You might checkout a tool I built a while back to be used by operations
teams deploying ZooKeeper:

It's really two tools actually, a smoketester and a latency tester, both of
which are important to verify when deploying a new cluster.


On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 9:50 AM, Ted Dunning <> wrote:

> Generally, I think a better way to do this is to use a standard mock object
> framework.  Then you don't have to fake up an interface.
> But the original poster probably has a need to do integration tests more
> than unit tests.  In such tests, they need to test against a real ZK to
> make
> sure that their assumptions about the semantics of ZK are valid.
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 8:53 AM, David Rosenstrauch <
> >wrote:
> > Consequently, the way I write my code for ZooKeeper is against a more
> > generic interface that provides operations for open, close, getData, and
> > setData.  When unit testing, I substitute in a "dummy" implementation
> that
> > just stores data in memory (i.e., a HashMap); when running live code I
> use
> > an implementation that talks to ZooKeeper.
> >

Reply via email to