Skip to content
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

feat: create a concurrent testing library #23

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
56 changes: 56 additions & 0 deletions lib/concurrent_testing.ex
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
defmodule ConcurrentTesting do
@moduledoc """
Concurrent Testing is a seperate library that allows faster

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

[misspell] reported by reviewdog 🐶
"seperate" is a misspelling of "separate"

and more isolated tests in a large distributed environment.

## Why

Let's think about a small system first. We have a single application
that wants to run tests concurrently. When this happens without any
prior setup, you run into issues where the database will have data
from other tests. This is a huge pain and delt with a couple of
different ways:

1) You simply don't run tests concurrently. This works but it's slow.

2) Ensure your data never overlaps. This takes a very large time
for a developer to do correctly, and still leads to edge cases where
queries not filtered correctly can leak data.

3) Run everything in a transaction. This is what most libraries as
it uses your database's transaction guarantees to ensure data is not
leaked between tests.

Phoenix supports number 3 via the `Phoenix.Ecto.SQL.Sandbox` module.
This works _great_ but has a couple of downsides in large distributed
systems.

## Problems

1) It only wraps the database, so RabbitMQ messages are still consumed
outside of the transaction

2) You have to call an endpoint to create a transaction. This means
cascading calls with every service which takes a while.

## Differences

To solve these problems, we've recreated the `Phoenix.Ecto.SQL.Sandbox`
module using a registry pattern, and generalized it to be useful in
other transports like HTTP or RabbitMQ.

Firstly, we use a registry to store arbitrary keys instead of encoding
the pid data. This allows us to use the same key for all services in
the same distributed test.

Secondly, we expose easy to use functions for producing and consuming
libraries to use. This makes it easy to integrate no matter what data
source you are using.

Lastly, we don't require a request to create the initial transaction.
If the given key is unknown, we will create a new transaction on the
fly. Then after the configured timeout, the transaction automatically
closes. This prevents cascading transaction create calls in a distributed
system.
"""
end