGenerator): > """ This class will add the servers under default server group. """ > > scenarios = [ > # Fetch the default url for server object > ( > 'Default Server Node url', dict( > url='/browser/server/obj/' > ) > ) > ] > > def setUp(self): > pass > > def runTest(self): > """ This function will add the server under default server group.""" > url = "{0}{1}/".format(self.url, utils.SERVER_GROUP) > # Add service name in the config > self.server['service'] = "TestDB" > response = self.tester.post( > url, > data=json.dumps(self.server), > content_type='html/json' > ) > self.assertEquals(response.status_code, 200) > response_data = json.loads(response.data.decode('utf-8')) > self.server_id = response_data['node']['_id'] > > def tearDown(self): > """This function delete the server from SQLite """ > utils.delete_server_with_api(self.tester, self.server_id) > > Would have to look changed to: > > class ServersWithServiceIDAddTestCase(object): > """ This class will add the servers under default server group. """ > > scenarios = [ > # Fetch the default url for server object > ( > 'Default Server Node url', dict( > url='/browser/server/obj/' > ) > ) > ] > > def setUp(self): > pass > > def runTest(self, url): > """ This function will add the server under default server group.""" > url = "{0}{1}/".format(url, utils.SERVER_GROUP) > # Add service name in the config > self.server['service'] = "TestDB" > response = self.tester.post( > url, > data=json.dumps(self.server), > content_type='html/json' > ) > self.assertEquals(response.status_code, 200) > response_data = json.loads(response.data.decode('utf-8')) > self.server_id = response_data['node']['_id'] > > def tearDown(self): > """This function delete the server from SQLite """ > utils.delete_server_with_api(self.tester, self.server_id) > > > > Thanks > Joao > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 8:31 AM Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 2:22 PM, Joao De Almeida Pereira < >> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote: >> >>> Hello Khushboo, >>> Completely forgot about this python "feature"....... >>> Attached is the fix. >>> >> >> Thanks, applied. >> >> >>> >>> Just as a side question, does anyone else feel the pain of wanting to >>> run a single test using a IDE or the command line and not being able to? >>> >> >> Not really - the Python and JS tests are so quick I don't really care >> (and with the Python ones, I can execute for a single module for even more >> speed). >> >> What I would *really* like, is the ability to run individual feature >> tests. That would be very valuable and save me a ton of time. >> >> >> >>> We an HandRolled the loader, and that as some implications. Did anyone >>> try to use a different launcher like pytest or nose instead of the current >>> runner? >>> I understand that testscenarios is one of the problems we have if we >>> want to move away from this way of running tests. >>> Any suggestion? >>> >>> Thanks >>> Joao >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 11:41 PM Khushboo Vashi < >>> khushboo.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Joao, >>>> >>>> In the test_start_running_query.py, 2 static methods >>>> (is_begin_required_for_sql_query and is_rollback_statement_required) >>>> of StartRunningQuery class were used directly without @patch. Due to >>>> this, in all the cases, the original value of them doesn't restore. >>>> >>>> To fix this, I have sent the patch in another thread, to restore its >>>> original state, but I wonder if we can use these methods with @patch. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Khushboo >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 5:24 PM, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Support EXPLAIN on Greenplum. Fixes #3097 >>>>> >>>>> - Extract SQLEditor.execute and SQLEditor._poll into their own files >>>>> and add test around them >>>>> - Extract SQLEditor backend functions that start executing query to >>>>> their own files and add tests around it >>>>> - Move the Explain SQL from the front-end and now pass the Explain >>>>> plan parameters as a JSON object in the start query call. >>>>> - Extract the compile_template_name into a function that can be used >>>>> by the different places that try to select the version of the template and >>>>> the server type >>>>> >>>>> Branch >>>>> ------ >>>>> master >>>>> >>>>> Details >>>>> ------- >>>>> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=pgadmin4.git;a=commitdiff;h= >>>>> e16a95275336529a734bf0066889e39cc8ef0662 >>>>> Author: Joao Pedro De Almeida Pereira <jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> >>>>> >>>>> Modified Files >>>>> -------------- >>>>> .../databases/schemas/tables/tests/test_utils.py | 0 >>>>> web/pgadmin/static/js/sqleditor/execute_query.js | 287 ++++ >>>>> .../js/sqleditor/is_new_transaction_required.js | 14 + >>>>> .../static/js/sqleditor/query_tool_actions.js | 33 +- >>>>> web/pgadmin/tools/sqleditor/__init__.py | 396 +---- >>>>> web/pgadmin/tools/sqleditor/static/js/sqleditor.js | 227 +-- >>>>> .../sqleditor/sql/10_plus/explain_plan.sql | 23 + >>>>> .../sqleditor/sql/9.2_plus/explain_plan.sql | 20 + >>>>> .../sqleditor/sql/default/explain_plan.sql | 17 + >>>>> .../sqleditor/sql/gpdb_5.0_plus/explain_plan.sql | 5 + >>>>> web/pgadmin/tools/sqleditor/tests/__init__.py | 8 + >>>>> .../sqleditor/tests/test_explain_plan_templates.py | 152 ++ >>>>> .../test_extract_sql_from_network_parameters.py | 59 + >>>>> .../tools/sqleditor/tests/test_start_query_tool.py | 38 + >>>>> web/pgadmin/tools/sqleditor/utils/__init__.py | 14 + >>>>> .../sqleditor/utils/apply_explain_plan_wrapper.py | 24 + >>>>> .../tools/sqleditor/utils/constant_definition.py | 32 + >>>>> .../tools/sqleditor/utils/is_begin_required.py | 169 ++ >>>>> .../tools/sqleditor/utils/start_running_query.py | 172 ++ >>>>> .../tools/sqleditor/utils/tests/__init__.py | 8 + >>>>> .../utils/tests/test_apply_explain_plan_wrapper.py | 121 ++ >>>>> .../utils/tests/test_start_running_query.py | 445 +++++ >>>>> .../utils/update_session_grid_transaction.py | 18 + >>>>> web/pgadmin/utils/compile_template_name.py | 17 + >>>>> .../utils/tests/test_compile_template_name.py | 34 + >>>>> web/pgadmin/utils/versioned_template_loader.py | 2 +- >>>>> web/regression/javascript/fake_endpoints.js | 6 +- >>>>> .../javascript/sqleditor/execute_query_spec.js | 1702 >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> .../sqleditor/is_new_transaction_required_spec.js | 65 + >>>>> .../sqleditor/query_tool_actions_spec.js | 141 +- >>>>> 30 files changed, 3670 insertions(+), 579 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> >> >> -- >> Dave Page >> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com >> Twitter: @pgsnake >> >> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com >> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >> > -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
