Ups and downs of contract testing in real life
Download as PPTX, PDF•1 like•285 views
This document discusses contract testing for microservices. It describes unit, API, and contract tests and explains how contract testing can help address integration errors. Contract tests run locally on both the consumer and producer sides. The document also discusses storing contracts, workflows for adding and changing contracts, integrating contracts into development pipelines, and challenges of implementing contract testing at scale for many microservices.
![15
CONSUMER-DRIVEN CONTRACTS
User
Conference
Service
(Consumer)
Some Other
Service
(Consumer)
Bonus
Conference
Service
(Producer)
{
"bonuses":[
{
“id":1,
“type":"TICKET"
}
]
}
{
"bonuses":[
{
“id":1
}
]
}](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/upsanddownsofcontracttestingsc2020finalxxx-200222121757/85/Ups-and-downs-of-contract-testing-in-real-life-15-320.jpg)
Ups and downs of contract testing in real life
- 1. UPS AND DOWNS OF CONTRACT TESTING IN REAL LIFE
- 4. 4 GAME BACKEND AT 2017 > 100 microservices ~40 deployments per week Unit + Component + API tests Integration errors
- 6. 6 UNIT TEST User Conference Service Bonus Conference Service GET /bonus-conference- service/userBalance?userId=1&sessionId=2 User Conference Service Mock(Bonus Conference Service) when(bonusClient.getBalance(1, 2)).thenReturn(100); assertThat(getUserItem(1)).isEqualTo(100); Runs locally
- 8. 8 WHAT SHOULD I CHOOSE?
- 9. 9 CONTRACT TESTING TO THE RESCUE! User Conference Service Bonus Conference Service Runs locally User Conference Service Bonus Conference Service GET /bonus-conference- service/userBalance?userId=1&sessionId=2 Producer Test ContractConsumer Test
- 10. 10 WHY CONTRACT TESTING ASPECT / LEVEL UNIT CONTRACT API WAY TO EXECUTE LOCAL LOCAL ENVIRONMENT FEEDBACK TIME FAST MEDIUM SLOW SETUP COMPLEXITY LOW MEDIUM HIGH CHANGE TOLERANCE NO YES YES CHECK FUNCTIONALITY YES NO YES CROSS-TEAM COLLABORATION NO YES YES
- 11. 11 TEST PYRAMID FOR MICROSERVICES Exploratory End-to-End Contract Component Unit
- 13. 13 APPROACHES
- 16. 16 TOOLSET
- 17. 17 TOOLSET
- 18. 18 CONCEPTS
- 19. 19 PROOF – OF - CONCEPTS Explore trade-offs. Do not seek for 'perfect' one Sample services - not a prod ones Do not forget about use cases
- 20. 20 STORAGE
- 21. 21 STORAGE: PRODUCER SIDE Contract kept with producer Need to make changes to producer repo every time Low visibility of coverage
- 22. 22 STORAGE: SEPARATE REPOSITORY Need to setup and maintain separate repo High visibility of contract coverage Ability to set up additional workflows and hooks
- 25. 25 WORKFLOWS: ADDING NEW CONTRACT Add contract in contract repo Contract review Implement test on consumer side Implement test on producer side Merge contract Merge consumer test Merge producer test
- 26. 26 WORKFLOWS: CHANGE EXISTING CONTRACT Change contract in contract repo Change code review Apply fixes on each consumer’s side Apply fixes on each producer’s side Merge contract change Merge consumer changes Merge producer changes
- 27. 27 INTEGRATING INTO DEVELOPMENT PIPELINE Unit + Component + Contract tests while artifacts build End-to-End API tests on pre- prod Deploy to prod
- 28. 28 EDUCATION
- 29. 29 TRAINING AND EDUCATION Make projects easy to start Do workshop. A lot Engineers need a knowledge base QA can write contract tests
- 31. 31 LEGACY SERVICES • It is better to think before action • Stakeholders can change priorities • Do not touch ‘old’ stuff
- 32. 32 AUTOMATE THE PROCESS • People can trick, gates don’t • If it’s not enforced, it will be skipped • “I can’t break anything with this change!” • Who is the gatekeeper of the services?
- 33. 33 AUTOMATIC TASKS TO RESOLVE
- 34. 34 AUTOMATIC TASKS TO RESOLVE
- 36. 36 COMMUNICATION • No time for code review • No time for applying the change / fix a test • “Talk to product owner”
- 37. 37 WHAT’S NOW • ~230 microservices • > 3200 contracts • Automatic contract resolution BUT? • Missing contract coverage map • Build time for contract repo • Contract tests for client
- 40. 40 CONTRACT TESTING… is not a “silver” bullet
- 41. 41 THINK!
- 42. 42 WHO AM I? OLEKSANDR ROMANOV Lead Software Engineer In Test @ Playtika Twitter: @al8xr Skype: alex_roma_nov www.linkedin.com/in/oleksandr-romanov
- 43. 43 Playtika is a world-leading games company. ABOUT US Platforms 13 Locations 19 Employees 3000+ Games 16