Re: Simplify (junit) testing in cayenne

From: Tore Halset (
Date: Thu Sep 06 2007 - 14:25:11 EDT

  • Next message: Mike Kienenberger: "Re: Simplify (junit) testing in cayenne"


    My junit setup creates a database with all its tables and basic
    schema and then all of the cayenne-related tests operate on that
    temporary db. It is pretty much like cayenne junit tests before the
    move to maven, but a bit simpler. The junit tests are started when a
    developer wants to and periodically on our development server. It
    tests everything with both PostgreSQL and Derby.

    Why do you want all of that mocking stuff?

      - Tore.

    On Sep 5, 2007, at 17:10, Mike Kienenberger wrote:

    > There's a few different ways to look at this.
    > It's true that Cayenne doesn't easily support application unit
    > testing.
    > However, I'm not sure it's entirely appropriate to do so.
    > What I do is use a DAO pattern for my database operations. Then I
    > mock up a DAO rather than the entire database layer. It's far easier
    > to mock up "myTestingDAO.findUserByUserName()" than to mock up
    > SelectQuery, DataNode, DataMap, DataContext, etc.
    > I haven't quite reached this point in all of my projects, but my goal
    > is to generate Interfaces for each of my Entities. If I have a User
    > entity, then I create a User interface and use that exclusively
    > outside of my DAO. The DAO returns User interface objects rather
    > than User data objects.
    > This then allows me to create a MockUser simply by implementing the
    > User interface. For projects where I don't have entity interfaces,
    > I subclass the User DataObject instead. This isn't quite as clean or
    > workable, but it does help so long as you override every method.
    > For creating Mock objects, I use the cayenne code generator the same
    > way I use it for the DataObjects.
    > I'm finding that there are still some places where integration testing
    > is necessary to catch problems. In Cayenne 1.1.4, I've had an issue
    > where I tried to create a local copy of a modified or a transient
    > object and then commit an object with a relationship to it -- those
    > kinds of problems can only be detected when using the real database
    > layer unless your mock layer knows the quirks.
    > On 9/4/07, Marcin Skladaniec (JIRA) <> wrote:
    >> Simplify (junit) testing in cayenne
    >> -----------------------------------
    >> Key: CAY-862
    >> URL:
    >> CAY-862
    >> Project: Cayenne
    >> Issue Type: New Feature
    >> Components: Cayenne Core Library
    >> Affects Versions: 3.0
    >> Environment: All
    >> Reporter: Marcin Skladaniec
    >> Assignee: Andrus Adamchik
    >> Junit tests are becoming very important once the project reaches a
    >> certain point. Cayenne has dozens of junit tests but writing a
    >> junit test for cayenne based application is not easy at all.
    >> For me the main trouble is when there is no need to fetch or
    >> commit something (like testing GUI or lifecycle events). I tried
    >> to reproduce the tests found in cayenne,but always ended up with
    >> problems with mocking up the context, datachannel,
    >> entityResolver, altering the configuration to point to different
    >> db etc.
    >> To solve that my idea was that one might specify a package in the
    >> CayenneModeler, this package will than be populated with generated
    >> a set of _MockupXXX extends XXX (like _MockupArtist extends
    >> Artist, _MockupPainting extends Painting etc.) and a
    >> MockupDataContext etc. There could be a second set of
    >> _MockupEntities for ROP client.
    >> Another thing is to specify the testing environment with ease. I
    >> think there should be also a possibility to create a "testing"
    >> DataNode pointing to a different database than deployment, and for
    >> the DataMap could be related to the real or testing DataNode at
    >> the same time. To choose the testing environment a system param
    >> like -Dcayenne.testing=TRUE could be utilised.
    >> I might have missed something here: is there a simply way of
    >> having two DataNodes for one DataMap ?
    >> I think that simplified testcase writing feature would be a great
    >> advantage for Cayenne over any other ORM.
    >> --
    >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
    >> -
    >> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Sep 06 2007 - 14:24:55 EDT