Slide 1

Slide 1 text

Testing microservices the right way Tatiana Shepeleva @ Toptal

Slide 2

Slide 2 text

Tatiana Shepeleva @ Toptal

Slide 3

Slide 3 text

• I am Quality Assurance Engineer • Love my job • 36 countries

Slide 4

Slide 4 text

toptal.com

Slide 5

Slide 5 text

Testing microservices the right way

Slide 6

Slide 6 text

Microservices are great

Slide 7

Slide 7 text

Microservices are light

Slide 8

Slide 8 text

Microservices are isolated

Slide 9

Slide 9 text

Microservices are fun

Slide 10

Slide 10 text

Microservices are fun

Slide 11

Slide 11 text

No content

Slide 12

Slide 12 text

~2000 end-to-end* tests * also known as acceptance, UI or business tests

Slide 13

Slide 13 text

~3800 min

Slide 14

Slide 14 text

No content

Slide 15

Slide 15 text

No content

Slide 16

Slide 16 text

No content

Slide 17

Slide 17 text

Complications • Have different databases • Use different languages • Work with different protocols

Slide 18

Slide 18 text

+5 min/service

Slide 19

Slide 19 text

What’s wrong with end-to-end tests? • Expensive and complex infrastructure • Time consuming • Flaky

Slide 20

Slide 20 text

No content

Slide 21

Slide 21 text

No content

Slide 22

Slide 22 text

Test integration separately

Slide 23

Slide 23 text

Requirements •Ruby •JavaScript •Scala/JVM •Elixir •WebSocket support •Easy to update tests •Provider can’t break consumers

Slide 24

Slide 24 text

Record & Replay

Slide 25

Slide 25 text

No content

Slide 26

Slide 26 text

No content

Slide 27

Slide 27 text

Record & Replay Polly.JS VCR Ruby ❌ ✅ JavaScript ✅ ✅ Scala/JVM ❌ ✅ Elixir ❌ ✅ WebSocket support ✅ ❌ Easy to update tests ❌ ❌ Provider can’t break consumers ❌ ❌

Slide 28

Slide 28 text

Fake server

Slide 29

Slide 29 text

No content

Slide 30

Slide 30 text

Fake servers Wiremock Mockserver Ruby ✅ ✅ JavaScript ✅ ✅ Scala/JVM ✅ ✅ Elixir ❌ WebSocket support ❌ ❌ Easy to update tests ✅ ✅ Provider can’t break consumers ❌ ❌

Slide 31

Slide 31 text

Contract tests

Slide 32

Slide 32 text

No content

Slide 33

Slide 33 text

No content

Slide 34

Slide 34 text

No content

Slide 35

Slide 35 text

Contract tests Spring Cloud Pact Ruby ❌ ✅ JavaScript ❌ ✅ Scala/JVM ✅ ✅ Elixir ❌ Web Socket support Easy to update tests ✅ ✅ Provider can’t break consumers ✅ ✅

Slide 36

Slide 36 text

Cons • Expensive and complex infrastructure ✅ • Time consuming ✅ • Flaky ✅

Slide 37

Slide 37 text

Cons • Not a functional testing

Slide 38

Slide 38 text

docs.pact.io

Slide 39

Slide 39 text

Pact • Support different languages (Ruby, JS, Go, PHP, Python, JVM) • Framework-agnostic • Language-agnostic contract (JSON)

Slide 40

Slide 40 text

No content

Slide 41

Slide 41 text

No content

Slide 42

Slide 42 text

No content

Slide 43

Slide 43 text

No content

Slide 44

Slide 44 text

No content

Slide 45

Slide 45 text

No content

Slide 46

Slide 46 text

No content

Slide 47

Slide 47 text

GraphQL?

Slide 48

Slide 48 text

No content

Slide 49

Slide 49 text

No content

Slide 50

Slide 50 text

No content

Slide 51

Slide 51 text

No content

Slide 52

Slide 52 text

WebSockets?

Slide 53

Slide 53 text

Experimental support Pact-JS

Slide 54

Slide 54 text

gRPC?

Slide 55

Slide 55 text

No but may be - #protobufs

Slide 56

Slide 56 text

Storage for contracts • Your CI • Your codebase • Pact Broker

Slide 57

Slide 57 text

Pact Broker • Stores versions and tags • Webhooks to trigger checks or notifications • can-i-deploy tool

Slide 58

Slide 58 text

No content

Slide 59

Slide 59 text

No content

Slide 60

Slide 60 text

No content

Slide 61

Slide 61 text

No content

Slide 62

Slide 62 text

Pact Broker PactFlow

Slide 63

Slide 63 text

No content

Slide 64

Slide 64 text

No content

Slide 65

Slide 65 text

How is it actually going to work?

Slide 66

Slide 66 text

Consumer flow

Slide 67

Slide 67 text

Consumer flow

Slide 68

Slide 68 text

Consumer flow

Slide 69

Slide 69 text

Consumer flow

Slide 70

Slide 70 text

Consumer flow

Slide 71

Slide 71 text

Consumer flow

Slide 72

Slide 72 text

Consumer flow

Slide 73

Slide 73 text

Consumer flow

Slide 74

Slide 74 text

Consumer flow

Slide 75

Slide 75 text

Provider flow

Slide 76

Slide 76 text

Provider flow

Slide 77

Slide 77 text

Provider flow

Slide 78

Slide 78 text

Provider flow

Slide 79

Slide 79 text

Provider flow

Slide 80

Slide 80 text

Provider flow

Slide 81

Slide 81 text

The Right Way • 10 instead of 3800 min • Contract tests are a part of unit tests • Number of end-to-end tests minimal

Slide 82

Slide 82 text

The end Tatiana Shepeleva tati.engineer