81 lines
3.1 KiB
Markdown
81 lines
3.1 KiB
Markdown
|
---
|
||
|
|
title: Don't let failures spread over your suite with process-based tests isolation
|
||
|
|
date: 2020-12-28
|
||
|
|
series: rust-testing-tricks
|
||
|
|
tags: [rust, testing]
|
||
|
|
---
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Being able to precisely control what failures in underlying systems occur and at what time can be really useful in achieving a fast and stable test suite. While I am a big proponent of dependency inversion and being able to control dependencies via the explicit injection points in your API, sometimes it's impractical to do so. This is where [`fail`](https://crates.io/crates/fail) can help us immensely, providing an escape hatch for situations like those as it allows to inject failures into previously defined failure points.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
It comes at a price though. If you would mix your other unit tests and tests activating fail points you will notice some unexpected failures in the test suite. As `cargo test` runs tests in parallel by default, the tests activating a fail point can interfere with another test that did not want that fail point active at all that is ran at the same time. The crate authors [recommend](https://docs.rs/fail/#usage-in-tests) running all of the tests using fail points in a separate executable and using `FailScenario` to serialise test execution.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
There is another way, that I found simpler for the way I write tests, if you allow for yet another helper crate. We can run each test in a separate process, effectively isolating it from the rest, stopping failures from spreading.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Let's take a look at an example from [`bakare`](https://git.sr.ht/~cyplo/bakare) - my experiment in writing a backup system.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
`cargo.toml`
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
```toml
|
||
|
|
[dependencies]
|
||
|
|
fail = "0.4"
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
[dev-dependencies]
|
||
|
|
two-rusty-forks = "0.4.0"
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
[features]
|
||
|
|
failpoints = [ "fail/failpoints" ]
|
||
|
|
```
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
`lock.rs`
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
```rust
|
||
|
|
/// this function is called from `Lock::lock()`
|
||
|
|
fn create_lock_file(lock_id: Uuid, index_directory: &VfsPath) -> Result<()> {
|
||
|
|
...
|
||
|
|
fail_point!("create-lock-file", |e: Option<String>| Err(anyhow!(e.unwrap())));
|
||
|
|
let mut file = lock_file_path.create_file()?;
|
||
|
|
...
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
mod must {
|
||
|
|
use super::Lock;
|
||
|
|
use anyhow::Result;
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
/// only import the macro when `failpoints` feature is enabled
|
||
|
|
#[cfg(feature = "failpoints")]
|
||
|
|
use two_rusty_forks::rusty_fork_test;
|
||
|
|
use vfs::{MemoryFS, VfsPath};
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
#[test]
|
||
|
|
/// this is a normal unit test
|
||
|
|
/// we don't want for it to be affected by the fail points being active
|
||
|
|
fn be_released_when_dropped() -> Result<()> {
|
||
|
|
let temp_dir: VfsPath = MemoryFS::new().into();
|
||
|
|
{
|
||
|
|
let _lock = Lock::lock(&temp_dir);
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
let entries = temp_dir.read_dir()?.count();
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
assert_eq!(entries, 0);
|
||
|
|
Ok(())
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
#[cfg(feature = "failpoints")]
|
||
|
|
rusty_fork_test! { /// use the macro to create a separate process for this test
|
||
|
|
#[test]
|
||
|
|
fn be_able_to_lock_when_creating_lock_file_fails_sometimes() {
|
||
|
|
/// activate the fail point
|
||
|
|
fail::cfg("create-lock-file", "90%10*return(some lock file creation error)->off")
|
||
|
|
.unwrap();
|
||
|
|
let path = MemoryFS::new().into();
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
let lock = Lock::lock(&path).unwrap();
|
||
|
|
lock.release().unwrap();
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
...
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
```
|