4 ms·

Ok. In this case it is still e2e. In my head e2e is never a strategy to test everything. I also thing they did a good optimizations to offload some cases from

by gls2ro 5y ago

Ok. In this case it is still e2e. In my head e2e is never a strategy to test everything. I also thing they did a good optimizations to offload some cases from e2e go some other form of testing which for should be integration testing. If they dont do integration testing then a lot of possible bug cannot be found. Just testing the input and output of each microservice is not enough. But I will watch the video as maybe it is better explained there and there is something to learn from this experience.

mst 5y ago
Yes, I said it was still e2e. What they meant - I think - was they moved away from "a primarily end-to-end integration test suite" to "service-as-black-box unit-ish testing" plus "focused end-to-end integration testing for critical paths".
- lamontcg 5y ago
  Yeah and that's deeply confusing. At work we have too many components that are tested in isolation, but which have grown to become tightly coupled, so we're trying to build an end to end testing framework. So from my perspective I'm living in a world where our end-to-end test suite doesn't exist and therefore could be equivalent to "killing it" and it is bad. Each component tests its own contracts, but if there's no global testing that the contracts match in both codebases then you're still shipping broken software. I thought this article would be some clever way to match client side and server side contracts to ensure that the contracts are identical on both sides and tested so that you could test in isolation then still come away with assurances that the whole would work together. Instead it sounds like it is advice to only build as much end-to-end tests so that you're reasonably confident that more isolating unit/functional will work, but don't build too much because they're horribly slow, and never adopt a policy that literally everything should be end-to-end tested because that will result in infinitely long running test suites. If you have no end-to-end tests you have no confidence that the software you ship works, if you have only end-to-end tests you have no confidence in your ability to ship software in the future. So, uh, "clickbait title" I guess is my point?
  - alex-freire 5y ago
    sorry for the bait. thanks for the click :-D

by gls2ro 5y ago

mst 5y ago

Yes, I said it was still e2e. What they meant - I think - was they moved away from "a primarily end-to-end integration test suite" to "service-as-black-box unit-ish testing" plus "focused end-to-end integration testing for critical paths".

lamontcg 5y ago
Yeah and that's deeply confusing. At work we have too many components that are tested in isolation, but which have grown to become tightly coupled, so we're trying to build an end to end testing framework. So from my perspective I'm living in a world where our end-to-end test suite doesn't exist and therefore could be equivalent to "killing it" and it is bad. Each component tests its own contracts, but if there's no global testing that the contracts match in both codebases then you're still shipping broken software. I thought this article would be some clever way to match client side and server side contracts to ensure that the contracts are identical on both sides and tested so that you could test in isolation then still come away with assurances that the whole would work together. Instead it sounds like it is advice to only build as much end-to-end tests so that you're reasonably confident that more isolating unit/functional will work, but don't build too much because they're horribly slow, and never adopt a policy that literally everything should be end-to-end tested because that will result in infinitely long running test suites. If you have no end-to-end tests you have no confidence that the software you ship works, if you have only end-to-end tests you have no confidence in your ability to ship software in the future. So, uh, "clickbait title" I guess is my point?
- alex-freire 5y ago
  sorry for the bait. thanks for the click :-D