When did they add the in memory mode? Can you provide a quick link? Last time I checked (around august of 2k5), they didn't.
I recommend layering your unit test suite. So yes, the mapping layer tests would hit the database.
Cheers,
Clinton
On 1/14/06, Gregg D Bolinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Derby (which is an Apache project now) has an in memory mode. At any rate, yes, the quoted text was not stated correctly. I'll try again.
Is it common/good practise to perform unit tests that actually hit a database versus using mock objects? Should I be doing both?
Ok, probably not an iBatis mailing list question, but....
Thanks.
GreggOn 1/14/06, Clinton Begin < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:I think your quoted question is missing a word or something. :-)
In any case, I recommend HSQLDB over Derby if you have a choice, only because HSQLDB will be much faster, as it has an "in memory" mode.
When I tried to port the iBATIS unit tests to Derby, the build took like 10 times longer. (not a problem with derby, just the reality of physical disks vs. DDR -- for what it's worth, I think Derby is a better "real" database).
Cheers,
ClintonOn 1/14/06, Gregg D Bolinger < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Thanks Clinton. I suppose I could do something similar with Derby. I guess my question was a more general "Is it ok to do unit tests that actually unit tests?" Or rather, is it common practice?Gregg
On 1/14/06, Clinton Begin <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
I use HSQLDB for my ibatis unit tests. It's totally effective for most well written SQL. Only SQL that uses custom functions or stored procs will require your real database. In such cases, we (where I work) give each developer their own account on the database server, or a copy of the database on their local machine (depending on the practicality of the database).
Cheers,
Clinton
On 1/14/06, Gregg D Bolinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:I do unit tests. I've heard good and bad about performing unit tests that actually hit the database. Typical scenerio is to use Mock Objects so you don't have too. Anyone care to elaborate on unit testing that actually hits the database?Gregg
On 1/14/06, Clinton Begin <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
+1
On 1/14/06, Hycel Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Unit Tests.
On 1/13/06, Gregg D Bolinger < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am looking for a way that I can validate my mapping files against my
> associated object files and even possibly the database. Basically, I want
> to ensure that when the project it built, I run into as few runtime issues
> as possible. As it is, if someone changes the database or someone changed
> an Object file or someone changed a mapping file, I won't really know about
> it until the app is deployed and running.
>
> I'd like to hear some stories and information on how anyone else delt with
> this problem, if at all.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Gregg
>
>
