Micro-service delivery - without the pitfalls
•
0 gostou•18 visualizações
The days of delivering a monolithic desktop application once a year on physical media are long gone. Today we expect continuous (or at least frequent) delivery of upgrades and security patches with zero downtime. To support this, more and more companies are moving to a distributed, cloud-based architecture of collaborating micro-services. But managing and testing an evolving of a micro-service ecosystem is not without it’s challenges. In this session we’ll examine what can go wrong when organisations jump headfirst into micro-service architectures without understanding the potential pitfalls. You’ll leave with an understanding of the techniques and tooling necessary to reap the benefits of increased flexibility and velocity without creating additional risk or deployment nightmares.
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Semelhante a Micro-service delivery - without the pitfalls
Semelhante a Micro-service delivery - without the pitfalls (20)
Mais de Seb Rose
Mais de Seb Rose (20)
Último
Último (20)
Micro-service delivery - without the pitfalls
- 1. Micro-service delivery - without the pitfalls Seb Rose Mastodon: @sebrose@mastodon.scot Twitter: @sebrose Blog: https://cucumber.io/blog/ E-mail: seb.rose@smartbear.com Please help us by completing this 30 second microservices and contract testing questionnaire. https://bit.ly/PSTQB22-PACTFLOW
- 2. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com TL;DR • All interac ti ons between so ft ware components are governed by contracts • Contract tes ti ng ensures that both components have the same expecta ti ons • Testers may not write these tests, but they need to collaborate with developers
- 3. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Agenda So ft ware contracts Managing dependencies Decoupling with test doubles Contract tests Pact & Pact Broker Q & A
- 5. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Consumer & provider C P Contract
- 6. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Design by contract Design by contract Contract • an agreement between client and supplier Characteris ti cs • expect some bene fi ts • incur some obliga ti ons
- 10. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Agenda So ft ware contracts Managing dependencies Decoupling with test doubles Contract tests Pact & Pact Broker Q & A
- 11. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com CI Staging Prod C3 C2 C1 P3 P2 P1 CI - consumer & provider Test Test Test Test Test Test Test
- 12. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com You have a distributed monolith Beth Skurrie If you can’t deploy services independently, you don’t have micro-services.
- 13. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Agenda So ft ware contracts Managing dependencies Decoupling with test doubles Contract tests Pact & Pact Broker Q & A
- 14. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com C C Collaboration tests Monolithic approach Collaboration Collaboration Test Production P P
- 15. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com C C Collaboration tests Test double Common approach Collaboration Collaboration Test Production P
- 17. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com C C Collaboration tests Test double Fail Collaboration Test Production Incorrect behaviour P
- 18. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Agenda So ft ware contracts Managing dependencies Decoupling with test doubles Contract tests Pact & Pact Broker Q & A
- 19. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com JB Rainsberger, via GOOS mailing list, “Unit-test mock/stub assumptions rots” 15 March 2012 Systema ti c contract tes ti ng • Collabora ti on tests make assump ti ons about the contract • Contract tests try to jus ti fy those assump ti ons JB Rainsberger, via GOOS mailing list, “Unit-test mock/stub assumptions rots” 15 March 2012
- 21. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Test double I n t e r f a c e Hand-rolled contract tests Contract Test P
- 22. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Agenda So ft ware contracts Managing dependencies Decoupling with test doubles Contract tests Consumer driven Pact & Pact Broker Q & A
- 23. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com ▪Closed and complete Provider contracts express a service's business function capabilities in terms of the complete set of exportable elements available to consumers, and as such are closed and complete with respect to the functionality available to the system. ▪Singular and authoritative Provider contracts are singular and authoritative in their expression of the business functionality available to the system. ▪Bounded stability and immutability A provider contract is stable and immutable for a bounded period and/or locale. Provider contracts typically use some form of versioning to differentiate differently bounded instances of the contract. https://martinfowler.com/articles/consumerDrivenContracts.html Provider contracts
- 24. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com ▪Open and incomplete Consumer contracts are open and incomplete with respect to the business functionality available to the system. They express a subset of the system's business function capabilities in terms of the consumer's expectations of the provider contract. ▪Multiple and non-authoritative Consumer contracts are multiple in proportion to the number of consumers of a service, and each is non- authoritative with regard to the total set of contractual obligations placed on the provider. Consumers may evolve at different rates. ▪Bounded stability and immutability Like provider contracts, consumer contracts are valid for a particular period of time and/or location. https://martinfowler.com/articles/consumerDrivenContracts.html Consumer driven contracts (CDC)
- 25. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com How do you agree a contract?
- 26. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Provider team Consumer team How do you agree a contract?
- 27. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Provider team Consumer team How do you agree a contract?
- 28. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Provider team Consumer team How do you agree a contract?
- 29. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Provider team Consumer teams How do you agree a contract?
- 30. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Agenda So ft ware contracts Managing dependencies Decoupling with test doubles Contract tests Pact & Pact Broker Q & A
- 31. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Pact provides a mechanism for crea ti ng a contract between a service consumer and a service provider, and then providing the tools to validate that the consumer and provider adhere to the contact independently of each other. https://dius.com.au/2014/05/19/simplifying-micro-service-testing-with-pacts/ Simplifying micro-service tes ti ng
- 32. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com •Consumer creates contracts using Pact DSL •When consumer tests are run: •Pact creates a mock HTTP server •a Pact fi le is created •Provider uses Pact fi le to verify compa ti bility •Provider may o ff er “backdoor” interface Pact - key points
- 36. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com CI Staging Prod V32 V29 V27 Complica ti ons W3 W2 X9 X8 X7 Y15 Y14 Y9 Z84 Z73 Z72
- 37. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com • Pacts are published by Consumer • Pacts are fetched by Provider • Results are stored in the “Matrix” • “Matrix” supports independent deployment Pact broker - key points
- 38. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com Pact fl ow is the complete contract testing solution allowing teams to orchestrate and scale their contract testing initiative. Visibility to focus on what ma tt ers With Pact fl ow, developers can fi nd and fi x integration errors earlier in the SDLC and teams can improve communication & collaboration, reduce reliance on E2E tests resulting in faster and safer deployments.
- 39. @sebrose h tt p:/ /smartbear.com •Increases con fi dence •Reduces need for integra ti on tests •Speeds up development •No subs ti tute for communica ti on •Does not replace other forms of tes ti ng Take aways
- 40. https://bddbooks.com Please help us by completing this 30 second microservices and contract testing questionnaire. https://bit.ly/PSTQB22-PACTFLOW Seb Rose Mastodon: @sebrose@mastodon.scot Twitter: @sebrose Blog: https://cucumber.io/blog/ E-mail: seb.rose@smartbear.com