Spring Integration: Automated integration tests with embedded Broker? - spring

Is it in a way possible to, say in memory, start a broker that can be used to execute automated test cases using Spring Integration MQTT?
I've tried achieving this with ActiveMQ (following https://docs.spring.io/spring-boot/docs/current/reference/html/boot-features-messaging.html) but somehow didn't succeed, maybe anyone has a short working example?

It's not Spring Integration (Spring Boot) responsibility to provide some embedded broker for such a protocol. If there is one, we could consider to implement an auto-configuration on the matter , similar to what we do for embedded RDBMS, JMS and MongoDB. You really need to consult ActiveMQ documentation.
Looks like we can do it like this in the test class:
private static BrokerService activeMQBroker;
...
#BeforeClass
public static void setup() throws Exception {
activeMQBroker = new BrokerService();
activeMQBroker.addConnector("mqtt://localhost:1883");
activeMQBroker.setPersistent(false);
activeMQBroker.setUseJmx(false);
activeMQBroker.start();
}
I didn't try it, but this is exactly what I do to test against STOMP.

Related

Configuration Bean in Quarkus

This is regarding CDI spec of quarkus. Would want to understand is there a configuration bean for quarkus? How does one do any sort of configuration in quarkus?
If I get it right the original question is about #Configuration classes that can contain #Bean definitions. If so then CDI producer methods and fields annotated with #javax.enterprise.inject.Produces are the corresponding alternative.
Application configuration is a completely different question though and Jay is right that the Quarkus configuration reference is the ultimate source of information ;-).
First of all reading how cdi spec of quarkus differs from spring is important.
Please refer this guide:
https://quarkus.io/guides/cdi-reference
The learnings from this guide is there is #Produces which is an alternative to #Configuration bean in Quarkus.
Let us take an example for libs that might require a configuration through code. Example: Microsoft Azure IOT Service Client.
public class IotHubConfiguration {
#ConfigProperty(name="iothub.device.connection.string")
String connectionString;
private static final Logger LOG = Logger.getLogger(IotHubConfiguration.class);
#Produces
public ServiceClient getIot() throws URISyntaxException, IOException {
LOG.info("Inside Service Client bean");
if(connectionString==null) {
LOG.info("Connection String is null");
throw new RuntimeException("IOT CONNECTION STRING IS NULL");
}
ServiceClient serviceClient = new ServiceClient(connectionString, IotHubServiceClientProtocol.AMQPS);
serviceClient.open();
LOG.info("opened Service Client Successfully");
return serviceClient;
}
For all libs vertically intergrated with quarkus application.properties can be used and then you will get a driver obj for that broker/dbs available directly through #Inject in your #applicationScoped/#Singleton bean So, Why is that?
To Simplify and Unify Configuration
To Make Sure no code is required for configuring anything i.e. database config, broker config , quarkus config etc.
This drastically reduces the amount of code written for configuring and also Junits needed to cover that code.
Let us take an example where kafka producer configuration needs to be added: in application.properties
kafka.bootstrap.servers=${KAFKA_BROKER_URL:localhost:9092}
mp.messaging.outgoing.incoming_kafka_topic_test.topic=${KAFKA_INPUT_TOPIC_FOR_IOT_HUB:input_topic1}
mp.messaging.outgoing.incoming_kafka_topic_test.connector=smallrye-kafka
mp.messaging.outgoing.incoming_kafka_topic_test.value.deserializer=org.apache.kafka.common.serialization.StringDeserializer
mp.messaging.outgoing.incoming_kafka_topic_test.key.deserializer=org.apache.kafka.common.serialization.StringDeserializer
mp.messaging.outgoing.incoming_kafka_topic_test.health-readiness-enabled=true
For full blown project reference: https://github.com/JayGhiya/QuarkusExperiments/tree/initial_version_v1/KafkaProducerQuarkus
Quarkus References for Config:
https://quarkus.io/guides/config-reference
Example for reactive sql config: https://quarkus.io/guides/reactive-sql-clients
Now let us talk about a bonus feature that quarkus provides which improves developer experience by atleast an order of magnitude that is profile driven development and testing.
Quarkus provides three profiles:
dev - Activated when in development mode (i.e. quarkus:dev)
test - Activated when running tests
prod - The default profile when not running in development or test
mode
Let us just say that in the given example you wanted to have different topics for development and different topics for production. Let us achieve that!
%dev.mp.messaging.outgoing.incoming_kafka_topic_test.topic=${KAFKA_INPUT_TOPIC_FOR_IOT_HUB:input_topic1}
%prod.mp.messaging.outgoing.incoming_kafka_topic_test.topic=${KAFKA_INPUT_TOPIC_FOR_IOT_HUB:prod_topic}
This is how simple it is. This is extremely useful in cases where your deployments run with ssl enabled brokers/dbs etc and for dev purposes you have unsecure local brokers/dbs. This is a game changer.

Spring Integration RedisLockRegistry example

I want to use Spring Integration RedisLockRegistry . I have some questions about Spring Integration RedisLockRegistry.
Can I use the redisLockRegistry as a Spring bean ? it means my application just a single redisLockRegistry.
I see the RedisLockRegistry implement ExpirableLockRegistry in the version 5.0,
Should I need run the expireUnusedOlderThan method?
I met the same questions and start analyze spring code. So from sources I can state that:
Yes you can create and configure it as a bean of any instance of LockRegistry like RedisLockRegistry, JdbcLockRegistry. For test purposes I'd like even use PassThruLockRegistry
I tried to find any invocation of expireUnusedOlderThan inside Spring without success.
So I have created simple scheduler as following:
#Autowired
private ExpirableLockRegistry lockRegistry;
#Scheduled(fixedDelay=50000)
public void cleanObsolete(){
lockRegistry.expireUnusedOlderThan(50000);
}

Spring boot Artemis embedded broker behaviour

Morning all,
I've been struggling lately with the spring-boot-artemis-starter.
My understanding of its spring-boot support was the following:
set spring.artemis.mode=embedded and, like tomcat, spring-boot will instanciate a broker reachable through tcp (server mode). The following command should be successful: nc -zv localhost 61616
set spring.artmis.mode=native and spring-boot will only configure the jms template according to the spring.artemis.* properties (client mode).
The client mode works just fine with a standalone artemis server on my machine.
Unfortunatelly, I could never manage to reach the tcp port in server mode.
I would be grateful if somebody confirms my understanding of the embedded mode.
Thank you for tour help
After some digging I noted that the implementation provided out of the box by the spring-boot-starter-artemis uses org.apache.activemq.artemis.core.remoting.impl.invm.InVMAcceptorFactory acceptor. I'm wondering if that's not the root cause (again I'm by no means an expert).
But it appears that there is a way to customize artemis configuration.
Therefore I tried the following configuration without any luck:
#SpringBootApplication
public class MyBroker {
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
SpringApplication.run(MyBroker.class, args);
}
#Autowired
private ArtemisProperties artemisProperties;
#Bean
public ArtemisConfigurationCustomizer artemisConfigurationCustomizer() {
return configuration -> {
try {
configuration.addAcceptorConfiguration("netty", "tcp://localhost:" + artemisProperties.getPort());
} catch (Exception e) {
throw new RuntimeException("Failed to add netty transport acceptor to artemis instance");
}
};
}
}
You just have to add a Connector and an Acceptor to your Artemis Configuration. With Spring Boot Artemis starter Spring creates a Configuration bean which will be used for EmbeddedJMS configuration. You can see this in ArtemisEmbeddedConfigurationFactory class where an InVMAcceptorFactory will be set for the configuration. You can edit this bean and change Artemis behaviour through custom ArtemisConfigurationCustomizer bean which will be sucked up by Spring autoconfig and be applied to the Configuration.
An example config class for your Spring Boot application:
import org.apache.activemq.artemis.api.core.TransportConfiguration;
import org.apache.activemq.artemis.core.remoting.impl.netty.NettyAcceptorFactory;
import org.apache.activemq.artemis.core.remoting.impl.netty.NettyConnectorFactory;
import org.springframework.boot.autoconfigure.jms.artemis.ArtemisConfigurationCustomizer;
import org.springframework.context.annotation.Configuration;
#Configuration
public class ArtemisConfig implements ArtemisConfigurationCustomizer {
#Override
public void customize(org.apache.activemq.artemis.core.config.Configuration configuration) {
configuration.addConnectorConfiguration("nettyConnector", new TransportConfiguration(NettyConnectorFactory.class.getName()));
configuration.addAcceptorConfiguration(new TransportConfiguration(NettyAcceptorFactory.class.getName()));
}
}
My coworker and I had the exact same problem as the documentation on this link (chapter Artemis Support) says nothing about adding an individual ArtemisConfigurationCustomizer - Which is sad because we realized that without this Customizer our Spring Boot App would start and act as if everything was okay but actually it wouldn't do anything.
We also realized that without the Customizer the application.properties file is not beeing loaded so no matter what host or port you mentioned there it would not count.
After adding the Customizer as stated by the two examples it worked without a problem.
Here some results that we figured out:
It only loaded the application.properties after configuring an ArtemisConfigurationCustomizer
You don't need the broker.xml anymore with an embedded spring boot artemis client
Many examples showing the use of Artemis use a "in-vm" protocol while we just wanted to use the netty tcp protocol so we needed to add it into the configuration
For me the most important parameter was pub-sub-domain as I was using topics and not queues. If you are using topics this parameter needs to be set to true or the JMSListener won't read the messages.
See this page: stackoverflow jmslistener-usage-for-publish-subscribe-topic
When using a #JmsListener it uses a DefaultMessageListenerContainer
which extends JmsDestinationAccessor which by default has the
pubSubDomain set to false. When this property is false it is
operating on a queue. If you want to use topics you have to set this
properties value to true.
In Application.properties:
spring.jms.pub-sub-domain=true
If anyone is interested in the full example I have uploaded it to my github:
https://github.com/CorDharel/SpringBootArtemisServerExample
The embedded mode starts the broker as part of your application. There is no network protocol available with such setup, only InVM calls are allowed. The auto-configuration exposes the necessary pieces you can tune though I am not sure you can actually have a TCP/IP channel with the embedded mode.

Combine Jersey with Tyrus

I have a Jersey JAX-RS application which runs on a Grizzly instance:
public class Application {
public static final String BASE_URI = "http://127.0.0.1:8080/rest";
public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException {
ResourceConfig rc = new ResourceConfig().packages("my.package.rest");
HttpServer server = GrizzlyHttpServerFactory.createHttpServer(URI.create(BASE_URI), rc);
System.out.println("Server started, press any key to stop.");
System.in.read();
server.shutdownNow();
}
}
inside my.package.rest there are JAX-RS annotated resources. I'd like to add websocket annotated (#ServerEndpoint, #OnOpen, #OnMessage, etc.) resources using Tyrus on the same server instance (say in "http://127.0.0.1:8080/websocket") but all the documentation I was able to find shows how to start a standalone websocket server using Tyrus + a Grizzly container, not combined with Jersey. I'm looking for something like:
server.getServerConfiguration().addHttpHandler(new SomeTyrusHttpHandler("/websocket"));
but I can't find anything similar to SomeTyrusHttpHandler. How can I combine Jersey and Tyrus in a single Grizzly server?
good question, but there is currently no good answer for this one. You still can do that, but it would require to deep dive into Grizzly internals; Tyrus is registered by an addon (see WebSocketAddOn) and it can be combined with Jersey way of registering into that container.
Please have in mind that integrating these two frameworks together is not trivial challenge - running them in a single container is a first step, but there are other things which need to be taken care of, like "instance provider", lifecycle adjustment, etc. I believe this topic exceeds the scope of one SO answer - you can expect blogpost from me or some other Tyrus/Jersey team member about this. (I'll post it here once that is done).
Anyway, I would recommend to take more conservative approach and use some lightweight container which supports Servlet 3.1; that should require far less work on your side and you'll have standard Servlet runtime / lifecycle.

Unit testing with Spring and the Jersey Test Framework

I'm writing some JUnit-based integration tests for a RESTful web service using JerseyTest. The JAX-RS resource classes use Spring and I'm currently wiring everything together with a test case like the following code example:
public class HelloResourceTest extends JerseyTest
{
#Override
protected AppDescriptor configure()
{
return new WebAppDescriptor.Builder("com.helloworld")
.contextParam( "contextConfigLocation", "classpath:helloContext.xml")
.servletClass(SpringServlet.class)
.contextListenerClass(ContextLoaderListener.class)
.requestListenerClass(RequestContextListener.class)
.build();
}
#Test
public void test()
{
// test goes here
}
}
This works for wiring the servlet, however, I'd like to be able to share the same context in my test case so that my tests can have access to mock objects, DAOs, etc., which seems to call for SpringJUnit4ClassRunner. Unfortunately, SpringJUnit4ClassRunner creates a separate, parallel application context.
So, anyone know how can I create an application context that is shared between the SpringServlet and my test case?
Thanks!
Override JerseyTest.configure like so:
#Override
protected Application configure() {
ResourceConfig rc = new JerseyConfig();
rc.register(SpringLifecycleListener.class);
rc.register(RequestContextFilter.class);
rc.property("contextConfigLocation", "classpath:helloContext.xml");
return rc;
}
For me the SpringServlet was not required, but if you need that you may be able to call rc.register for that too.
I found a couple of ways to resolve this problem.
First up, over at the geek#riffpie blog there is an excellent description of this problem along with an elegant extension of JerseyTest to solve it:
Unit-testing RESTful Jersey services glued together with Spring
Unfortunately, I'm using a newer version of Spring and/or Jersey (forget which) and couldn't quite get it to work.
In my case, I ended up avoiding the problem by dropping the Jersey Test Framework and using embedded Jetty along with the Jersey Client. This actually made better sense in my situation anyway since I was already using embedded Jetty in my application. yves amsellem has a nice example of unit testing with the Jersey Client and embedded Jetty. For Spring integration, I used a variation of Trimbo's Jersey Tests with Embedded Jetty and Spring

Resources