I have a complex Java EE 6 app with a web module, an EJB module and some utility jars.
I want to do some integration tests with Junit. Therefore I use the openwebbeans cdi container (Thanks to Mr. Struberg http://struberg.wordpress.com/2012/03/17/controlling-cdi-containers-in-se-and-ee/)
It works perfectly. I can start a complete cdi container in a Junit test.
My problem is that I have some interceptors in my application which cannot run in a Junit test (MQ-, persistence- and transaction-interceptors). So I want to mock these interceptor implementations.
Does anybody know how to do this?
To whom it may concern ;-)
At the end I solved my issue with clean Java EE techniques. I provided a method which observes the ProcessAnnotatedType event. This method evaluates the type which is processed and if it is one of my interceptors, then I veto the processing.
public void processAnnotatedType(#Observes final ProcessAnnotatedType<?> event, final BeanManager manager) {
if (event.getAnnotatedType().getJavaClass().equals(PrivilegeCheckingInterceptor.class)) {
event.veto();
}
}
Why not just test in the container of choice with Arquillian? The other option which comes to mind would be to add in interceptors with mock functionality and exclude the actual interceptor implementation when you start the CDI container.
You can also run tests with embedded OpenEJB.
This link http://openejb.apache.org/examples-trunk/interceptors/ may be useful - perhaps setting property of 'openejb.deployments.classpath.exclude' could help.
Another option of "vetoing" could be through Deltaspike #Exclude annotation. It can veto beans based on ProjectStage.
Example:
#Exclude(ifProjectStage = ProjectStage.UnitTest.class)
public class MyInterceptor {
}
Then in your test you can activate the project stage using Deltapike test control module, example:
#RunWith(CdiTestRunner.class)
#TestControl(projectStage = UnitTest.class)
public class TestStageControl {
#Test...
}
Related
I have an application with rest api endpoints. I want to write test cases for that. It follows MVC architecture. For one of the end points I want to mock a method in my DAO class.
Sample code for my test class is:
RequestBuilder requestGetBuilder = MockMvcRequestBuilders
.get("/processcal/getdata/srn/{srn}",1000)
.contentType(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
.accept(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON);
This controller will call the DAO layer having that method to be mocked.
I tried using the mockito as below in my Test config class:
#Bean
#Primary
BookMarkDao bookMarkDao() {
final BookMarkDao bookMarkDao = Mockito.mock(BookMarkDao.class);
Mockito.when(bookMarkDao.fetchMrPostProcessCalc(Mockito.anyString()))
.thenReturn(TestUtils.getMockResponse());
return bookMarkDao;
}
The problem with this is it's mocking the entire DAO bean so for rest of the endpoints its not calling the DAO class methods and my test coverage reduces. Is there a way around solving this?
You can use a specific profile for mocked beans and activate this profile in necessary test cases. By the way, if your application based on the spring-boot then you can use #MockBean instead of manual making a mock of your DAO in test configurations.
I am using junit, mockito and mockMVC to test the working of a webapp. I am struggling with a dependency whose injecttion I cannot figure out. My webapp structure is as follows.
Class Controller{
#Autowired Service searchService;
#RequestMapping("Search")
public returnType search(#RequestParam("parameter")String parameter){
searchService.doSearch(parameter);
}
}
and the service class
Class Service{
#Autowired Service2 service2;
public returnType doSearch(String parameter){
//some code
service2.call(parameter);
}
}
I need to test the search method for this controller, however service2 is not currently live and hence calls to it have to be mocked. I can mock service2, but cannot figure out how to inject a mock of service2 in my mockMVC instance of controller. As far as I know #InjectMocks in mockito only injects mocks one level deep and not two.
EDIT:
I am using the following to get MockMVC instance of controller
MockMvc controller;
controller = MockMvcBuilders.standaloneSetup(Controller);
What you are essentially want to do is mock a bean.
In your case, you have to mock bean for service2 using #MockBean annotations.
Please refer this article for details.
You don't need that.
Mocking search service will be sufficient as you get the handle of what needs to be done.
Example:
doReturn(...).when(searchService).doSearch(any());
While performing Unit Testing, the developer need to identify the System Under Test and mock/stub all the collaborators.
So, in this case you would write a separate unit test for Controller and Search Service.
Also, read this brilliant article by Martin Fowler - Mocks Aren't Stubs.
i try to use spring-test(3.2.10) and integration tests with TestNG by this link.
I created RootTest.java
#WebAppConfiguration
#ContextConfiguration("file:src/test/resources/root-context2.xml")
public class ReferenceServiceTest extends AbstractTestNGSpringContextTests {
...
spring context loaded success. But my global variables not instantiated because web.xml ignored. In web.xml i have my own "listener-class"(implementation of ServletContextListener) and "context-param". How i can load web.xml context(and calls all application startup listeners) with spring integration test context?
As stated in the reference manual, the Spring MVC Test Framework...
"loads the actual Spring configuration through the TestContext
framework and always uses the DispatcherServlet to process requests
thus approximating full integration tests without requiring a running
Servlet container."
The key point there is "without ... a Servlet container". Thus web.xml does not come into the picture here. In other words, there is no way for configuration in web.xml to have an affect on integration tests using the Spring MVC Test Framework.
Now, having said that, it is possible to register a Servlet Filter with MockMvc like this:
mockMvcBuilder.addFilters(myServletFilter);
or
mockMvcBuilder.addFilters(myResourceFilter, "/resources/*");
And you can configure context-param entries by adding them manually to the ServletContext (which is actually Spring's MockServletContext) before you execute assertions on MockMvc like this:
wac.getServletContext().setInitParameter(name, value);
But... there is no way to configure a ServletContextListener using Spring MVC Test. If you want to have a listener applied to all of your requests that pass through Spring MVC, as an alternative you could consider implementing a custom HandlerInterceptor or WebRequestInterceptor (see Configuring interceptors in the reference manual).
Regards,
Sam
Try with a MockServletContext
#Before
public void before() {
MockServletContext mockServletContext = new MockServletContext();
mockServletContext.setInitParameter("parameterName", "parameterValue");
new MyListenerClass().contextInitialized(new ServletContextEvent(mockServletContext));
}
I'm trying to write a test that needs both Robolectric 2.2 and PowerMock, as the code under test depends on some Android libraries and third party libraries with final classes that I need to mock.
Given that I'm forced to use the Robolectric test runner through:
#RunWith(RobolectricTestRunner.class)
...I cannot use the PowerMock test runner, so I'm trying to go with the PowerMock java agent alternative, without luck so far.
I have setup everything according to this guide but I'm facing a collision problem between classes required by the javaagent library and by robolectric through its dependency with asm-1.4. Both depend on
org.objectweb.asm.ClassVisitor
, but javaagent-1.5.1 ships with its own version where ClassVisitor is an interface while asm-1.4 version for the same namespace is an abstract class, with the corresponding error at runtime:
java.lang.IncompatibleClassChangeError: class org.objectweb.asm.tree.ClassNode has interface org.objectweb.asm.ClassVisitor as super class
I have even tried to modify the javaagent library jar to entirely remove the org.objectew.asm classes in there, but that doesn't work as ClassNotFoundException happens afterwards due to some other classes needed in the org.objectweb.asm package that only ship in the javaagent library jar, and not in the asm one.
Any ideas? According to examples out there the agent seems to work fine with, at least, the Spring test runner.
I had the same problem and while I didn't solve this problem as such, I wanted to share my approach, which removes the need for PowerMock (which is always a good thing in my view): I wanted to mock a call to
Fragment fooFragment = new FooFragment();
So what I did was addanother level of indirection. I created a FragmentProvider class:
public FragmentFactory fragmentFactory = new FragmentFactory();
[...]
Fragment fooFragment = fragmentFactory.getFooFragment();
After i did this, I could just mock out the factory with standard Mockito, like this:
FragmentFactory mockFactory = mock(FragmentFactory.class);
activity.fragmentFactory = mockFactory;
when(mockFactory.getFooFragment()).thenReturn(mockFooFragment);
I was going through the documentation for junit tests but am unable to understand the need for defining tests as public.Could anyone share some info on this?
I read on https://github.com/junit-team/junit/blob/master/src/main/java/org/junit/Test.java
But am still not clear with the reason.
With is I meant why can't I write something as
#Test
private void testAdd(){ }
The JUnit framework calls your test methods from outside your test class. If your test methods are private, it won't be able to do that.
"Test classes, test methods, and lifecycle methods are not required to be public, but they must not be private."
Ref. the doc:
https://junit.org/junit5/docs/current/user-guide/#writing-tests-classes-and-methods
JUnit accesses your test methods by reflection. A SecurityManager can control access to private methods. Hence JUnit uses only public methods and fields for anything that is accessed by the framework.
In short: JUnit would fail to run private test methods if a SecurityManager is active that does not allow access to private methods.
try
#Test
public void testAdd(){ }
your testAdd method is private, it won't be able to do that.