Timeline for Are in-memory database a form of integration tests?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 27, 2020 at 6:37 | comment | added | Bart van Ingen Schenau | @elfico: Sharing a database between tests can create a coupling, where for example test 5 will start failing if tests 2 and 4 are not executed before it in that order. That limits your ability to run a subset of the tests. | |
| Mar 26, 2020 at 13:21 | comment | added | Doc Brown | @elfico: this can work well, but be careful: when reusing the same db for several tests (in-memory or not), one has to make sure not to get unwanted side effects. It can also prevent parallelization of tests. It depends all on your specific requirements. | |
| Mar 26, 2020 at 13:06 | vote | accept | elfico | ||
| Mar 26, 2020 at 13:06 | vote | accept | elfico | ||
| Mar 26, 2020 at 13:06 | |||||
| Mar 26, 2020 at 13:06 | comment | added | elfico | thanks a lot for the detailed answer. I can honestly answer yes to point 1 and 3. For point, it is worth noting that the setup for the in-memory database occurs once as this is a shared context so the same setup is used across all tests. I wrote two tests using the same in-memory database and though the first took about 1.5s, the second took 74ms. The second test for using the mocking method took about 20ms compared to about 350ms for the first. These numbers are average of course. Thanks for the link too | |
| Mar 26, 2020 at 13:04 | history | edited | Doc Brown | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 17 characters in body
|
| Mar 26, 2020 at 12:06 | history | edited | Doc Brown | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 81 characters in body
|
| Mar 26, 2020 at 12:00 | history | edited | Doc Brown | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 81 characters in body
|
| Mar 26, 2020 at 11:54 | history | answered | Doc Brown | CC BY-SA 4.0 |