I'm using MSTest (Visual Studio) unit tests to run Selenium to test the functionality of a website. What I want to do is to be able to pass some configuration variables to my tests. Things like, the server address, Selenium browser type...etc. I've been trying to use the TestContext, but there doesn't seem to be anyway other than using LoadTests to pass this information.
I also tried to use Spring.NET but that didn't seem to help either.
Any ideas on using TestContext? Or maybe something else.
Thanks
I thought I'd share what I ended up doing. I used Spring.net to inject the settings into a SeleniumSettings class like this;
<objects xmlns="http://www.springframework.net" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.springframework.net http://www.springframework.net/xsd/spring-objects.xsd" >
<object id="Settings" type="Sample.SeleniumSettings, Sample" singleton="true">
<property name="Server" value="localhost"/>
<property name="Port" value="4444"/>
<property name="Browser" value="*firefox" />
<property name="Url" value="http://website.com"/>
<property name="Email" value="sample#website.com"/>
</object>
</objects>
This will inject the SeleniumSettings into a Property called Settings on the Test class. The tests need to inherit from AbstractDependencyInjectionSpringContextTests, and implement;
protected override string[] ConfigLocations
The settings class looks like this;
public class SeleniumSettings
{
public const string DefaultEmailAddress = "sample#website.com";
public const string DefaultServerAddress = "localhost";
public const string DefaultProtocol = "http://";
public const string DefaultEndPoint = "/";
public string Server = DefaultServerAddress;
public int Port = 4444;
public string Browser = "*firefox";
public string Url = "http://localhost";
public string Email = DefaultEmailAddress;
public ISelenium factory()
{
return new DefaultSelenium(Server, Port, Browser, Url);
}
}
Then use SeleniumSettings.factory() to get the DefaultSelenium object to run your tests with.
The Selenium documentation has some info on this but it dives in too deep too fast, and skips the basic information needed to set this stuff up.
I tried to inject the DefaultSelenium object into the class originally but I was having issues with Selenium crashing internally. It didn't seem to like being created by the Spring.net injection.
I hope this helps someone.
Related
I'm trying to figure out a way to store certain properties in an encrypted form while they are at rest, and have them transparently decrypted before the property is injected into any beans, whether they are using #Value or they are defined in xml by setting properties. We're not using spring-boot yet. The property file would look like this:
db_password={aes}some_encrypted_value
I can see in the logs where the PropertySourcesPropertyResolver gets the value for my property. It should be pretty simple to create my own implementation of the PropertySourcesPropertyResolver.getProperty method that looks for the "{aes}" prefix, decrypting it if necessary, but I can't figure out how to use my subclass in my application.
Does anyone have any idea how I can get spring to use my implementation instead of Springs?
I initially tried to use the PropertySourcesPlaceholderConfigurer that worked for me in Spring 3, but I couldn't figure out how to make it work in spring 4. I also couldn't get the newer PropertySourcesPlaceholderConfigurer to work either.
Can anyone point me in the right direction?
We did it as follows with Spring 4.0.3 RELEASE
public class MyPropertyConfigurer extends PropertyPlaceHolderConfigurer{
protected void convertProperties(Properties props){
Enumeration<?> propertyNames = props.propertyNames();
while(propertyNames.hasMoreElements()){
String propName = (String)propertyNames.nextElement();
String propValue = (String)props.getProperty(propName);
if(propName.indexOf("db_password") != -1){
setPropertyValue(props,propName,propValue);
}
}
}
private void setPropertyValue(Properties props,String propName,String propValue){
String decryptedValue = PasswordUtility.decrypt(propValue);
props.setProperty(propName,decryptedValue);
}
}
In xml, it was configured as below
<bean id="dbPropertyPlaceholder" class="mypackage.MyPropertyConfigurer">
<property name="locations">
<list>
<value>file:myProp.properties</value>
<list>
</property>
</bean>
I am implementing a health check for my application.I have configured the classes for different logical systems in our application and have written methods which check for conditions across the environment like db count , logging errors , cpu process etc.
Now I have requirement where I have to check only certain conditions ie certain methods in the class according to the host.
What is the best way to access those methods via property file ? Please give your suggestions.
Thanks.
I don't like using reflection for this sort of thing. Its too easy for the property files to be changed and then the system starts generating funky error messages.
I prefer something straightforward like:
controlCheck.properties:
dbCount=true
logger=false
cpuProcess=true
Then the code is sort of like this (not real code):
Properties props = ... read property file
boolean isDbCount = getBoolean(props, "dbCount"); // returns false if prop not found
... repeat for all others ...
CheckUtilities.message("Version " + version); // Be sure status show version of this code.
if (isDbCount) {
CheckUtilities.checkDbCount(); // logs all statuses
}
if (... other properties one by one ...) {
... run the corresponding check ...
}
There are lots of ways to do it but this is simple and pretty much foolproof. All the configuration takes place in one properties file and all the code is in one place and easy for a Java programmer to comment out tests that are not relevant or to add new tests. If you add a new test, it doesn't automatically get run everywhere so you can roll it out on your own schedule and you can add a new test with a simple shell script, if you like that.
If its not running a particular test when you think it should, there's only two things to check:
Is it in the properties file?
Is the version of the code correct?
You can define different beans for every check you need:
<bean id="dbcountBean" class="DBCountHealtCheck" scope="prototype">
<!-- bean properties -->
</bean>
Then a bean for HealtCheck with operations bean injected:
<bean id="healtChecker" class="HealtChecker" scope="prototype">
<property name="activeChecker"><bean class="PropertiesFactoryBean>
<property name="location">file:path/to/file</property></bean>
</property>
<property name="dbCountCheck" ref="dbCountBean" />
<!-- other properties -->
</bean>
class HealtChecker {
private DBCountHealtCheck dbCountChecker;
private Properties activeChecker;
public void setDbcount(DBCountHealtCheck dbCountChecker) {
this.dbCountChecker = dbCountChecker;
}
public void setActiveChecker(Properties activeChecker) {
this.activeChecker = activeChecker;
}
public void check() {
if("true".equals(this.activeChecker.get("dbCount")) {
this.dbCountChecker.check();
}
}
If with this solution you can't reload file, in HealthChecker remove activeChecker a property public void setPropertiesLocation(URL propertiesLocation); let HealthChecker implements InitializingBean and load properties in afterPropertiesSet()
I have a Rest service using Resteasy (running on top of Appengine), with the following psuedo code:
#Path("/service")
public class MyService {
#GET
#Path("/start")
public Response startService() {
// Need to read properties file here.
// like: servletContext.getResourceAsStream("/WEB-INF/config.properties")
}
}
However its obvious that the servlet context cannot be accessed here.
And code like:
InputStream inputStream = this.getClass().getClassLoader()
.getResourceAsStream("/WEB-INF/config.properties");
Can't be executed within the Appengine environment.
EDIT:
I have tried doing it with Spring like:
appContext.xml
<bean class="org.springframework.beans.factory.config.PropertyPlaceholderConfigurer">
<property name="locations" value="/WEB-INF/auth.properties"/>
</bean>
Then, put this on the actual class fields:
#Path("/service")
public MyService{
#Autowired
#Value("${myservice.userid}")
private String username;
#Autowired
#Value("${myservice.passwd}")
private String password;
// Code omitted
}
However, part of the code of the MyService complains because the username and password was not "injected", I mean its empty although its on the auth.properties file
In RESTEasy you can easily inject Servlet context via #Context annotation: http://docs.jboss.org/resteasy/docs/2.3.1.GA/userguide/html_single/index.html#_Context
Examples can be found here: Rest easy and init params - how to access?
This should work if you put the file in /WEB-INF/classes/ (which, importantly, is on the classpath), specifying config.properties as a file at the top-level.
this.getClass().getClassLoader().getResourceAsStream("/config.properties");
See this similar question: How to load properties file in Google App Engine?
Edit: Now you've edited, I'll respond & answer the Spring-related question. So, put the auth.properties into /WEB-INF/classes/ , and then specify classpath as follows.
<bean class="org.springframework.beans.factory.config.PropertyPlaceholderConfigurer">
<property name="location" value="classpath:auth.properties"/>
</bean>
I have a Spring mvc (3.1.1) app, and I want to define conditions beyond what's available in RequestMapping. I have a couple of things I want to use it for.
First, it would be nice if I could show a different home page for different user types:
#Controller
public class HomepageController {
#RequestMapping(value = "/")
#CustomCondition(roles = Guest.class)
public String guestHome() { /*...*/ }
#RequestMapping(value = "/")
#CustomCondition(roles = Admin.class)
public String adminHome() { /*...*/ }
}
Second, I want the app to function both as a web site and as a REST service (e.g. for mobile apps), so I'd want to let the website access both html and json actions, and let the service (different subdomain) only access json actions (some kind of #CustomCondition(web = true) which only matches website urls)
Can this work for any of the two uses I'm planning?
I found very little documentation about custom conditions, but I did find one example that implements custom conditions which might be what I want, but it uses a #Configuration class instead of the XML configuration which I'm using and I don't want to move my entire spring xml definitions to a #Configuration class.
Can I define a customMethodCondition for RequestMappingHandlerMapping in the XML?
I tried subclassing RequestMappingHandlerMapping and override getCustomMethodCondition, to return my custom RequestCondition, but it didn't work - getMatchingCondition() in my condition didn't fire.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
UPDATE
I read a little more, and it looks like RequestMappingHandlerMapping is a new class (since ver 3.1).
What happens in my app is that the #Configuration that tries to override and thereby redefine the requestMappingHandlerMapping bean actually works, but the url mappings (#RequestMapping methods in #Controllers) seem to get processed twice, once by the subclass ExtendedRequestMappingHandlerMapping and once by the original RequestMappingHandlerMapping --first with a custom condition, and then again without it.
Bottom line is my custom conditions are simply ignored.
This is supposed to be an advanced pattern, but IMO it should be quite common...
Comments anyone?
Spring MVC already provides a mechanism for distinguishing between json and html, the RequestMapping annotation takes a consumes attribute which looks at the content type of the request...
// REST version, Content-type is "application/json"
#RequestMapping(value = "/", consumes = "application/json")
public void myRestService() {
...
// HTML version, Content-type is not "application/json"
#RequestMapping(value = "/", consumes = "!application/json")
public void myHtmlService() {
...
Another way to use the same url but have distinct methods is with the param or headers attribute...
// the url is /?role=guest
#RequestMapping(value = "/", param = "role=guest")
public void guestService() {
// the url is / with header role=admin
#RequestMapping(value = "/", headers = "role=admin")
public void adminService() {
I would think you would want distinct urls for security. Typically, with something like Spring Security, you would put all of the admin functionality under /admin and let the framework manage it all...
<http auto-config="true">
<intercept-url pattern="/admin/**" access="ROLE_ADMIN" />
...
Would this be sufficient for your use case(s)?
If you have extended RequestMappingHandlerMapping(say ExtendedRequestMappingHandlerMapping) you have to register this new mapping a little differently in application context xml.
You cannot use <mvc:annotation-driven/> to configure the Spring MVC as that defines it's own handlerMapping internally, you can instead do something along these lines(or follow the approach in the link with #Configuration that you have provided):
<bean name="handlerAdapter" class="org.springframework.web.servlet.mvc.method.annotation.RequestMappingHandlerAdapter">
<property name="webBindingInitializer">
<bean class="org.springframework.web.bind.support.ConfigurableWebBindingInitializer">
<property name="conversionService" ref="conversionService"></property>
<property name="validator">
<bean class="org.springframework.validation.beanvalidation.LocalValidatorFactoryBean"/>
</property>
</bean>
</property>
<property name="messageConverters">
<list>
<bean class="org.springframework.http.converter.ByteArrayHttpMessageConverter"></bean>
<bean class="org.springframework.http.converter.StringHttpMessageConverter"></bean>
<bean class="org.springframework.http.converter.ResourceHttpMessageConverter"></bean>
<bean class="org.springframework.http.converter.xml.SourceHttpMessageConverter"></bean>
<bean class="org.springframework.http.converter.xml.XmlAwareFormHttpMessageConverter"></bean>
<bean class="org.springframework.http.converter.xml.Jaxb2RootElementHttpMessageConverter"></bean>
<bean class="org.springframework.http.converter.json.MappingJacksonHttpMessageConverter"></bean>
</list>
</property>
</bean>
<bean name="handlerMapping" class="..ExtendedRequestMappingHandlerMapping">
</bean>
This should ensure that your mapping takes effect and will ensure that the appropriate handler method is found by the handlerAdapter component.
I'm wondering that if there is a way for binding a spring bean's property to another bean's property so if any change on binded property occurs in runtime, what i expect is referencing bean's property also changes. I'll explain more with a little code snippet.
<bean id="johnHome" class="example.Contact">
<property name="phone" value="5551333" />
</bean>
<bean id="johnWork" class="example.Contact">
<property name="phone">
<util:property-path path="johnHome.phone" />
</property>
</bean>
OK. This works at initial bean wiring but what i exactly want is to bind property so if the property changes at runtime the referencing bean also changes. If i should like to show with a metaphor it will seem like this.
<bean id="johnHome" class="example.Contact">
<property name="phone" value="5551333" />
</bean>
<bean id="johnWork" class="example.Contact">
<property name="phone">
<util:bind path="johnHome.phone" />
</property>
</bean>
Am i overloading the spring's concept too much or is this possible without a lot of tricks?
Thanks..
Simplest way - make that property a bean which is referenced by the two other beans, e.g. for a String value have a StringHolder class:
public class StringHolder {
private String value;
// setter and getter elided due to author's lazyness
}
The whole idea behind Spring is (was?) to keep a clean object-oriented design consisting of plain old java objects and use the spring framework to handle the tedious object creation. As for AOP, this should only handle cross-cutting concerns. I'm not at all convinced that this is one of those cases where AOP is a good idea. Your application relies on the behaviour of these phone numbers getting synced to each other, it's one of the main functionalities. As such, your design should reflect this.
Probably the most logical way to handle this specific problem is to make phone numbers their own class (which is also handy if you ever want to distinguish different types of phone numbers).
If you have a PhoneNumber object which takes the number as a constructor argument the mapping becomes trivial:
<bean id="johnFirstPhone" class="example.PhoneNumber">
<constructor-arg value="5551333" />
</bean>
<bean id="johnHome" class="example.Contact">
<property name="phone" ref="johnFirstPhone" />
</bean>
<bean id="johnWork" class="example.Contact">
<property name="phone" ref="johnFirstPhone" />
</bean>
Of course whether you'd map it like this in a static file is another matter, but the thing is in this situation you pretty clearly just need a reference/pointer.
I don't think what you're doing is possible in Spring 2.5. It may be possible in Spring 3, using the new expression syntax, but I don't think so.
Even if it were, it'd be confusing, I think. Better to stick your shared value into its own class and inject an instance of that class into the other beans that need to share it.
I can think of two possibilities.
One is (it is kind of a hack), if you don't have very many beans that need to be linked like the ones in your example, you could inject johnWork into the johnHome bean, and in johnHome.setPhone you could update the johnWork phone property, something like:
public class Contact {
private Contact myWorkContact;
private String phone;
public void setPhone(String phone) {
this.phone = phone;
if (this.myWorkContact != null) {
this.myWorkContact.setPhone(phone);
}
}
public void setWorkContact(Contact c) {
this.myWorkContact = c;
}
}
Or you could have HomeContact and WorkContact both extend a class Contact and do the same injection with that.
If you have tons and tons of beans that will need this (like if your application actually IS dealing with contact information), with AOP (you'll need AspectJ for the example given) I think you could do something like this (it will be a bit memory intensive if you get a ton of objects, but you can see how something like it would work):
Warning: this actually got complicated fast, but I'm pretty sure it would work after you worked out a few kinks
public class Contact {
...
private String phone;
private String name;
private Integer id;
public Contact(Integer id, String name, String phone) {
this.phone = phone;
this.name = name;
this.id = id;
}
public void setPhone(String phone) {
this.phone = phone.
}
//Other getters, setters, etc
...
}
#Aspect
public class ContactPhoneSynchronizer {
//there is probably a more efficient way to keep track of contact objects
//but right now i can't think of one, because for things like a tree, we need to
//be able to identify objects with the same name (John Smith), but that
//have different unique ids, since we only want one of each Contact object
//in this cache.
private List<Contact> contacts = Collections.synchronizedList(new ArrayList<Contact>());
/**
This method will execute every time someone makes a new Contact object.
If it already exists, return it from the cache in this.contacts. Otherwise,
proceed with the object construction and put that object in the cache.
**/
#Around("call(public Contact.new(Integer,String,String)) && args(id,name,phone)")
public Object cacheNewContact(ProceedingJoinPoint joinPoint, Integer id, String name, String phone) {
Contact contact = null;
for (Contact c : contacts) {
if (id.equals(c.getId()) {
contact = c;
break;
}
}
if (contact == null) {
contact = (Contact) joinPoint.proceed();
this.contacts.add(contact);
}
return contact;
}
/**This should execute every time a setPhone() method is executed on
a contact object. The method looks for all Contacts of the same
name in the cache and then sets their phone number to the one being passed
into the original target class.
Because objects are passed by reference until you do a reassociation,
calling c.setPhone on the object in the cache should update the actual
instance of the object in memory, so whoever has that reference will
get the updated information.
**/
#After("execution(example.Contact.setPhone(String) && args(phone)")
public void syncContact(JoinPoint joinPoint, String phone) {
Contact contact = joinPoint.getTarget();
for (Contact c : this.contacts) {
if (c.getName().equals(contact.getName()) {
c.setPhone(phone);
}
}
}
}
Again, there is probably 100 ways you could optimize this, since I'm typing it off the top of my head; that is, if you wanted to go this route in the first place. In theory it should work but I haven't tested it at all.
Anyway, Happy Springing!