


How to Use Fake Clients for Unit Testing Kubernetes-Integrated Code?
Unit Testing with Fake Client for Kubernetes
When writing tests for code that interacts with Kubernetes, it's beneficial to isolate the test environment from the actual cluster. This can be achieved by leveraging fake clients, which simulate the behavior of Kubernetes API without requiring a live cluster.
Problem
Consider the following method:
<code class="go">import ( "fmt" "k8s.io/api/core/v1" metav1 "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/apis/meta/v1" fake "k8s.io/client-go/kubernetes/fake" "time" ) func GetNamespaceCreationTime(namespace string) int64 { clientset, err := kubernetes.NewForConfig(rest.InClusterConfig()) if err != nil { panic(err.Error()) } ns, err := clientset.CoreV1().Namespaces().Get(namespace, metav1.GetOptions{}) if err != nil { panic(err.Error()) } fmt.Printf("%v \n", ns.CreationTimestamp) return (ns.GetCreationTimestamp().Unix()) }</code>
The goal is to write a unit test for this method using a fake client.
Solution
To use a fake client, we need to modify the GetNamespaceCreationTime function to accept a kubernetes.Interface as a parameter:
<code class="go">func GetNamespaceCreationTime(kubeClient kubernetes.Interface, namespace string) int64 { ns, err := kubeClient.CoreV1().Namespaces().Get(namespace, metav1.GetOptions{}) if err != nil { panic(err.Error()) } fmt.Printf("%v \n", ns.CreationTimestamp) return (ns.GetCreationTimestamp().Unix()) }</code>
In our test function, we can create a fake clientset and pass it to the GetNamespaceCreationTime method as follows:
<code class="go">func TestGetNamespaceCreationTime(t *testing.T) { kubeClient := fake.NewSimpleClientset() got := GetNamespaceCreationTime(kubeClient, "default") want := int64(1257894000) nsMock :=kubeClient.CoreV1().Namespaces() nsMock.Create(&v1.Namespace{ ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{ Name: "default", CreationTimestamp: metav1.Date(2009, time.November, 10, 23, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC), }, }) if got != want { t.Errorf("got %q want %q", got, want) } }</code>
Complete Test with In-Cluster Configuration Stubbing
The complete test with stubbing for in-cluster configuration could look like:
<code class="go">import ( "fmt" "k8s.io/api/core/v1" metav1 "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/apis/meta/v1" fake "k8s.io/client-go/kubernetes/fake" "k8s.io/client-go/kubernetes" "k8s.io/client-go/rest" "time" ) var getInclusterConfigFunc = rest.InClusterConfig var getNewKubeClientFunc = dynamic.NewForConfig func GetNamespaceCreationTime(kubeClient kubernetes.Interface, namespace string) int64 { ns, err := kubeClient.CoreV1().Namespaces().Get(namespace, metav1.GetOptions{}) if err != nil { panic(err.Error()) } fmt.Printf("%v \n", ns.CreationTimestamp) return (ns.GetCreationTimestamp().Unix()) } func GetClientSet() kubernetes.Interface { config, err := getInclusterConfigFunc() if err != nil { log.Warnf("Could not get in-cluster config: %s", err) return nil, err } client, err := getNewKubeClientFunc(config) if err != nil { log.Warnf("Could not connect to in-cluster API server: %s", err) return nil, err } return client, err } func TestGetNamespaceCreationTime(t *testing.T) { kubeClient := fake.NewSimpleClientset() got := GetNamespaceCreationTime(kubeClient, "default") want := int64(1257894000) nsMock :=kubeClient.CoreV1().Namespaces() nsMock.Create(&v1.Namespace{ ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{ Name: "default", CreationTimestamp: metav1.Date(2009, time.November, 10, 23, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC), }, }) if got != want { t.Errorf("got %q want %q", got, want) } } func fakeGetInclusterConfig() (*rest.Config, error) { return nil, nil } func fakeGetInclusterConfigWithError() (*rest.Config, error) { return nil, errors.New("fake error getting in-cluster config") } func TestGetInclusterKubeClient(t *testing.T) { origGetInclusterConfig := getInclusterConfigFunc getInclusterConfigFunc = fakeGetInclusterConfig origGetNewKubeClient := getNewKubeClientFunc getNewKubeClientFunc = fakeGetNewKubeClient defer func() { getInclusterConfigFunc = origGetInclusterConfig getNewKubeClientFunc = origGetNewKubeClient }() client, err := GetClientSet() assert.Nil(t, client, "Client is not nil") assert.Nil(t, err, "error is not nil") } func TestGetInclusterKubeClient_ConfigError(t *testing.T) { origGetInclusterConfig := getInclusterConfigFunc getInclusterConfigFunc = fakeGetInclusterConfigWithError defer func() { getInclusterConfigFunc = origGetInclusterConfig }() client, err := GetClientSet() assert.Nil(t, client, "Client is not nil") assert.NotNil(t, err, "error is nil") }</code>
The above is the detailed content of How to Use Fake Clients for Unit Testing Kubernetes-Integrated Code?. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!

Hot AI Tools

Undresser.AI Undress
AI-powered app for creating realistic nude photos

AI Clothes Remover
Online AI tool for removing clothes from photos.

Undress AI Tool
Undress images for free

Clothoff.io
AI clothes remover

Video Face Swap
Swap faces in any video effortlessly with our completely free AI face swap tool!

Hot Article

Hot Tools

Notepad++7.3.1
Easy-to-use and free code editor

SublimeText3 Chinese version
Chinese version, very easy to use

Zend Studio 13.0.1
Powerful PHP integrated development environment

Dreamweaver CS6
Visual web development tools

SublimeText3 Mac version
God-level code editing software (SublimeText3)

Hot Topics











Go language performs well in building efficient and scalable systems. Its advantages include: 1. High performance: compiled into machine code, fast running speed; 2. Concurrent programming: simplify multitasking through goroutines and channels; 3. Simplicity: concise syntax, reducing learning and maintenance costs; 4. Cross-platform: supports cross-platform compilation, easy deployment.

Golang is better than Python in terms of performance and scalability. 1) Golang's compilation-type characteristics and efficient concurrency model make it perform well in high concurrency scenarios. 2) Python, as an interpreted language, executes slowly, but can optimize performance through tools such as Cython.

Golang is better than C in concurrency, while C is better than Golang in raw speed. 1) Golang achieves efficient concurrency through goroutine and channel, which is suitable for handling a large number of concurrent tasks. 2)C Through compiler optimization and standard library, it provides high performance close to hardware, suitable for applications that require extreme optimization.

Goimpactsdevelopmentpositivelythroughspeed,efficiency,andsimplicity.1)Speed:Gocompilesquicklyandrunsefficiently,idealforlargeprojects.2)Efficiency:Itscomprehensivestandardlibraryreducesexternaldependencies,enhancingdevelopmentefficiency.3)Simplicity:

Golang and Python each have their own advantages: Golang is suitable for high performance and concurrent programming, while Python is suitable for data science and web development. Golang is known for its concurrency model and efficient performance, while Python is known for its concise syntax and rich library ecosystem.

The performance differences between Golang and C are mainly reflected in memory management, compilation optimization and runtime efficiency. 1) Golang's garbage collection mechanism is convenient but may affect performance, 2) C's manual memory management and compiler optimization are more efficient in recursive computing.

Golang is suitable for rapid development and concurrent scenarios, and C is suitable for scenarios where extreme performance and low-level control are required. 1) Golang improves performance through garbage collection and concurrency mechanisms, and is suitable for high-concurrency Web service development. 2) C achieves the ultimate performance through manual memory management and compiler optimization, and is suitable for embedded system development.

Golang and C each have their own advantages in performance competitions: 1) Golang is suitable for high concurrency and rapid development, and 2) C provides higher performance and fine-grained control. The selection should be based on project requirements and team technology stack.
