Support for mocking nexus operations #1666

rodrigozhou · 2024-10-10T05:24:39Z

What was changed

Support for mocking nexus operations in the test framework.
The user can mock using either the nexus.Operation itself, or using nexus.OperationReference through the nexus.NewOperationReference helper. See the docs in the OnNexusOperation for description and example.

Why?

Be able to mock nexus operation without needing to have access to the operation implementation itself or creating dummy operations.

Checklist

Closes
How was this tested:

Any docs updates needed?

internal/workflow_testsuite.go

bergundy · 2024-10-10T16:08:32Z

This PR could use some tests and there would be an example in the documentation showing how this may be used. I want to understand the experience you had in mind better before diving deeper into the review.

internal/internal_workflow_testsuite.go

bergundy · 2024-10-10T16:12:31Z

internal/internal_workflow_testsuite.go

+		panic(fmt.Sprintf("mock of ExecuteNexusOperation failed to deserialize input"))
+	}
+
+	// rebuild the input as *nexus.LazyValue


Because, after I call input.Consume on L3208, it closed the reader, so it can't call again, which is needed if the user didn't mock the operation.

Well, actually, I can see that the reader isn't really being used at this moment, so maybe I could just skip this...

Yeah, you can avoid this for now since we control both implementations. Might want to just put a comment here but either way it's not critical.

I'd rather leave as it to avoid forgetting about this later if things change.

cretz

LGTM, but would wait until @Quinn-With-Two-Ns takes a look

rodrigozhou · 2024-10-11T17:48:01Z

internal/workflow_testsuite.go

+//	t.OnNexusOperation(
+//		service,
+//		HelloOperation,
+//		HelloInput{Message: "Temporal"},
+//		mock.Anything,
+//	).Return(
+//		&nexus.HandlerStartOperationResultAsync{
+//			OperationID: "hello-operation-id",
+//		},
+//		nil,
+//	)
+//
+//	t.RegisterNexusAsyncOperationCompletion(
+//		service,
+//		HelloOperation.Name(),
+//		"hello-operation-id",
+//		HelloOutput{Message: "Hello Temporal"},
+//		nil,
+//		1*time.Second,
+//	)


In addition to this, maybe we could have helper functions to mock sync and async operations. Example: for async operation, we could have something like this:

func (e *TestWorkflowEnvironment) MockNexusAsyncOperation( service any, operation any, input any, options any, result any, err error, delay time.Duration, ) *MockCallWrapper { operationID := uuid.New() // maybe also input? m := e.OnNexusOperation(service, operation, input, options).Return( &nexus.HandlerStartOperationResultAsync{ OperationID: operationID, }, nil, ) e.RegisterNexusAsyncOperationCompletion(service, operation, operationID, result, err, delay) return m }

And we could also have something similar for the sync which basically abstract the returned value type nexus.HandlerStartOperationResultSync.

Yeah, I think this would be a more friendly interface. But I'm okay merging what we have for flexibility and opening an issue to track adding a variant as you suggested.

Alternatively, if a user sets After on the returned MockCallWrapper, it sort of makes the operation async already (with the exception of generating a separate started event).
Can you config After worker with the MockCallWrapper returned here?

Yes, you can, but as you said, it would not represent the actual behavior of async operation.
I added some unit tests to check the After is doing its job.

internal/internal_workflow_testsuite.go

bergundy

Overall LGTM. There's just one conversation to resolve and this would be good to merge AFAIC.

go.mod

bergundy · 2024-10-14T13:55:06Z

internal/workflow_testsuite.go

+//	t.OnNexusOperation(
+//		service,
+//		HelloOperation,
+//		HelloInput{Message: "Temporal"},
+//		mock.Anything,
+//	).Return(
+//		&nexus.HandlerStartOperationResultAsync{
+//			OperationID: "hello-operation-id",
+//		},
+//		nil,
+//	)
+//
+//	t.RegisterNexusAsyncOperationCompletion(
+//		service,
+//		HelloOperation.Name(),
+//		"hello-operation-id",
+//		HelloOutput{Message: "Hello Temporal"},
+//		nil,
+//		1*time.Second,
+//	)


Yeah, I think this would be a more friendly interface. But I'm okay merging what we have for flexibility and opening an issue to track adding a variant as you suggested.

bergundy · 2024-10-14T14:03:21Z

internal/workflow_testsuite.go

+//	t.OnNexusOperation(
+//		service,
+//		HelloOperation,
+//		HelloInput{Message: "Temporal"},
+//		mock.Anything,
+//	).Return(
+//		&nexus.HandlerStartOperationResultAsync{
+//			OperationID: "hello-operation-id",
+//		},
+//		nil,
+//	)
+//
+//	t.RegisterNexusAsyncOperationCompletion(
+//		service,
+//		HelloOperation.Name(),
+//		"hello-operation-id",
+//		HelloOutput{Message: "Hello Temporal"},
+//		nil,
+//		1*time.Second,
+//	)


Alternatively, if a user sets After on the returned MockCallWrapper, it sort of makes the operation async already (with the exception of generating a separate started event).
Can you config After worker with the MockCallWrapper returned here?

internal/workflow_testsuite.go

Quinn-With-Two-Ns

I don't think this PR handles expectation failure , If I am wrong then could we add a test to verify.

rodrigozhou · 2024-10-16T16:29:58Z

@Quinn-With-Two-Ns I added AssertNexusOperation* functions.

rodrigozhou · 2024-10-16T16:32:14Z

internal/workflow_testsuite.go

-	if !(e.workflowMock.AssertCalled(dummyT, methodName, arguments...) || e.activityMock.AssertCalled(dummyT, methodName, arguments...)) {
-		return e.workflowMock.AssertCalled(t, methodName, arguments...) && e.activityMock.AssertCalled(t, methodName, arguments...)
-	}
-	return true


I think this code is wrong, as well as AssertNotCalled and AssertNumberOfCalls.

What do you mean?

L1003 checks if both workflowMock and activityMock was called. I think it was supposed to be if either of them was called. The other functions have similar mistakes.

Quinn-With-Two-Ns · 2024-10-16T22:44:47Z

internal/workflow_testsuite.go

+	return e
+}
+
+func (e *TestWorkflowEnvironment) SetOnNexusOperationCanceledListener(


nit: do we have a test for SetOnNexusOperationCanceledListener?

No, I'm not sure how to test it since the SDK itself doesn't support canceling a Nexus operation.

You can cancel a nexus operation from the SDK, the SDK can send a cancelation command from a workflow task.

Quinn-With-Two-Ns · 2024-10-16T22:45:50Z

test/nexus_test.go

@@ -1184,6 +1186,229 @@ func TestWorkflowTestSuite_NexusSyncOperation_ClientMethods_Panic(t *testing.T)
 	require.Equal(t, "not implemented in the test environment", panicReason)
 }

+func TestWorkflowTestSuite_MockNexusOperation(t *testing.T) {


nit: I don't think we test mocking cancel?

Quinn-With-Two-Ns

LGTM! few pieces of test coverage missing but not blocking address if you can. Please point at a released version of the nexus Go SDK before you merge

Quinn-With-Two-Ns · 2024-10-17T00:39:55Z

internal/workflow_testsuite.go

-	}
-	return true
+	return e.AssertWorkflowCalled(dummyT, methodName, arguments...) ||
+		e.AssertActivityCalled(dummyT, methodName, arguments...) ||


Why are some of these called with dummyT and some t?

That's a great question, and I have no idea. I just copied the existing calls.

I think we can just leave it as is, I will note I plan to deprecate these functions in the next minor release because they cause a lot of confusion for users since they awkwards combine workflow and activities so I wouldn't spend a lot of time fussing over them.

* Support mocking Nexus operation with operation reference * address comments * address comments

* Support for mocking nexus operations * address comments * add tests * add nexus events listeners * add test for nexus listeners * address comments * add assert nexus calls methods * address static checks * Support mocking Nexus operation with operation reference (temporalio#1683) * Support mocking Nexus operation with operation reference * address comments * address comments

rodrigozhou requested review from bergundy and Quinn-With-Two-Ns October 10, 2024 05:24

rodrigozhou requested a review from a team as a code owner October 10, 2024 05:24

cretz reviewed Oct 10, 2024

View reviewed changes

internal/workflow_testsuite.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

bergundy reviewed Oct 10, 2024

View reviewed changes

internal/internal_workflow_testsuite.go Show resolved Hide resolved

bergundy reviewed Oct 10, 2024

View reviewed changes

rodrigozhou requested review from bergundy and cretz October 11, 2024 04:27

cretz approved these changes Oct 11, 2024

View reviewed changes

rodrigozhou commented Oct 11, 2024

View reviewed changes

internal/internal_workflow_testsuite.go Show resolved Hide resolved

bergundy reviewed Oct 14, 2024

View reviewed changes

Quinn-With-Two-Ns reviewed Oct 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

internal/workflow_testsuite.go Show resolved Hide resolved

Quinn-With-Two-Ns requested changes Oct 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

rodrigozhou requested a review from Quinn-With-Two-Ns October 16, 2024 16:30

rodrigozhou commented Oct 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

Quinn-With-Two-Ns reviewed Oct 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

Quinn-With-Two-Ns approved these changes Oct 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

Quinn-With-Two-Ns reviewed Oct 17, 2024

View reviewed changes

rodrigozhou force-pushed the rodrigozhou/nexus-test-mocks branch from f6df7a0 to 3bb0bb9 Compare October 24, 2024 05:43

rodrigozhou added 7 commits October 28, 2024 14:09

Support for mocking nexus operations

80f40b4

address comments

e0da362

add tests

d467112

add nexus events listeners

af39532

add test for nexus listeners

6772f6d

address comments

80d40e6

add assert nexus calls methods

2d6bba7

rodrigozhou and others added 2 commits October 28, 2024 14:09

address static checks

c133289

Support mocking Nexus operation with operation reference (#1683)

509813d

* Support mocking Nexus operation with operation reference * address comments * address comments

rodrigozhou force-pushed the rodrigozhou/nexus-test-mocks branch from 606be16 to 509813d Compare October 28, 2024 21:09

rodrigozhou enabled auto-merge (squash) October 28, 2024 21:10

rodrigozhou merged commit 37d1775 into master Oct 28, 2024
14 checks passed

rodrigozhou deleted the rodrigozhou/nexus-test-mocks branch October 28, 2024 22:03

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Support for mocking nexus operations #1666

Support for mocking nexus operations #1666

rodrigozhou commented Oct 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading

bergundy commented Oct 10, 2024

bergundy Oct 10, 2024

rodrigozhou Oct 10, 2024

rodrigozhou Oct 10, 2024

bergundy Oct 14, 2024

rodrigozhou Oct 15, 2024

cretz left a comment

rodrigozhou Oct 11, 2024

bergundy Oct 14, 2024

bergundy Oct 14, 2024

rodrigozhou Oct 15, 2024 •

edited

Loading

bergundy left a comment

bergundy Oct 14, 2024

bergundy Oct 14, 2024

Quinn-With-Two-Ns left a comment

rodrigozhou commented Oct 16, 2024

rodrigozhou Oct 16, 2024

Quinn-With-Two-Ns Oct 16, 2024

rodrigozhou Oct 17, 2024

Quinn-With-Two-Ns Oct 16, 2024

rodrigozhou Oct 17, 2024

Quinn-With-Two-Ns Oct 17, 2024

Quinn-With-Two-Ns Oct 16, 2024

Quinn-With-Two-Ns left a comment

Quinn-With-Two-Ns Oct 17, 2024

rodrigozhou Oct 18, 2024

Quinn-With-Two-Ns Oct 23, 2024

Support for mocking nexus operations #1666

Support for mocking nexus operations #1666

Conversation

rodrigozhou commented Oct 10, 2024 • edited Loading

What was changed

Why?

Checklist

bergundy commented Oct 10, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cretz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rodrigozhou Oct 15, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bergundy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Quinn-With-Two-Ns left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rodrigozhou commented Oct 16, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Quinn-With-Two-Ns left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rodrigozhou commented Oct 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading

rodrigozhou Oct 15, 2024 •

edited

Loading