On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 4:29 PM, Joao De Almeida Pereira < jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 11:04 AM Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote: > >> 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? >> > See the function signature, that is the cumbersome issue > Ahh, yes. > >> >>> 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 >> > -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
