here's a small spike project with a failing test
no build needed, just checkout the code and open the solution
the failing test , minimal code that gives the error, is in
Tests/HelloOrigoSmokeTests.cs -> Happy_path()
should we take this offline? Or start a new discussion so that other folk can ask questions and not be drowned out by this thread?
so lock is not released before next test commences
Busy re-creating the exact code from getting started, almost finished
then
this test throws System.IO.Exception cannot access the file
[Test]
public void Happy_path()
{
Config.Engines.CloseAll();
try
{
Console.WriteLine("Hosting the engine");
//------------------------------------
var path = Path.Combine(AppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectory);
Environment.CurrentDirectory = path;
var config = new EngineConfiguration()
{
JournalPath = path
};
IEngine<VetModel> engine = Engine.For<VetModel>();
Console.WriteLine("Executing commands");
// ------------------------------------
var cat = new Cat()
{
DOB = DateTime.UtcNow,
Name = NameGenerator.Generate(Gender.Female)
};
engine.Execute(new RegisterBirthCommand(cat));
Console.WriteLine("Executing query");
// ------------------------------------
var localEngine = (LocalEngineClient<VetModel>)engine;
var cats = localEngine.Execute(db => db.Cats.Where(c => true)).ToArray();
foreach (var c in cats) Console.WriteLine(c);
}
finally
{
Config.Engines.CloseAll();
}
}
i.e. I've gone overboard and set Environment.CurrentDirectory as well as JournalPath plus ensuring Engines.CloseAll before and after.
adding in thread.Sleeps does not fix either.
quick question, what exact namespace, what exact 'serializable' attribute must be used?
I'm now getting class
Foo (Cat) is not marked as serializable, and it is. mmm!
quickest way to give you the feedback is for you to clone this 'gist' / spike repo and run the test
clone that, and checkout branch
fail2
the failing test is '\Tests\HelloOrigoSmokeTests.cs`
Put the ToArray() inside the Execute instead and it will work
Hi Robert, there's this one phrase I dont quite understand in the documentation, describing the RoyalFoodTaster,
If a command fails, the taster is discarded and replaced with a clone of the real model, without requiring full restore. More importantly, the real model is readable while the taster is being rebuilt.
if the real model is still readable, (and valid) then why bother with rebuilding?
If the royal food taster goes corrupt, you need to create a new one
Ok got it; I had a performance test that appears superficially to contradict this; and my problem was that my test model was wastefully keeping a transaction history in memory that was never being queried. This resulted in a linear growth of model size in memory, resulting in a long clone times. (That's my theory) going to remove the transaction table from memory, ... that can always be recreated by replaying all the messages (wow.. that's incredible! ) ...and that should = a test that proves how it all works. If this works, I'd like to offer it for consideration as sample code for the docs?
so far, it looks like the sample code is thin on 'best practice' examples, or examples that show with tests, why (and when) you'd choose A over B.
