testfixtures VS ginkgo

I'm the author of https://github.com/go-testfixtures/testfixtures, a library written to make it easier to write tests with a real database and test data. You might want to use it together with docker-compose, for example.

To solve the problem we will use testfixtures. Create a folders fixtures и fixtures/storage and put a file users.yaml inside:

A lot of good suggestions here, I would also take a look at go-testfixtures which allows you to create some simple yaml-based fixture data to use with unit testing. It's quick and easy, but yes can get unwieldy the more you add.

I built an alternative to Make written in Go that is simpler to use and cross-platform: https://taskfile.dev/

Also, a library to write tests with databases for Go: https://github.com/go-testfixtures/testfixtures

Ginkgo: a testing framework based on the concept of ‌"Behavior Driven Development" (BDD)

We were also able to leverage Ginkgo's parallel testing runtime to run our integration tests on multiple concurrent processes. This provided multiple benefits: we could run our entire integration test suite in under 10 minutes and also reuse the same suite to load test the operator in a production-like environment. Using these tests, we were able to identify hot spots in the code that needed further optimization and experimented with ways to save API calls to ease the load on our own Kubernetes API server while also staying under various AWS rate limits. It was only after running these tests over and over again that I felt confident enough to deploy the operator to our dev and prod clusters.

A bit off-topic, but i really like the ginkgo BDD framework

You obviously are not familiar with the third circle of golang continuous integration hell that is ginkgo+gomega:

https://onsi.github.io/ginkgo/#adding-specs-to-a-suite

It’s actually worse than that example suggests. Stuff like Expect(“type safety”).ShouldBe(GreaterThan(13)) throws runtime errors.

The semantics of parallel test runs weren’t defined anywhere the last time I checked.

Anyway, you’ll be thinking back fondly to the days of TestShouldReplaceChildrenWhenUpdatingInstance because now you need to write nested function calls like:

Context(“instances”, func …)

Describe(“that are being updated”, …)

Expect(“should replace children”, …)

And to invoke that from the command line, you need to write a regex against whatever undocumented and unprinted string it internally concatenates together to uniquely describe the test.

Also, they dump color codes to stdout without checking that they are writing to a terminal, so there will be line noise all over whatever automated test logs you produce, or if you pipe stdout to a file.

If you are using Ginkgo for your e2e, this library might of help.

https://onsi.github.io/ginkgo/ offers a simple way to create tables with different scenarios useful to generate different test cases based on a file like a yml without to need to develop useless code. Maybe at start seems to be a little verbose but depends how you design the test case.

What are people’s thoughts on testing frameworks? I’ve heard that most devs only use the testing package in the standard library and the testify package for assertions— I assume this is because Go is meant to be lightweight and scalable, and adding external dependencies basically goes against that. But I’ve also seen devs use packages like ginkgo to make tests more structured and readable. What do you guys think?

Ginkgo Behavioural test framework

If you write your tests with Ginkgo [0] its CLI can do this for you. It also has nice facilities to quickly disable a test or portion of a test by pretending an X to the test function name, or to focus a test (only run that test) by prepending an F. It’s pretty nice.

[0]: https://onsi.github.io/ginkgo/

The BDD testing framework Ginko [1] has some "weird" / unidiomatic patterns, yet it is very popular

https://github.com/onsi/ginkgo