I have several Windsor Installers at my ASP.NET MVC application. They register controllers and services. Most of them depend on ICurrentService.
Controller example:
public DataStructureController(
IMapper mapper,
DataEntityService dataEntityService,
FieldDefinitionService fieldDefinitionService,
CompanyService companyService,
ICurrentService currentService,
SelectListService selectListService,
EnumResourceService enumResourceService,
WebPreprocessService preprocessService)
: base(preprocessService)
{
// Initialise variables code here
}
Service example:
public DataEntityService(DataEntitySpec specification, ICurrentService currentService)
: base(specification)
{
// Initialise variables code here
}
In my test classes I have a method, that I call once in [TestInitialize] marked method, or on/many times in [TestMethod] marked methods:
private static ICurrentService MockCurrentUser(User user)
{
var currentUserSerivceMock = new Mock<ICurrentService>(MockBehavior.Strict);
currentUserSerivceMock.Setup(x => x.UserId).Returns(user.Id);
currentUserSerivceMock.Setup(x => x.CompanyId).Returns(user.CompanyProfile.Id);
return currentUserSerivceMock.Object;
}
I want to replace ICurrentService implementation when calling the container.Resolve<> method, because it depends on HttpContext, that isn't available when unit tests run. Is it possible and how do I do it with minimum code?
You can simply create a fake HttpContext:
HttpContext.Current = new HttpContext(
new HttpRequest(null, "http://tempuri.org", null),
new HttpResponse(null));
And then in your tests:
[SetUp]
public void SetUp()
{
HttpContext.Current = new HttpContext(
new HttpRequest(null, "http://tempuri.org", null),
new HttpResponse(null));
}
[TearDown]
public void TearDown()
{
HttpContext.Current = null;
}
*Reference: http://caioproiete.net/en/fake-mock-httpcontext-without-any-special-mocking-framework/
Register your implementation as a Fallback with Windsor. Then in your test register your mock instance. That or just build up a dedicated instance of the container for your test and register what you like.
Related
I have many AOP libraries that use Castle DynamicProxy with Autofac DI container for logging, auditing, transaction control, etc.
I wonder if there is a way to declare interceptors using the default .NET Core DI container. It will be good to have this flexibility since many .NET Core projects don't use Autofac.
Yes, you can use DynamicProxy using Core DI. I've written up a blog post explaining it at http://codethug.com/2021/03/17/Caching-with-Attributes-in-DotNet-Core5/, but here is the code for it:
Create an attribute
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = false)]
public class CacheAttribute : Attribute
{
public int Seconds { get; set; } = 30;
}
Create an interceptor (requires Castle.Core nuget package)
public class CacheInterceptor : IInterceptor
{
private IMemoryCache _memoryCache;
public CacheInterceptor(IMemoryCache memoryCache)
{
_memoryCache = memoryCache;
}
// Create a cache key using the name of the method and the values
// of its arguments so that if the same method is called with the
// same arguments in the future, we can find out if the results
// are cached or not
private static string GenerateCacheKey(string name,
object[] arguments)
{
if (arguments == null || arguments.Length == 0)
return name;
return name + "--" +
string.Join("--", arguments.Select(a =>
a == null ? "**NULL**" : a.ToString()).ToArray());
}
public void Intercept(IInvocation invocation)
{
var cacheAttribute = invocation.MethodInvocationTarget
.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(CacheAttribute), false)
.FirstOrDefault() as CacheAttribute;
// If the cache attribute is added ot this method, we
// need to intercept this call
if (cacheAttribute != null)
{
var cacheKey = GenerateCacheKey(invocation.Method.Name,
invocation.Arguments);
if (_memoryCache.TryGetValue(cacheKey, out object value))
{
// The results were already in the cache so return
// them from the cache instead of calling the
// underlying method
invocation.ReturnValue = value;
}
else
{
// Get the result the hard way by calling
// the underlying method
invocation.Proceed();
// Save the result in the cache
var options = new MemoryCacheEntryOptions
{
AbsoluteExpirationRelativeToNow =
new System.TimeSpan(hours: 0, minutes: 0,
seconds: cacheAttribute.Seconds)
};
_memoryCache.Set(cacheKey, invocation.ReturnValue,
options);
}
}
else
{
// We don't need to cache the results,
// nothing to see here
invocation.Proceed();
}
}
}
Add an extension method to help register classes in DI:
public static void AddProxiedScoped<TInterface, TImplementation>
(this IServiceCollection services)
where TInterface : class
where TImplementation : class, TInterface
{
// This registers the underlying class
services.AddScoped<TImplementation>();
services.AddScoped(typeof(TInterface), serviceProvider =>
{
// Get an instance of the Castle Proxy Generator
var proxyGenerator = serviceProvider
.GetRequiredService<ProxyGenerator>();
// Have DI build out an instance of the class that has methods
// you want to cache (this is a normal instance of that class
// without caching added)
var actual = serviceProvider
.GetRequiredService<TImplementation>();
// Find all of the interceptors that have been registered,
// including our caching interceptor. (you might later add a
// logging interceptor, etc.)
var interceptors = serviceProvider
.GetServices<IInterceptor>().ToArray();
// Have Castle Proxy build out a proxy object that implements
// your interface, but adds a caching layer on top of the
// actual implementation of the class. This proxy object is
// what will then get injected into the class that has a
// dependency on TInterface
return proxyGenerator.CreateInterfaceProxyWithTarget(
typeof(TInterface), actual, interceptors);
});
}
Add these lines to ConfigureServices in Startup.cs
// Setup Interception
services.AddSingleton(new ProxyGenerator());
services.AddScoped<IInterceptor, CacheInterceptor>(
After that, if you want to use the cache interceptor, you need to do two things:
First, add the attribute to your method
[Cache(Seconds = 30)]
public async Task<IEnumerable<Person>> GetPeopleByLastName(string lastName)
{
return SomeLongRunningProcess(lastName);
}
Second, register the class in DI using the Proxy/Interception:
services.AddProxiedScoped<IPersonRepository, PersonRepository>();
Instead of the normal way without the Proxy/Interception:
services.AddScoped<IPersonRepository, PersonRepository>();
The base .NET Core container does not have any extra features like interceptors. The whole reason the DI container in .NET Core can be swapped out for something like Autofac is so you can move to a different container once you outgrow the default one.
[Route("api/[controller]")]
public class DigitalDocumentController : Controller
{
private IDigitalDocumentService digitalDocumentService;
private IDatabaseInitializer databaseInitializer;
public DigitalDocumentController(IDigitalDocumentService digitalDocumentService)
{
this.digitalDocumentService = digitalDocumentService;
}
public DigitalDocumentController(IDatabaseInitializer databaseInitializer)
{
this.databaseInitializer = databaseInitializer;
}
i want two controller constructor in my project to Mock in xUnit Testing, but there was an error in my swagger interface {
"error": "Multiple constructors accepting all given argument types have been found in type 'i2ana.Web.Controllers.DigitalDocumentController'. There should only be one applicable constructor."
}
can anybody help me how i can do it ?
…
what i am try to do , is to test Uniquness of the Name Field in my database
My testing code:
[Fact]
public void AddNotUniqueName_ReturnsNotFoundObjectResult()
{
var digitalDocument = new DigitalDocument
{
Image = new byte[] { 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20 },
CreatedOn = DateTime.Today,
Id = 6,
Location = "temp",
Name = "Flower",
Tages = new List<Tag> { new Tag { Id = 1, Value = "Tag 1" }, new Tag { Id = 1, Value = "Tag 2" } }
};
// Arrange
var mockRepo = new Mock<IDatabaseInitializer>();
mockRepo.Setup(repo => repo.SeedAsync()).Returns(Task.FromResult(AddUniqueDigitalDocument(digitalDocument)));
var controller = new DigitalDocumentController(mockRepo.Object);
// Act
var result = controller.Add(digitalDocument);
// Assert
var viewResult = Assert.IsType<NotFoundObjectResult>(result);
var model = Assert.IsAssignableFrom<int>(viewResult.Value);
Assert.NotEqual(6, model);
}
the "AddUniqueDigitalDocument" returns 6 only to test that the new digitaldocumet is not the same id of my initialize data.
When using dependency injection, you should only have one constructor where all dependencies can be satisfied. Otherwise, how is the DI container to know which constructor to utilize? That's your issue here. Using the Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection package, and since this is a controller you're injecting into, there's only one reasonable way to solve this: don't register one or the other of the services, IDigitalDocumentService or IDatatabaseInitializer. If only one is registered, the service collection will simply use the constructor it has a registered service for.
It's possible with a more featured DI container, you might be able to configure something to allow it choose the proper constructor. How to do that would be entirely dependent on the DI container you end up going with, though, so not much more can be said on the subject at this point. Just realize that the default container (Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection) is intentionally simplistic, so if you needs are more complex, you should sub in a full DI container.
UPDATE
You should be doing integration testing with the test host and an in-memory database. The basic approach is:
public MyTests()
{
_server = new TestServer(new WebHostBuilder().UseStartup<TestStartup>());
_context = _server.Host.Services.GetRequiredService<MyContext>();
_client = _server.CreateClient();
}
In your app's Startup, create a virtual method:
public virtual void ConfigureDatabase(IServiceCollection services)
{
// normal database setup here, e.g.
services.AddDbContext<MyContext>(o =>
o.UseSqlServer(Configuration.GetConnectionString("Foo")));
}
Then, in ConfigureServices, replace your database setup with a call to this method.
Finally, in your test project, create a TestStartup class and override the ConfigureDatabase method:
public class TestStartup : Startup
{
public override void ConfigureDatabase(IServiceCollection services)
{
var databaseName = Guid.NewGuid().ToString();
services.AddDbContext<MyContext>(o =>
o.UseInMemoryDatabase(databaseName));
}
}
Now, in your tests you just make requests against the test client (which is just an HttpClient instance, so it works like any other HttpClient). You start by setting up your database with appropriate test data, and then ensure that the correct response is returned:
// Arrange
_context.Add(new DigitalDocument { Name = "Foo" });
await _context.SaveChanges();
// Act
// Submit a `DigitalDocument` with the same name via `_client`
// Assert
// Inspect the response body for some indication that it was considered invalid. Or you could simply assert that no new `DigitalDocument` was created by querying `_context` (or both)
This is admittedly a lot easier with an API, as with a web application, you're going to invariably need to do some HTML parsing. However, the docs and corresponding sample app help you with that.
Additionally, in actual practice, you'd want to use a test fixture to prevent having to bootstrap a test server for every test. Again, the docs have you covered there. One thing to note, though, is that once you switch to using a fixture, your database will then be persisted between tests. To segregate your test data, make sure that you call EnsureDeleted() on your context before each test. This can be easily done in the test class' constructor:
public class MyTests : IClassFixture<WebApplicationFactory<Startup>>
{
private readonly HttpClient _client;
private readonly MyContext _context;
public MyTests(WebApplicationFactory<Startup> factory)
{
factory = factory.WithWebHostBuilder(builder => builder.UseStartup<TestStartup>());
_client = factory.CreateClient();
_context = factory.Server.Host.Services.GetRequiredService<MyContext>();
_context.EnsureDeleted();
}
I don't even like this much bootstrapping code in my tests, though, so I usually inherit from a fixture class instead:
public class TestServerFixture : IClassFixture<WebApplicationFactory<Startup>>
{
protected readonly HttpClient _client;
protected readonly MyContext _context;
public TestServerFixture(WebApplicationFactory<Startup> factory)
{
factory = factory.WithWebHostBuilder(builder => builder.UseStartup<TestStartup>());
_client = factory.CreateClient();
_context = factory.Server.Host.Services.GetRequiredService<MyContext>();
_context.EnsureDeleted();
}
}
Then, for each test class:
public class MyTests : TestServerFixture
{
public MyTests(WebApplicationFactory<Startup> factory)
: base(factory)
{
}
This may seem like a lot, but most of it is one-time setup. Then, your tests will be much more accurate, more robust, and even easier in many ways.
We are looking at implementing a few services using the new Spring 5 "Reactive" API.
We currently use, somewhat dependent on MVC, Apache CXF and Apache Shiro for our REST services and security. All of this runs in Undertow now.
We can get one or the other to work but not both together. It appears when we switch over to the reactive application it knocks out the servlets, filters, etc. Conversely, when we use the MVC-style application it does not see the reactive handlers.
Is it possible to run the Spring 5 Reactive services alongside REST/servlet/filter components or customize the SpringBoot startup to run REST and Reactive services on different ports?
Update:
I "seem" to be able to get the reactive handlers working doing this but I don't know if this is the right approach.
#Bean
RouterFunction<ServerResponse> routeGoodbye(TrackingHandler endpoint)
{
RouterFunction<ServerResponse> route = RouterFunctions
.route(GET("/api/rx/goodbye")
.and(accept(MediaType.TEXT_PLAIN)), endpoint::trackRedirect2);
return route;
}
#Bean
RouterFunction<ServerResponse> routeHello(TrackingHandler endpoint)
{
RouterFunction<ServerResponse> route = RouterFunctions
.route(GET("/api/rx/hello")
.and(accept(MediaType.TEXT_PLAIN)), endpoint::trackRedirect);
return route;
}
#Bean
ContextPathCompositeHandler servletReactiveRouteHandler(TrackingHandler handler)
{
final Map<String, HttpHandler> handlers = new HashMap<>();
handlers.put("/hello", toHttpHandler((this.routeHello(handler))));
handlers.put("/goodbye", toHttpHandler(this.routeGoodbye(handler)));
return new ContextPathCompositeHandler(handlers);
}
#Bean
public ServletRegistrationBean servletRegistrationBean(final ContextPathCompositeHandler handlers)
{
ServletRegistrationBean registrationBean = new ServletRegistrationBean<>(
new ReactiveServlet(handlers),
"/api/rx/*");
registrationBean.setLoadOnStartup(1);
registrationBean.setAsyncSupported(true);
return registrationBean;
}
#Bean
TrackingHandler trackingEndpoint(final TrackingService trackingService)
{
return new TrackingHandler(trackingService,
null,
false);
}
public class ReactiveServlet extends ServletHttpHandlerAdapter
{
ReactiveServlet(final HttpHandler httpHandler)
{
super(httpHandler);
}
}
Ok, after playing around with this for too long I finally seemed to be able to cobble together a solution that works for me. Hopefully this is the right way to do what I need to do.
Now, executing normal CXF RESTful routes shows me Undertow using a blocking task and executing my Reactive routes shows me undertow using NIO directly. When I tried using the ServletHttpHandler it looked like it was just invoking the service as a Servlet 3 async call.
The handlers are running completely separate from each other and allows me to run my REST services beside my reactive services.
1) Create an annotation that will be used to map the RouterFunction to an Undertow Handler
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
#Documented
#Target({ElementType.METHOD, ElementType.TYPE})
public #interface ReactiveHandler
{
String value();
}
2) Create an UndertowReactiveHandler "Provider" so that I can lazily get the injected RouterFunction and return the UndertowHttpHandler when I configure Undertow.
final class UndertowReactiveHandlerProvider implements Provider<UndertowHttpHandlerAdapter>
{
#Inject
private ApplicationContext context;
private String path;
private String beanName;
#Override
public UndertowHttpHandlerAdapter get()
{
final RouterFunction router = context.getBean(beanName, RouterFunction.class);
return new UndertowHttpHandlerAdapter(toHttpHandler(router));
}
public String getPath()
{
return path;
}
public void setPath(final String path)
{
this.path = path;
}
public void setBeanName(final String beanName)
{
this.beanName = beanName;
}
}
3) Create the NonBLockingHandlerFactory (implements BeanFactoryPostProcessor). This looks for any of my #Bean methods that have been annotated with "ReactiveHandler" and then dynamically creates a "UndertowReactiveHandlerProvider" bean for each annotated router function which is used later to provide the handlers to Undertow.
#Override
public void postProcessBeanFactory(final ConfigurableListableBeanFactory configurableListableBeanFactory) throws BeansException
{
final BeanDefinitionRegistry registry = (BeanDefinitionRegistry)configurableListableBeanFactory;
final String[] beanDefinitions = registry.getBeanDefinitionNames();
for (String name : beanDefinitions)
{
final BeanDefinition beanDefinition = registry.getBeanDefinition(name);
if (beanDefinition instanceof AnnotatedBeanDefinition
&& beanDefinition.getSource() instanceof MethodMetadata)
{
final MethodMetadata beanMethod = (MethodMetadata)beanDefinition.getSource();
final String annotationType = ReactiveHandler.class.getName();
if (beanMethod.isAnnotated(annotationType))
{
//Get the current bean details
final String beanName = beanMethod.getMethodName();
final Map<String, Object> attributes = beanMethod.getAnnotationAttributes(annotationType);
//Create the new bean definition
final GenericBeanDefinition rxHandler = new GenericBeanDefinition();
rxHandler.setBeanClass(UndertowReactiveHandlerProvider.class);
//Set the new bean properties
MutablePropertyValues mpv = new MutablePropertyValues();
mpv.add("beanName", beanName);
mpv.add("path", attributes.get("value"));
rxHandler.setPropertyValues(mpv);
//Register the new bean (Undertow handler) with a matching route suffix
registry.registerBeanDefinition(beanName + "RxHandler", rxHandler);
}
}
}
}
4) Create the Undertow ServletExtension. This looks for any UndertowReactiveHandlerProviders and adds it as an UndertowHttpHandler.
public class NonBlockingHandlerExtension implements ServletExtension
{
#Override
public void handleDeployment(DeploymentInfo deploymentInfo, final ServletContext servletContext)
{
deploymentInfo.addInitialHandlerChainWrapper(handler -> {
final WebApplicationContext ctx = getWebApplicationContext(servletContext);
//Get all of the reactive handler providers
final Map<String, UndertowReactiveHandlerProvider> providers =
ctx.getBeansOfType(UndertowReactiveHandlerProvider.class);
//Create the root handler
final PathHandler rootHandler = new PathHandler();
rootHandler.addPrefixPath("/", handler);
//Iterate the providers and add to the root handler
for (Map.Entry<String, UndertowReactiveHandlerProvider> p : providers.entrySet())
{
final UndertowReactiveHandlerProvider provider = p.getValue();
//Append the HttpHandler to the root
rootHandler.addPrefixPath(
provider.getPath(),
provider.get());
}
//Return the root handler
return rootHandler;
});
}
}
5) Under META-INF/services create a "io.undertow.servlet.ServletExtension" file.
com.mypackage.NonBlockingHandlerExtension
6) Create a SpringBoot AutoConfiguration that loads the post processor if Undertow is on the classpath.
#Configuration
#ConditionalOnClass(Undertow.class)
public class UndertowAutoConfiguration
{
#Bean
BeanFactoryPostProcessor nonBlockingHandlerFactoryPostProcessor()
{
return new NonBlockingHandlerFactoryPostProcessor();
}
}
7) Annotate any RouterFunctions that I want to map to an UndertowHandler.
#Bean
#ReactiveHandler("/api/rx/service")
RouterFunction<ServerResponse> routeTracking(TrackingHandler handler)
{
RouterFunction<ServerResponse> route = RouterFunctions
.nest(path("/api/rx/service"), route(
GET("/{cid}.gif"), handler::trackGif).andRoute(
GET("/{cid}"), handler::trackAll));
return route;
}
With this I can call my REST services (and Shiro works with them), use Swagger2 with my REST services, and call my Reactive services (and they do not use Shiro) in the same SpringBoot application.
In my logs, the REST call shows Undertow using the blocking (task-#) handler. The Reactive call shows Undertow using the non-blocking (I/O-# and nioEventLoopGroup) handler
I'm dabbling into AOP with Castle's Dynamic Proxy.
I've made my first interceptors a selector and now was trying to use the proxy generator on the startup class:
public class Startup
{
private static readonly ProxyGenerator _generator = new ProxyGenerator();
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddMvc();
services.AddTransient<IInterface, Implementation>(ctx=>
{
var dependency = ctx.GetService<IOtherInterface>();
var proxyOptions = new ProxyGenerationOptions { Selector = new Selector(dependency)};
return (Implementation)
_generator.CreateInterfaceProxyWithTarget(
typeof(IContactRepository),
new ContactRepository(options, logger),
proxyOptions);
});
}
//Removed the rest for this example
}
This is failing, I know the cast of the generation result should be to IInterface instead of Implementation (This is what is failing rith now), but the Func for the implementation factory on service.AddTransient expects an Implementation.
How should I set the proxy on the netcore IOC?
Thanks!!
I am creating a small proof of concept asp.net web api 2 service with entity framework code first. The controller's constructor looks like
public AccountController: ApiController
{
private readonly DbContext context;
public AccountController(DbContext _context){
context = _context;
}
public AccountController(){context = new ApplicationContext();}
}
I need to unit test my controllers. How can I mock the DbContext class. Is there a simple way of doing this? I want to avoid all that repository pattern with lot of interfaces. Because it will be a way overkill for this prototype.
Its usually something like this if you use Nunit and Moq.
[TestFixture]
public class AccountControllerTest
{
private Mock<DbContext> mockContext;
private AccountController sut;
[SetUp]
public void TestSetup()
{
mockContext = new Mock<DbContext>();
var account = new Account() { Id = 123, Name = "Test Account" };
mockContext.SetUp(x => x.GetAccountOnContext()).Returns(account);
sut = new Controller(mockContext.Object) { Request = new HttpRequestMessage() };
sut.Request.Properties.Add(HttpPropertyKeys.HttpConfigurationKey, new HttpConfiguration());
}
[Test]
public void ControllerMethod_GetLogin_Test()
{
// assuming GetLogin calls GetAccount on DbContext()
var response = sut.GetLogin(someAccount);
Assert.AreEqual(HttpStatusCode.OK, response.StatusCode);
mockContext.Verify();
}
}
You basically want to mock out your external dependencies and test just what the SUT (System Under Test) is supposed to do. I would also strongly encourage to look at Fakes instead of mocks. In general fakes result in less brittle tests.
So in this case, you could have a FakeDbContext() that you can pass to the tests. The FakeDbContext() will behave more like the actual DbContext() but will do all those operations in-memory, so that your tests don't have a dependency with a real database.
Depending on the database you use, you can also look at starting an embedded version of the real database as a part of your tests. Just have to make sure to do the necessary stopping and clean up of the test database records after the test run is complete in the TearDown() method.