This question may be a bit nebulous, so please bear with me.
I am using Visual Studio, and I am new to the entire realm of unit testing. One thing I do a lot though is use Unit Testing as a quick and dirty ad-hoc "administration ui" at times when I need to just TRY things, but don't have time to make an actual admin system.
What I mean is ... sometimes I just want to get some data thrown into my database to see how it looks on a page. So I'll make a dirty unit test...
[Fact]
public void install_some_test_data(){
using(var database = RavenDocumentStore()){
using(var session = database.OpenSession()){
// create some objects
// add some objects
// save some objects
}
}
}
Nowhere in here have I really cared about "testing", I just like the fact that I can right click and say "Run it" and it'll go, without launching up the program, without having to have a lot of interaction, etc. etc.
So my question is this;
Is this okay to do? I realize this isn't how a program should be long term managed, but I was scolded for doing this by another developer simply because I wanted to quickly show them how something they wanted to see worked. Is there really a problem with using these convenient tools as simpler ways of running commands against my database that can give me immediate feedback on whether it passed or failed?
My followup question to that is this; I have had to actually search pretty hard to find a unit test runner that lets me run individual methods instead of running every single unit test in a class. Is this normal? This whole thing kind of confuses me in general. Even when I do use tests for actually testing, why would I always want to run EVERY test every time? Isn't that extremely wasteful of time and resources? How do you control the order that they run in? This seems even more imperative when tests have to depend on some data to exist before they can run appropriately.
At the moment, I am using xunit and then the unit test runner in ReSharper, but out of the box, Visual Studio doesn't seem to let me run unit tests individually, just as huge batches in a single class.
Am I the only person confused by this?
Sure, it's actually very easy to execute a single unit test (without an external test runner required).
Go to TEST -> Windows -> Test Explorer
Now you'll see a window like this
Now you can rightclick on the test you want to execute and select 'run selected methods'.
As to your other question: it's hard to distinguish what you are asking. Are you demonstrating a proof of concept with a unit test? How does this test replace your admin panel?
Just put your cursor on a Test function name. Then go to Test -> Run Selected Scope (or similar - the name changes by context). That test should execute and also create a test list for you automatically.
Related
We have a legacy code base with some unit tests still coupled by global state (static variables etc.). To find them, I need to know the exact execution order the tests ran when I ran them via VS test explorer.
Is there a way to log execution order in VS test explorer?
I know that vstest.console does output/log the execution order but then I need to narrow down the subset of tests which is very inconvenient with vstest. In VS test runner, i can just run subsets.
I also know that there are other tools (like resharper test runner) but this is also not an option.
Not out of the box that I am aware of, but I guess you can find ways to log it, like have a global counter that you increment in a before method.
But, since the order of the tests are non deterministic by design I am not sure how valuable that information is.
If you know what test are coupled then run those as Ordered Tests or use a different test traits to control how you execute those test. The best option is of course to break their external dependencies.
I need to generate some delays to make a load test more realistic. In Visual Studio I have found 2 methods that delay execution of a transaction in a loadtest:
Convert to code
or
Set "Think Time" to first request in the transaction
What would be the best practice here. I am not completely sure that Visual Studio executes these test in sequencional manner, so 2nd option might return false results.
On the other hand, I would loose the ability to change settings from Visual Studios UI, if I generate code from a recorded test. And that increases time spent editing the test quite a bit.
Is there a better way than any of my methods?
I believe that the second way is more safier.
Just have in mind that the Think Time is aplied to each Test Run not to each contained Test. So, if you have a Load Test which contains more than one Tests in the Test Mix the Think Time will apllied at the end of the test run (when all included tests were completed).
Also, if you have more than one virtual user, since it's a load test, Think Time is applied to each user seperately. If, for example, you have 100 user then they will concurently start the tests but they may not finish them at the same time. Each user will wait according to the Think Time before starting the second test without waiting for the others to complete their first test.
Has anyone seen this very strange behaviour before?
I've got a solution whith 70 unit tests. All of them pass on my dev machine.
Whenever I commit my changes, our continuous integration process kicks in and the build box will eventually run the same 70 unit tests.
There is only ONE test in the build box that fails all the time.
The error is in one line that only gets a record from our unit test db. (I know it sucks having unit test to rely on data but please don't focus on this as it's not relevant now)
The most weird thing is when I logon myself to the build box, open up the same visual studio solution and manually kick off the unit tests. Result: ALL PASS!
Has anyone ever had this weird situation? I'm guessing there is some weird thing going on with Cruise Control.NET and MSTest?
Surely your unit test runner produces a good log that shows the exact exception message or error? It's kinda pointless to guess at it but an "access denied" kind of error would be an obvious candidate. Setup whatever dbase engine you use (you forgot to mention that too) to give the user account that runs the tests on the build grunt access to the tables.
As said in another answer, it doesn't make too much sense to guess about it when there are detailed logs around...
But because I had this situation several times, here's a guess anyway:
The account, which is used by the CI server to run the tests, may not have appropriate permissions in the database. This would also explain, why the same test succeeds when you run it manually (then with your user account)...
HTH!
Thomas
thanks for your inputs but it wasn't anything related to credentials at all.
I've found out that other tests that were running before that particular one were leaving my unit test database in an inconsistent state, therefore causing errors to the test in question.
It's not a good practice to have your unit tests relying on data, so unless you are extremely bound to it like myself, this is what a recommend to everyone: DO NOT RELY ON DATA TO DO YOUR UNIT TESTING !!!! Make sure you have all the good stuff in place, specifically a good IOC/dependency injector container so your classes are loosely coupled and you can mock up any interface you may want to unit test easily!
If you have system tests that you want to run on your build server or in general, want to be able to run correctly on any machine, including your own, then you must make sure that their states are independent.
In your case, you should have each test init prepare the DB it uses (either by copying a file-based DB or by emptying/filling a service-based DB). Each test should also attempt to undo its changes (delete file or empty DB) but not assume that other tests have done so successfully.
is there a way? do I have to wait for building every time I start the test? I want to build from visual studio not from test
thanks
Any time your code changes and you run your test it is going to do a build... so technically you can run your test over and over again and they will only build the first time, but once you run your test why would you run them again without making a code change?
Couple of things that I use that make your test run faster are:
Check the box for "Only build startup projects and dependencies on Run", located Options->Projects and Solution->Build and Run.
Learn the short cut keys
a. "Ctrl+R, T" Runs test in current context, so if your cursor is inside a test method it will only run that test, but when you do it inside of a non test class it will run all of your test.
b. "Crtl+R, Ctrl+T" Debug test same except debug.
c. Others can be found here, those are 2008 if you need to reference others you can find them via google.
Make sure your test are not calling the database or other time intensive resources, use mocking and stubbing.
Run only small sets of test, ie if I am working in a service class I run only the service class test.
Edit: Reading your question again if you want to build and not from a test you can just go to the menu and click Build->Build Solution or press F6. Also it would be helpful if you indicated which version of visual studio you are using because 2010 is different in the sense that you have to click refresh. Either way are you able to clarify?
This is an old question, but I keep seeing people ask it and the issue is still true in VS2017, and it's also true of other test frameworks (Xunit, etc) run from within VS.
I don't know how to make VS stop building all the time. But I do know how to circumvent the compile - run your tests from a console runner, not from within VS. If you're using ReSharper, it has one.
If you aren't using ReSharper, for MSTest, you can start here. https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms182489.aspx
If you aren't using ReSharper, for XUnit, you can start here. https://xunit.github.io/docs/getting-started-desktop.html#add-xunit-runner-ref
Any changes to source code cause compilation, because in order to run tests VS needs up to date DLL with tests.
If you have already compiled project then you can run test multiple times without compilation.
PS: I run MSTest using TestDriven.NET as for me it is faster.
I have a Delphi application that has many dependencies, and it would be difficult to refactor it to use DUnit (it's huge), so I was thinking about using something like AutomatedQA's TestComplete to do the testing from the front-end UI.
My main problem is that a bugfix or new feature sometimes breaks old code that was previously tested (manually), and used to work.
I have setup the application to use command-line switches to open-up a specific form that could be tested, and I can create a set of values and clicks needed to be done.
But I have a few questions before I do anything drastic... (and before purchasing anything)
Is it worth it?
Would this be a good way to test?
The result of the test should in my database (Oracle), is there an easy way in testcomplete to check these values (multiple fields in multiple tables)?
I would need to setup a test database to do all the automated testing, would there be an easy way to automate re-setting the test db? Other than drop user cascade, create user,..., impdp.
Is there a way in testcomplete to specify command-line parameters for an exe?
Does anybody have any similar experiences.
I would suggest you plan to use both DUnit and something like TestComplete, as they each serve a different purpose.
DUnit is great for Unit Testing, but is difficult to use for overall application testing and UI testing.
TestComplete is one of the few automated testing products that actually has support for Delphi, and our QA Engineer tells me that their support is very good.
Be aware though that setting up automated testing is a large and time-consuming job. If you rigourously apply unit testing and auomated UI testing, you could easily end up with more test code than production code.
With a large (existing) application you're in a difficult situation with regards to implementing automated testing.
My recommendation is to set up Unit Testing first, in conjunction with an automated build server. Every time someone checks anything in to source control, the Unit Tests get run automatically. DO NOT try to set up unit tests for everything straight up - it's just too big an effort for an existing application. Just remember to create unit tests whenever you are adding new functionality, and whenever you are about to make changes. I also strongly suggest that whenever a bug is reported that you create a unit test that reproduces the bug BEFORE you fix it.
I'm in a similar situation. (Large app with lots of dependencies). There is almost no automated testing. But there is a big wish to fix this issue. And that's why we are going to tackle some of the problems with each new release.
We are about to release the first version of the new product. And the first signs are good. But it was a lot of work. So next release we sure need some way to automate the test process. That's why I'm already introducing unit tests. Although due to the dependencies, these are no real unit tests, but you have to start somewhere.
Things we have done:
Introduced a more OO approach, because a big part the code was still procedural.
Moved stuff between files.
Eliminated dependencies where possible.
But there is far more on the list of requirements, ensuring enough work for the entire team until retirement.
And maybe I'm a bit strange, but cleaning up code can be fun. Refactoring without unit tests is a dangerous undertaking, especially if there are a lot of side effects. We used pair programming to avoid stupid mistakes. And lots of test sessions. But in the end we have cleaner code, and the amount of new bugs introduced was extremely low.
Oh, and be sure that you know this is an expensive process. It takes lots of time. And you have to fight the tendency to tackle more than one problem in a row.
I can't answer everything, as I've never used testcomplete, but I can answer some of those.
1 - Yes. Regression testing is worth it. It's quite embarrassing to you as a developer when the client comes back to you when you've broken something that used to work. Always a good idea to make sure everything that used to work, still does.
4 - Oracle has something called Flashback which lets you create a restore point in the database. After you've done your testing you can just jump back to this restore point. You can write scripts to use it too, FLASHBACK DATABASE TO TIMESTAMP (FEB-12-2009, 00:00:00);, etc
We're looking at using VMWare to isolate some of our testing.
You can start from a saved snapshot, so you always have a consistent environment and local database state.
VMWare actions can be scripted, so you can automatically install your latest build from a network location, launch your tests and shut down afterwards.
Is it worth it?
Probably. Setting up and maintaining tests can be a big job, but when you have them, tests can be executed very easily and consistently. If your project is evolving, some kind of test suite is very helpful.
Would this be a good way to test?
I would say that proper DUnit test suite is better first step. However if you have large codebase which is not engineered for testing, setting up functional tests is even bigger pain than setting up GUI tests.
The result of the test should in my database (Oracle), is there an easy
way in testcomplete to check these values (multiple fields in multiple tables)?
TestComplete has ADO and BDE interface. Or you can use OLE interface in VBScript to access everything that's available.
Is there a way in testcomplete to specify command-line parameters for
an exe?
Yes.
One way to introduse unittesting in an (old) application could be to have a "Start database" (like the "Flashback" feature described by Rich Adams).
The program som unittest using DUnit to control the GUI.
Se the "GUI testing with DUnit" on http://delphixtreme.com/wordpress/?p=181
Every time the test is started by restoring to "Start database", because, then a known set of data, can be used.
I would need to setup a test database to do all the automated
testing, would there be an easy way to
automate re-setting the test db?
Use transactions: perform a rollback when the test completed. This should revert everything to the initial state.
Recommended reading:
http://xunitpatterns.com/