[rspec-users] Should I be using database_cleaner to tear down data in RSpec 2.0 + Rails 3.0?
dchelimsky at gmail.com
Sat Jun 5 16:21:16 EDT 2010
On Jun 5, 2010, at 4:11 PM, Brian Cardarella wrote:
> Yeah, I'm not certain what the deal is.
> Here is my spec_helper: http://pastie.org/993256
> I was using Spork but commented it out to see if that was an issue.
> I was using sqlite to see if the lack of a real transactional database
> was the issue. (changed to postgres) Nope.
> Not certain if this is of any help but here is my Gemfile: http://pastie.org/993259
I see two rspec-rails references in your Gemfile - not sure if that's the issue, but it could be.
> (it's a mess, I know)
> This is confusing. :p
> - Brian
> On Jun 5, 3:42 pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 5, 2010, at 3:34 PM, Brian Cardarella wrote:
>>> On Jun 5, 2:12 pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jun 5, 2010, at 12:42 PM, Brian Cardarella wrote:
>>>>> Subject pretty much asks the question
>>>> You _can_, but if you use ActiveRecord and start off with a clean DB, you can use_transactional_examples (alias for use_transactional_fixtures, which defaults to true in beta.10, but will default to false in beta.11).
>>> I'm not seeing that behavior.
>>> I have beta.10 and without using database_cleaner data is persisting
>>> after each spec and from suite run to suite run. I thought
>>> database_cleaner would resolve the issue but it doesn't seem to.
>> I _am_ seeing that behaviour :)
>> Are you using AR? What does your spec_helper look like?
>> This cucumber feature passes:
>> Not sure what's up, but there is something different about your environment.
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
More information about the rspec-users