Commit Graph

22 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Martin Atkins 0573ff6793 helper/resource: pass config when testing import
Previously having a config was mutually exclusive with running an import,
but we need to provide a config so that the provider is declared, or else
we can't actually complete the import in the future world where providers
are installed dynamically based on their declarations.
2017-06-09 14:03:59 -07:00
Clint 372a80bc42 provider/aws: Add Sweeper setup, Sweepers for DB Option Group, Key Pair (#14773)
* provider/aws: Add Sweeper setup, Sweepers for DB Option Group, Key Pair

* provider/google: Add sweeper for any leaked databases
* more recursion and added LC sweeper, to test out the Dependency path

* implement a dependency example

* implement sweep-run flag to filter runs

* stub a test for TestMain

* test for multiple -sweep-run list
2017-06-06 10:34:17 -05:00
clint shryock 61355c33c5 testing: Add option to run only a plan on a TestStep configuration 2017-03-22 15:38:21 -05:00
James Bardin 5238f51dc7 move TestReset mock from terraform to helper
the terraform package doesn't know about TestProvider, so don't put the
hooks in terraform.MockResourceProvider. Wrap the mock in the test where
we need to check the TestProvider functionality.
2017-03-08 17:48:11 -05:00
James Bardin 4b2e96b2e2 test for TestReset and fixed resource factories 2017-03-07 11:39:12 -05:00
James Nugent b551981cc7 testing: Add ComposeAggregateTestFunc
This commit adds a function which composes a series of TestFuncs, but
will run all tests before returning an error, unlike ComposeTestFunc.
This is useful when verifying contents of state in acceptance tests and
it is desirable to see all the failing cases in one run for slow
resources.
2016-08-16 19:56:18 +01:00
Mitchell Hashimoto e0da21d381
helper/resource: make id-only check opt-in
As I've been working through the resources, I'm finding that a lot are
going to need some serious work. Given we have hundreds, I think it
might be prudent to make this opt-in for now and we can revisit
automatic/opt-out at some future point.

Importability will likely be opt-in it appears so this will match up
with that.
2016-04-21 08:37:08 -07:00
Mitchell Hashimoto 0c8b0bff2c
helper/resource: can specify specific name to id refresh test 2016-04-20 11:12:30 -07:00
Mitchell Hashimoto 1a9fae6b2e
helper/resource: can disable ID refresh check 2016-04-20 11:09:54 -07:00
Mitchell Hashimoto f2c4f8e9ba
helper/resource: fix tests 2016-04-20 10:08:34 -07:00
Mitchell Hashimoto 86e0c853db
helper/resource: test for failing id-only refresh check 2016-04-20 09:18:25 -07:00
Mitchell Hashimoto 4f6edf4fe4
helper/resource: id-only refresh testing 2016-04-20 09:16:48 -07:00
Paul Hinze 24048b4dca providers: Mention check number when acctest fails 2016-02-02 10:57:28 -06:00
Paul Hinze 88744d569f helper/resource/testing: unit tests to cover #1770
Also clarified that final return value of testStep is now only for the
happy path.
2015-05-01 11:22:06 -05:00
Paul Hinze 149e52ad1f helper/resource: verify refresh+plan after each step
I forgot to add `Computed: true` when I made the "key_name" field
optional in #1751.

This made the behavior:

 * Name generated in Create and set as ID
 * Follow up plan (without refresh) was nice and empty
 * During refresh, name gets cleared out on Read, causing a bad diff on
   subsequent plans

We can automatically catch bugs like this if we add yet another
verification step to our resource acceptance tests -> a post
Refresh+Plan that we verify is empty.

I left the non-refresh Plan verification in, because it's important that
_both_ of these are empty after an Apply.
2015-04-30 12:52:25 -05:00
Paul Hinze 7fe34d4547 providers: check for empty plan after each test step
Each acceptance test step plays a Refresh, Plan, Apply for a given
config. This adds a follow up Plan and fails the test if it does not
come back empty. This will catch issues with perpetual, unresolvable
diffs that crop up here and there.

This is going to cause a lot of our existing acceptance tests to fail -
too many to roll into a single PR. I think the best plan is to land this
in master and then fix the failures (each of which should be catching a
legitimate provider bug) one by one until we get the provider suites
back to green.
2015-04-09 10:19:01 -05:00
Mitchell Hashimoto 9b2b3a963f ResourceDiff => InstanceDiff 2014-09-17 16:33:24 -07:00
Mitchell Hashimoto 0bcbccf046 helper/resource: compiles, fails because Context doesn't work, probably 2014-09-16 17:02:05 -07:00
Mitchell Hashimoto 4a3d51f40e helper/resource: can compose TestCheckFuncs 2014-07-10 13:29:38 -07:00
Mitchell Hashimoto 83f73e63aa helper/resource: add PreCheck 2014-07-10 13:12:47 -07:00
Mitchell Hashimoto 55c1bf7f79 helper/resource: more tests 2014-07-10 10:30:41 -07:00
Mitchell Hashimoto e0fbd48afd helper/resource: Acceptance test framework 2014-07-10 10:20:21 -07:00