luxolus
/
open-consul
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 1 Pull Requests Packages Releases Wiki Activity
open-consul/ui-v2/tests/acceptance/dc/nodes/sessions/invalidate.feature

39 lines
1.5 KiB
Gherkin
Raw Normal View History

Lock Session invalidation acceptance test
2018-07-04 12:41:44 +00:00
@setupApplicationTest
Feature: dc / nodes / sessions / invalidate: Invalidate Lock Sessions
In order to invalidate a lock session
As a user
I should be able to invalidate a lock session by clicking a button and confirming
UI: Simplify/refactor the actions/notification layer (#4572) + (#4573) * Move notification texts to a slightly different layer (#4572) * Further Simplify/refactor the actions/notification layer (#4573) 1. Move the 'with-feedback' actions to a 'with-blocking-action' mixin which better describes what it does 2. Additional set of unit tests almost over the entire layer to prove things work/add confidence for further changes The multiple 'with-action' mixins used for every 'index/edit' combo are now reduced down to only contain the functionality related to their specific routes, i.e. where to redirect. The actual functionality to block and carry out the action and then notify are 'almost' split out so that their respective classes/objects do one thing and one thing 'well'. Mixins are chosen for the moment as the decoration approach used by mixins feels better than multiple levels of inheritence, but I would like to take this fuether in the future to a 'compositional' based approach. There is still possible further work to be done here, but I'm a lot happier now this is reduced down into separate parts.
2018-08-29 18:14:31 +00:00
Background:
Lock Session invalidation acceptance test
2018-07-04 12:41:44 +00:00
Given 1 datacenter model with the value "dc1"
And 1 node model from yaml
---
UI: External Source markers (#4640) 1. Addition of external source icons for services marked as such. 2. New %with-tooltip css component (wip) 3. New 'no healthcheck' icon as external sources might not have healthchecks, also minus icon on node cards in the service detail view 4. If a service doesn't have healthchecks, we use the [Services] tabs as the default instead of the [Health Checks] tab in the Service detail page. 5. `css-var` helper. The idea here is that it will eventually be replaced with pure css custom properties instead of having to use JS. It would be nice to be able to build the css variables into the JS at build time (you'd probably still want to specify in config which variables you wanted available in JS), but that's possible future work. Lastly there is probably a tiny bit more testing edits here than usual, I noticed that there was an area where the dynamic mocking wasn't happening, it was just using the mocks from consul-api-double, the mocks I was 'dynamically' setting happened to be the same as the ones in consul-api-double. I've fixed this here also but it wasn't effecting anything until actually made certain values dynamic.
2018-09-12 19:23:39 +00:00
ID: node-0
Lock Session invalidation acceptance test
2018-07-04 12:41:44 +00:00
---
And 2 session models from yaml
---
- ID: 7bbbd8bb-fff3-4292-b6e3-cfedd788546a
- ID: 7ccd0bd7-a5e0-41ae-a33e-ed3793d803b2
---
When I visit the node page for yaml
---
dc: dc1
node: node-0
---
UI: Simplify/refactor the actions/notification layer (#4572) + (#4573) * Move notification texts to a slightly different layer (#4572) * Further Simplify/refactor the actions/notification layer (#4573) 1. Move the 'with-feedback' actions to a 'with-blocking-action' mixin which better describes what it does 2. Additional set of unit tests almost over the entire layer to prove things work/add confidence for further changes The multiple 'with-action' mixins used for every 'index/edit' combo are now reduced down to only contain the functionality related to their specific routes, i.e. where to redirect. The actual functionality to block and carry out the action and then notify are 'almost' split out so that their respective classes/objects do one thing and one thing 'well'. Mixins are chosen for the moment as the decoration approach used by mixins feels better than multiple levels of inheritence, but I would like to take this fuether in the future to a 'compositional' based approach. There is still possible further work to be done here, but I'm a lot happier now this is reduced down into separate parts.
2018-08-29 18:14:31 +00:00
Then the url should be /dc1/nodes/node-0
Lock Session invalidation acceptance test
2018-07-04 12:41:44 +00:00
And I click lockSessions on the tabs
Then I see lockSessionsIsSelected on the tabs
UI: Simplify/refactor the actions/notification layer (#4572) + (#4573) * Move notification texts to a slightly different layer (#4572) * Further Simplify/refactor the actions/notification layer (#4573) 1. Move the 'with-feedback' actions to a 'with-blocking-action' mixin which better describes what it does 2. Additional set of unit tests almost over the entire layer to prove things work/add confidence for further changes The multiple 'with-action' mixins used for every 'index/edit' combo are now reduced down to only contain the functionality related to their specific routes, i.e. where to redirect. The actual functionality to block and carry out the action and then notify are 'almost' split out so that their respective classes/objects do one thing and one thing 'well'. Mixins are chosen for the moment as the decoration approach used by mixins feels better than multiple levels of inheritence, but I would like to take this fuether in the future to a 'compositional' based approach. There is still possible further work to be done here, but I'm a lot happier now this is reduced down into separate parts.
2018-08-29 18:14:31 +00:00
Scenario: Invalidating the lock session
Lock Session invalidation acceptance test
2018-07-04 12:41:44 +00:00
And I click delete on the sessions
And I click confirmDelete on the sessions
ui: Enable blocking queries by default (#6194) -Enable blocking queries by default -Change assertion to check for the last PUT request, not just any request for session destruction from a node page. Since we've now turned on blocking queries by default this means that a second GET request is made after the PUT request that we are asserting for but before the assertion itself, this meant the assertion failed. We double checked this by turning off blocking queries for this test using ``` And settings from yaml --- consul:client: blocking: 0 --- ``` which made the test pass again. As moving forwards blocking queries will be on by default, we didn't want to disable blocking queries for this test, so we now assert the last PUT request specifically. This means we continue to assert that the session has been destroyed but means we don't get into problems of ordering of requests here
2019-08-05 15:31:27 +00:00
Then the last PUT request was made to "/v1/session/destroy/7bbbd8bb-fff3-4292-b6e3-cfedd788546a?dc=dc1"
UI: Simplify/refactor the actions/notification layer (#4572) + (#4573) * Move notification texts to a slightly different layer (#4572) * Further Simplify/refactor the actions/notification layer (#4573) 1. Move the 'with-feedback' actions to a 'with-blocking-action' mixin which better describes what it does 2. Additional set of unit tests almost over the entire layer to prove things work/add confidence for further changes The multiple 'with-action' mixins used for every 'index/edit' combo are now reduced down to only contain the functionality related to their specific routes, i.e. where to redirect. The actual functionality to block and carry out the action and then notify are 'almost' split out so that their respective classes/objects do one thing and one thing 'well'. Mixins are chosen for the moment as the decoration approach used by mixins feels better than multiple levels of inheritence, but I would like to take this fuether in the future to a 'compositional' based approach. There is still possible further work to be done here, but I'm a lot happier now this is reduced down into separate parts.
2018-08-29 18:14:31 +00:00
Then the url should be /dc1/nodes/node-0
And "[data-notification]" has the "notification-delete" class
And "[data-notification]" has the "success" class
Scenario: Invalidating a lock session and receiving an error
Given the url "/v1/session/destroy/7bbbd8bb-fff3-4292-b6e3-cfedd788546a?dc=dc1" responds with a 500 status
And I click delete on the sessions
And I click confirmDelete on the sessions
Then the url should be /dc1/nodes/node-0
And "[data-notification]" has the "notification-delete" class
And "[data-notification]" has the "error" class