-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 22
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
just updating the unit testing file for Kafka Consumer #3834
Conversation
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe changes in this pull request involve a comprehensive restructuring of the test suite for the Kafka consumer in Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## staging #3834 +/- ##
========================================
Coverage 11.77% 11.77%
========================================
Files 114 114
Lines 15205 15205
Branches 274 274
========================================
Hits 1791 1791
Misses 13414 13414 |
Auth-service changes in this PR available for preview here |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 2
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
src/auth-service/bin/jobs/test/ut_kafka-consumer.js
(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
src/auth-service/bin/jobs/test/ut_kafka-consumer.js (2)
22-31
: Well-structured stub initialization!
The consolidation of Kafka consumer stubs into a single consumerStub
object is a great improvement. This approach:
- Provides better organization of related stubs
- Makes the test setup more maintainable
- Accurately represents the actual Kafka consumer interface
129-146
: Excellent subscription order verification!
This test effectively ensures the correct initialization sequence of the Kafka consumer by:
- Verifying all topics are subscribed to before the consumer starts
- Using Promise resolution to control the timing
- Checking the correct order of operations
it("should handle messages for each topic correctly", async () => { | ||
// Simulate message processing by triggering the eachMessage callback | ||
consumerStub.run.callsFake(async ({ eachMessage }) => { | ||
await eachMessage({ | ||
topic: "ip-address", | ||
partition: 0, | ||
message: { value: JSON.stringify({ ip: "192.168.1.1" }) }, | ||
}); | ||
}); | ||
|
||
try { | ||
// Call the kafkaConsumer function | ||
await kafkaConsumer(); | ||
await kafkaConsumer(); | ||
|
||
// Check if the error is caught and logged | ||
expect( | ||
loggerErrorStub.calledOnceWithExactly( | ||
"Error connecting to Kafka: Kafka connection error" | ||
) | ||
).to.be.true; | ||
} catch (error) { | ||
throw error; | ||
} | ||
// Verify message processing | ||
expect(consumerStub.run.calledOnce).to.be.true; | ||
// Add specific verification for your message handlers |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance message handling verification
While the test structure is good, it could benefit from more specific assertions to verify the actual message processing logic.
Consider adding these verifications:
it("should handle messages for each topic correctly", async () => {
// Simulate message processing by triggering the eachMessage callback
consumerStub.run.callsFake(async ({ eachMessage }) => {
await eachMessage({
topic: "ip-address",
partition: 0,
message: { value: JSON.stringify({ ip: "192.168.1.1" }) },
});
});
await kafkaConsumer();
// Verify message processing
expect(consumerStub.run.calledOnce).to.be.true;
+ // Verify the message was processed correctly
+ expect(loggerInfoStub.calledWith(
+ sinon.match(/Processing message from topic: ip-address/)
+ )).to.be.true;
+ // Verify any specific handlers or transformations
+ // Add assertions for business logic specific to ip-address topic
});
Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
it("should handle message processing errors", async () => { | ||
consumerStub.run.callsFake(async ({ eachMessage }) => { | ||
await eachMessage({ | ||
topic: "ip-address", | ||
partition: 0, | ||
message: { | ||
value: "testMessageData", | ||
}, | ||
}; | ||
await eachMessage(fakeMessage); | ||
message: { value: "invalid-json" }, | ||
}); | ||
}); | ||
|
||
try { | ||
// Call the kafkaConsumer function | ||
await kafkaConsumer(); | ||
await kafkaConsumer(); | ||
|
||
// Check if the error is caught and logged | ||
expect( | ||
loggerErrorStub.calledOnceWithExactly( | ||
"No operation defined for topic: topic2" | ||
) | ||
).to.be.true; | ||
} catch (error) { | ||
throw error; | ||
} | ||
expect(loggerErrorStub.called).to.be.true; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Strengthen error handling test assertions
The current test only verifies that an error was logged, but doesn't validate the specific error handling behavior.
Consider enhancing the test with more specific assertions:
it("should handle message processing errors", async () => {
+ const invalidJson = "invalid-json";
consumerStub.run.callsFake(async ({ eachMessage }) => {
await eachMessage({
topic: "ip-address",
partition: 0,
- message: { value: "invalid-json" },
+ message: { value: invalidJson },
});
});
await kafkaConsumer();
- expect(loggerErrorStub.called).to.be.true;
+ expect(loggerErrorStub.calledWith(
+ sinon.match(/Error processing message from topic: ip-address/)
+ )).to.be.true;
+ expect(jsonrepairStub.calledWith(invalidJson)).to.be.true;
+ // Verify that the consumer continues processing after error
+ expect(consumerStub.run.called).to.be.true;
});
Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
Description
just updating the unit testing file for Kafka Consumer
Summary by CodeRabbit