[hibernate-dev] replace Pax Exam with Docker
Brett Meyer
brett at hibernate.org
Fri Jan 12 19:08:47 EST 2018
Great questions. There'd be clear separation of concerns in this:
* Docker
o Plain 'ole Karaf
o Install our features.xml
o Install a test bundle that enables the ability to remotely
execute some flows. I had been thinking along the lines of what
we do in the OSGi quickstart/demo projects where we provide a
simple persistence context and the ability to
write/update/fetch/delete entities.
* External
o Plain JUnit methods
o Hit the test bundle through its remote API (HTTP or something
else), executing those simple functions.
o Assertions based on the results or metrics
So yes, there is a bit of overlap with the Pax Exam setup, but removing
the dynamic tiny-bundle, Pax Probes, and CL caveats. And most
importantly, full access to standard Karaf logging without more praying.
Before I get too far into the weeds here, one of the ActiveMQ guys gave
me some ref code from an entirely different Pax Exam setup that may
closely resemble what I'm describing, but without Docker. I'll give
that a fair shake before diving off any further, but as always, devil's
in the details.
> I believe most of this is already handled for various build tools
(like the gradle docker plugin) and simplified by docker image repos
(bintray, e.g.).
Exactly -- the Gradle and Maven plugins for Docker handle almost all of
the heavy lifting. Our setup has been pretty straight-forward so far.
On 1/12/18 4:04 PM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> I believe most of this is already handled for various build tools
> (like the gradle docker plugin) and simplified by docker image repos
> (bintray, e.g.).
>
> But this is a good point. I'd be interested to see if you've done
> this before Brett..
>
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:56 PM Gunnar Morling <gunnar at hibernate.org
> <mailto:gunnar at hibernate.org>> wrote:
>
> Brett,
>
> What's still unclear to me is when going the Docker route, won't
> you still
> need some code which deploys your tests to Karaf, runs them there and
> fetches the test results, so e.g. your Gradle build will fail if
> there are
> test failures? Would you envision to write these bits yourself? And
> wouldn't this amount to re-implementing PaxExam yourself? Seems
> I'm still
> missing a piece of the story :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> --Gunnar
>
>
> 2018-01-12 19:16 GMT+01:00 Brett Meyer <brett at hibernate.org
> <mailto:brett at hibernate.org>>:
>
> > I guess the way I'm looking at this is Docker will be primarily
> used by
> > Jenkins, and myself or anyone working directly on hibernate-osgi
> > itself. Otherwise, it'll be disabled by default and hidden behind a
> > profile. We'll make sure that most contributors running the entire
> > Hibernate test suite won't be affected...
> >
> >
> > On 1/12/18 1:13 PM, andrea boriero wrote:
> > > I already have Docker running on my machine, so it seems not a big
> > > issue for me,but not sure about the impact for others.
> > >
> > > Anyway It's worth giving a try.
> > >
> > > On 12 January 2018 at 17:54, Sanne Grinovero
> <sanne at hibernate.org <mailto:sanne at hibernate.org>
> > > <mailto:sanne at hibernate.org <mailto:sanne at hibernate.org>>> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 12 January 2018 at 17:32, Brett Meyer
> <brett at hibernate.org <mailto:brett at hibernate.org>
> > > <mailto:brett at hibernate.org <mailto:brett at hibernate.org>>>
> wrote:
> > > > If I don't have time to contribute to Pax Exam, I certainly
> > > don't have
> > > > time to start a new project haha...
> > > >
> > > > And realistically, that "something new" would likely involve
> > > containers
> > > > anyway.
> > > >
> > > > At this point, mostly a question of 1) status quo, 2)
> Docker (or
> > any
> > > > other container-based solution), or 3) try screwing
> around with
> > > Pax Exam
> > > > in "server-only" mode (but I don't have high hopes there).
> > >
> > > Sure. Docker is now available on the CI slaves too, so
> that's not
> > > a problem.
> > >
> > > The only annoyance is that the whole ORM team - and anyone
> > > contributing - would need to have Docker as well, but that
> doesn't
> > > seem too bad to me... and was likely bound to happen for
> other tools
> > > :)
> > >
> > > Steve, Chris and Andrea? Ok with that? Maybe you have Docker
> > > running already?
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 1/12/18 12:27 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> > > >> Ok, looks like you really should start something new :)
> > > >>
> > > >> Hopefully many of those other annoyed Karaf developers will
> > follow.
> > > >>
> > > >> On 12 January 2018 at 13:59, Brett Meyer
> <brett at hibernate.org <mailto:brett at hibernate.org>
> > > <mailto:brett at hibernate.org <mailto:brett at hibernate.org>>>
> wrote:
> > > >>> Plus, for me, it's more a question of time. I only
> have a bit
> > > available
> > > >>> for open source work these days, and I'd rather spend that
> > > knocking out
> > > >>> some of the hibernate-osgi tasks we've had on our
> plate for a
> > > while. I
> > > >>> unfortunately don't have anything left to contribute
> to Pax
> > > Exam itself,
> > > >>> assuming that would even fix the problem.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Even worse, we're barely using the integration tests for
> > > anything more
> > > >>> than a simple smoke test at this point, since it seems
> like
> > > every time
> > > >>> we touch it something new goes wrong. Looking for a more
> > > *consistent*
> > > >>> solution -- need more confidence in the backbone.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 1/12/18 8:56 AM, Brett Meyer wrote:
> > > >>>> Sorry Gunnar/Sanne, should have clarified this first:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> We actually used Arquillian before Pax Exam, and the
> > > experience was
> > > >>>> far worse (somewhat of a long story)...
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> Pax Exam was just "helping" to deploy/run things in
> Karaf, so I
> > > >>>> can't imagine using Karaf without the helpers being a
> walk in
> > > the park
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> That's not actually the case. The way Pax Exam currently
> > > runs our
> > > >>>> tests is fundamentally part of the problem. The test
> code is
> > > >>>> dynamically wrapped in an actual bundle, using
> something like
> > > >>>> tiny-bundles, and executed *within* the container
> itself. Pax
> > > >>>> overrides runs with additional probes, overrides logging
> > > >>>> infrastructure, etc. Those nuances can often be the
> source
> > > of many of
> > > >>>> the bugs (there are a ton of classloader
> implications, etc.
> > > -- IIRC,
> > > >>>> this was one area where Arquillian was much, much worse).
> > > There are
> > > >>>> some benefits to that setup, but for Hibernate it
> mainly gets
> > > in the way.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> It *does* have a "server mode" where tests run
> outside of the
> > > >>>> container, but I vaguely remember going down that
> path early
> > > on and
> > > >>>> hitting a roadblock. For the life of me, I can't
> remember the
> > > >>>> specifics. But my pushback here is that ultimately
> Docker
> > > might be
> > > >>>> more preferable, giving us more of a real world
> scenario to
> > > do true
> > > >>>> e2e tests without something else in the middle.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> so I can't imagine using Karaf without the helpers
> being a
> > > walk in
> > > >>>> the park; e.g. having to deal with HTTP operations
> comes with
> > > its own
> > > >>>> baggage {dependencies, complexity, speed, .. } and
> generally
> > more
> > > >>>> stuff to maintain.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I guess I respectfully disagree with that, but purely
> due to
> > > Karaf
> > > >>>> features. Our features.xml does most of the heavy
> lifting for
> > us
> > > >>>> w/r/t getting Hibernate provisioned. The same would
> be true
> > > with the
> > > >>>> test harness bundle/feature. REST is simple and
> > > out-of-the-box thanks
> > > >>>> to Karaf + CXF or Camel. For other possible routes
> (Karaf
> > > commands),
> > > >>>> we already have code available in our demo/quickstart
> projects.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> Also: considered contributing to Pax?
> > > >>>> Yes, of course. But the fact that numerous Karaf
> *committers*
> > > >>>> themselves have a long history of built-up
> frustration on it
> > > doesn't
> > > >>>> leave me optimistic. A couple of them had tried to
> pitch in
> > > at one
> > > >>>> point and weren't able to get anywhere.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> but it seems their developers really expect their
> users to
> > > be deeply
> > > >>>> familiar with it all
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Absolutely! But again, our struggles also come down
> to the
> > > >>>> fundamental way Pax Exam works...
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On 1/12/18 6:27 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> > > >>>>> +1 to explore alternatives to Pax Exam, but I'd be
> wary of
> > > maintining
> > > >>>>> our own test infrastructure.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Pax Exam was just "helping" to deploy/run things in
> Karaf,
> > > so I can't
> > > >>>>> imagine using Karaf without the helpers being a walk
> in the
> > > park; e.g.
> > > >>>>> having to deal with HTTP operations comes with its
> own baggage
> > > >>>>> {dependencies, complexity, speed, .. } and generally
> more
> > > stuff to
> > > >>>>> maintain.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> So.. +1 to try out Arquillian or anything else. Or
> maybe you
> > > could
> > > >>>>> start your own tool, but I'd prefer to see it in a
> separate
> > > repository
> > > >>>>> :) e.g. a nice Gradle plugin so maybe you get more
> people
> > > helping?
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Also: considered contributing to Pax? My personal
> experience
> > > with it
> > > >>>>> has always been a pain but if I had to try identify the
> > > reason, it was
> > > >>>>> mostly caused by me being unfamiliar with Karaf and not
> > > having good
> > > >>>>> clues to track down the real failure; maybe some
> minor error
> > > reporting
> > > >>>>> improvements could make a big difference to its
> usability? Just
> > > >>>>> saying, I don't feel like Pax is bad, but it seems their
> > > developers
> > > >>>>> really expect their users to be deeply familiar with
> it all
> > > - feels
> > > >>>>> like the typical case in which they could use some
> feedback
> > > and a
> > > >>>>> hand.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>> Sanne
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On 12 January 2018 at 08:22, Gunnar
> > > Morling<gunnar at hibernate.org <mailto:gunnar at hibernate.org>
> <mailto:gunnar at hibernate.org <mailto:gunnar at hibernate.org>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>> Hi Brett,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> We also had our fair share of frustration with Pax
> Exam in
> > > HV, and I was
> > > >>>>>> (more than once) at the point of dropping it.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Docker could work, but as you say it's a bit of a heavy
> > > dependency, if not
> > > >>>>>> required anyways. Not sure whether I'd like to add
> this as
> > > a prerequisite
> > > >>>>>> for the HV build to be executed. And tests in separate
> > > profiles tend to be
> > > >>>>>> "forgotten" in my experience.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> One other approach could be to use Arquillian's OSGi
> > > support (see
> > > >>>>>> https://github.com/arquillian/arquillian-container-osgi
> > >
> <https://github.com/arquillian/arquillian-container-osgi>), did
> > > you consider
> > > >>>>>> to use that one as an alternative?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Cheers,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> --Gunnar
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> 2018-01-12 3:34 GMT+01:00 Brett
> Meyer<brett at hibernate.org <mailto:brett at hibernate.org>
> > > <mailto:brett at hibernate.org <mailto:brett at hibernate.org>>>:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> <tired-rant>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> I'm fed up with Pax Exam and would love to replace
> it as the
> > > >>>>>>> hibernate-osgi integration test harness. Most of the
> > > Karaf committers
> > > >>>>>>> I've been working with hate it more than I do. Every
> > > single time we
> > > >>>>>>> upgrade the Karaf version, something
> less-than-minor in
> > > hibernate-osgi,
> > > >>>>>>> upgrade/change dependencies, or attempt to upgrade Pax
> > > Exam itself,
> > > >>>>>>> there's some new obfuscated failure. And no
> matter how
> > > much I pray, it
> > > >>>>>>> refuses to let us get to the container logs to
> figure out
> > what
> > > >>>>>>> happened. Tis a house of cards.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> </tired-rant>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> One alternative that recently came up elsewhere: use
> > > Docker to bootstrap
> > > >>>>>>> the container, hit it with our features.xml, install a
> > > test bundle that
> > > >>>>>>> exposes functionality externally (over HTTP, Karaf
> > > commands, etc), then
> > > >>>>>>> hit the endpoints and run assertions.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Pros: true "integration test", plain vanilla
> Karaf, direct
> > > access to all
> > > >>>>>>> logs, easier to eventually support and test other
> containers.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Cons: Need Docker installed for local test runs,
> probably
> > > safer to
> > > >>>>>>> isolate the integration test behind a
> disabled-by-default
> > > Maven profile.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Any gut reactions?
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> OSGi is fun and I'm not at all bitter,
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> -Brett-
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> ;)
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> > > >>>>>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
> > > >>>>>>> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> > > <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>>
> > > >>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> > > <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev>
> > > >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> > > >>>>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
> > > >>>>>> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> > > <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>>
> > > >>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> > > <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev>
> > > >>>>> _______________________________________________
> > > >>>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
> > > >>>>> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> > > <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>>
> > > >>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> > > <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev>
> > > >>> _______________________________________________
> > > >>> hibernate-dev mailing list
> > > >>> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> > > <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>>
> > > >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> > > <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > hibernate-dev mailing list
> > > > hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org> <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists
> <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists>.
> > jboss.org <http://jboss.org>>
> > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> > > <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > hibernate-dev mailing list
> > > hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>>
> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> > > <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev>
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > hibernate-dev mailing list
> > hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> >
> _______________________________________________
> hibernate-dev mailing list
> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>
More information about the hibernate-dev
mailing list