[rspec-users] Specifying certain tables NOT to be cleared each example?

David Chelimsky dchelimsky at gmail.com
Thu May 22 09:58:14 EDT 2008


On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Andrew Selder <aselder at mac.com> wrote:
> David,
>
> The static data generated in the migrations in being wiped away.
>
> I did a
> rake db:test:purge
>
> followed by
>
> rake db:migrate RAILS_ENV=test
>
> and then looked in my database to verify that the data was there and it was.
>
> And then when I run rake spec, the test blow up and I looks at the DB and
> all the static tables are empty.
>
> Looking at the rspec.rake file in the rspec_on_rails plugin, the spec task
> calls the spec_prereq task. This task does a db:test:prepare, which looking
> at the source for that in the rails gem only copies the schema from the
> development db.
>
> I'm using Rails 2.1 RC1, and the tagged CURRENT version of both plugins.

AHA!

CURRENT means the latest release, which is 1.1.3, which was released
months ago, before Rails 2.1 RC1.

Try the latest from github:

script/plugin install git://github.com/dchelimsky/rspec.git
script/plugin install git://github.com/dchelimsky/rspec-rails.git
script/generate rspec

See if that makes any difference.

Cheers,
David

>
> Thanks,
>
> Andrew
>
> On May 22, 2008, at 9:32 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
>> On May 21, 2008, at 9:49 PM, Andrew Selder wrote:
>>
>>> Is it possible to specify that certain tables not be cleared on each
>>> example.
>>>
>>> I've inherited a project where a good amount of enumerated data is stored
>>> in the database (US States, statuses, about 15-20 tables worth. Over all,
>>> it's a reasonable decision that leads to solid production code
>>> (acts_as_enumerated is good). This data is read-only and relatively static;
>>> any changes to these tables are done via migrations.
>>>
>>> The problem comes when I'm writing my tests. Obviously all these tables
>>> get wiped with each example.
>>
>> This should not be the case. Transactions get rolled back, but tables do
>> not just get wiped clean.
>>
>> If this static data is being generated in migrations, then you should be
>> OK. Is it?
>>
>>> Yes, I could specify these as fixtures, but I really don't want to have
>>> to specify 15-20 fixtures on every example. Yes, I could mock/stub all the
>>> values, except that I use many of these values at class definition time,
>>> which means that errors are thrown before I can even mock/stub.
>>>
>>> For instance, I have a statement like this.
>>>
>>> named_scope :open, :conditions => ["lead_status_id IN (?)", %w{New
>>> Incubating Client UAG}.collect{|x| LeadStatus[x].id}]
>>>
>>> Which loads the named_scope using the string version of the enumeration
>>> for clarity's sake. It works great, except for testing.
>>>
>>> Does anybody see anyway around this other than creating a fixture file
>>> for each of these tables and loading all the fixtures on each describe
>>> block. Not only does this make for ugly code, but I'm sure it takes a good
>>> chunk of time to setup and teardown each of the tables each example.
>>>
>>> It would be wonderful if there was some option to specify tables that
>>> behave like this, that should be loaded at the beginning of the test run,
>>> and (optionally) trashed at the end of the run. Or even better, specify that
>>> the test script shouldn't touch (build or teardown) these tables at all, and
>>> let their migrated state remain.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rspec-users mailing list
>>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>


More information about the rspec-users mailing list