akkadotnet/akka.net

Port of Akka actors for .NET

rsinohara

@rsinohara

this behavior is consistent

Aaron Stannard

@Aaronontheweb

if you're using the built-in mechanics there

and not reinventing the wheel

we guarantee that you start with a clean actorsystem each time

so this shouldn't be able to happen

@mmisztal1980 no, I'm not

rsinohara

@rsinohara

Yes, I recreate every TestProbe, props and actors on [Setup]

If I run that test + any other one, it fails (because it doesn't ignore that message)

_actor.Tell(new GameActor.NewGameMessage(new List<PlayerData>() { _userData1, _userData2 }));

            _userActorProbe1.IgnoreMessages(m=> m is UserActor.WelcomeToGameMessage);
            _userActorProbe2.IgnoreMessages(m => m is UserActor.WelcomeToGameMessage);

            _userActorProbe1.ExpectMsg<UserActor.GameInitializedMessage>();
            _userActorProbe2.ExpectMsg<UserActor.GameInitializedMessage>();

wait. Should my IgnoreMsgs be before .Tell?

Aaron Stannard

@Aaronontheweb

if the tell generates the messages that need to be ignored

then yep

rsinohara

@rsinohara

I just did that and it works... why on earth did I have them after?

Aaron Stannard

@Aaronontheweb

haha

rsinohara

@rsinohara

Still puzzled about why it worked when that test was run individually, but there you go... I've had this issue for days lol

Aaron Stannard

@Aaronontheweb

guess you just needed some "rubber duck debugging" for that one :p https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber_duck_debugging

might have worked when 1 test at a time because this is a race condition

the actor will asynchronously receive those messages as part of the tell

rsinohara

@rsinohara

I just needed to read the code after a few days off it :)

Aaron Stannard

@Aaronontheweb

and the ignore messages is synchronous

so it was just coincidence that it worked at all - whereas when you ran the full suite you eventually hit a case where you lost the race

rsinohara

@rsinohara

That's why this test is the only one that had this issue, as others I have ignores use TestActors

Maciek Misztal

@mmisztal1980

@Aaronontheweb After a 3rd Become, I'm trying to do a Self.Tell(new Msg()) but that Msg is never received, even though the Receive<Msg>(...) is set in that Become(...) handler

rsinohara

@rsinohara

btw congrats Aaron, besides the nice work on akka.net, you're an amazing speaker

rsinohara

@rsinohara

Hmm, I cannot call methods on TestActor.UnderlyingActor... What is the recommended way to make a test actor become something, without having to go through all the state changes?

(Or is the only way to create a message handler just for this?)

Bartosz Sypytkowski

@Horusiath

@rsinohara think about this a little differently. Become essentially builds a state machine. C# await also builds a state machine:

DoSomething();
await DoSomethingAsync(); // in this continuation the behavior switches
DoSomethingElse();

How do you want to check if DoSomethingElse() has been called without calling first two methods before?

rsinohara

@rsinohara

@Horusiath I'm not sure what you mean. Suppose my actor goes S1->S2->S3. I want to test S3 behavior, without having to interact with the actor to make it follow nominal path from S1 to S3.

I just want to set that state, then test its behavior, not test the state change flow.

Bartosz Sypytkowski

@Horusiath

what I'm trying to say, is that's impossible unless you already have some start point, which allows you to omit are intermediate steps

just like you cannot execute only the last line of the method without going through every statement before

rsinohara

@rsinohara

Well I can create a message handler that will directly call the specific Become... but I'll be creating a handler just to accommodate tests - which I'd avoid unless there is no way

Bartosz Sypytkowski

@Horusiath

when writing tests for akka, I usually write the whole initialization code (if it's repeatable, make a separate method from it)

rsinohara

@rsinohara

If Underlying actor exposed methods, that would be as simples as calling a method that Becomes what I need for the test in question.

A hack would be to do it through a property setter/getter (ewww)

Bartosz Sypytkowski

@Horusiath

if I make a shortcut to test only the specific behavior without steps that I need to make on the way, then I'm not truly testing that behavior. Simply because the tested scenario is artificial and doesn't occur in reality

heh, testing only the behavior is something that's going to happen, when akka-typed goes out :P

rsinohara

@rsinohara

I get what you mean now

Maybe I should rethink my testing startegy

Is there any material on actor (unit) testing?

I'd love a book about that.

Bartosz Sypytkowski

@Horusiath

the biggest reference is akka repository - around 4000 examples ;P

rsinohara

@rsinohara

Aren't they too low level?

Bartosz Sypytkowski

@Horusiath

it depends, most of them are actually integration tests - using the testkit itself

rsinohara

@rsinohara

Interesting then. I'll take a look. Thanks :)

Jeff

@jpierson

Is there a way to create a ConsistentHashingGroup router where the hash id determined by the sender as opposed to something in each message?

On second thought, perhaps it would be better to have some other actor responsible for providing another actor for direct communication (routee) based on a consistent hash of the sender without using a router. Is this an existing pattern already that has a name? I'm running into this where I have interfaces between external services where I wanted ordered retry logic but don't want to force everything to be processed in serial, just in proper order based on the sender to keep the sender/receiver order guarantees.

Aaron Stannard

@Aaronontheweb

I think I'll be able to add the ability to log anything on the Scheduler that wasn't executed at the time it was shutdown

as part of some of these changes

Michael

@michaelsg

anyone have familiarity with the F# api? I have one nagging question about the implementation of pipe operator |!>.

Where communities thrive

People

Repo info

Activity