# Robust Integration Testing in Rails 4 with RSpec, Capybara and Selenium

## The Problem

Using RSpec and Capybara to test your Rails apps can make writing tests easier which is good both from a perspective of getting people to actually write tests but also for our general productivity as developers.

While it has its detractors, I like the terse syntax and ease with which we can define our own helpers which help set up certain contexts such as in this case setting up the default account and switching into its subdomain:

feature "Onboarding", :js do
with_default_account do
within_account_subdomain do
before {
Service.create_default_services
}

scenario "User can complete onboarding process" do
visit dashboard_path

# User is redirected
expect(page.current_path).to eql(getting_started_path)

fill_in "Name", with: "New Service XYZ"
click_button "Create Service"

# ...
end
end
end
end


Those helpers can be used in any test, which eliminates repeated setup code between test cases. Then from Capybara we get a simple but powerful DSL which lets us visit pages, fill_in forms and interact as if we were a user (click_button, click_link). This is an attractive mix and it isn’t hard to see why this has caught on.

The testing setup that ships with Rails is also perfectly capable but generally I prefer this syntax and workflow. One great advantage that the standard testing setup (using Test::Unit) has over RSpec however is support–quite simply when you write your tests using Test::Unit and the default Rails helpers you will be in good company and can expect minimum fuss. As the Rails core team advance the test harness then you can also benefit from out-of-the-box improvements like Spring, which will cut app startup time out of the test running equation.

When you move to RSpec however, and start mixing in things like Capybara, FactoryGirl (for fixtures) and Selenium then you are entering potentially uncharted territory, in particular because your app may have something unusual about it that causes your tests to fail, perhaps mysteriously.

One way to look at the argument between the two approaches is that if you work with Rails on a contract/consulting basis then having familiarity with both is going to be advantageous–if you work only on your own projects then the choice is entirely up to you.

In this post I’m going to step through the several roadblocks that I have encountered in setting up the above tools such that they all work together correctly and reliably. In doing so I will attempt to keep the setup as simple as possible, and minimise the use of blunt instruments like database_cleaner’s truncation strategy.

Note: Given how many moving parts there are here (the majority from 3rd parties), for future projects I will be experimenting with sticking to the stock Rails test framework to measure approximately the difference in productivity. The tests may (or may not!) take longer to write, but I would expect some gains from the reduction in lost time due to needing to fix the test harness.

An additional complication that I have is that I am testing a subdomain-based multi-tenant system–this is something that is not well documented when it comes to RSpec and particularly Capybara so if you are in a similar situation then the following should hopefully be of use to you.

The roadblocks I have hit are:

• Database inconsistencies when running a mix of plain and Javascript/Selenium tests.
• Assets (CSS/JS) not being served in Selenium tests.
• The requesting of assets causing RSpec/Capybara to hang, with no hint as to what is wrong.

The setup:

• rspec-rails 2.14.2
• capybara 2.4.1
• selenium-webdriver 2.42.0
• factory_girl_rails 4.4.1
• database_cleaner 1.3.0

The characteristics that we want the setup to have:

• Running a test in a real browser should be as simple as specifying :js for a feature or scenario.
• Tests should pass/fail reliably, not sporadically, i.e. there should be no race conditions.
• All tests will be carried out using a single tenant–we are testing the application functionality; the multi-tenant aspect of the system will be handled by a completely separate set of tests as mixing the two in one suite is more trouble than it’s worth.

## The Solution

### Gemfile

group :development, :test do
gem 'rspec-rails', '2.14.2'
gem 'capybara', '2.4.1'
gem 'selenium-webdriver'
gem 'factory_girl_rails', '~> 4.0'
gem 'database_cleaner', '1.3.0'
end


### Spec Helper

Here is a full spec helper file (which should live in spec/spec_helper.rb); I would recommend reading the comments and incorporating the settings as appropriate (i.e. don’t copy and paste this whole file into your project):

# This file is copied to spec/ when you run 'rails generate rspec:install'
ENV["RAILS_ENV"] ||= 'test'
require File.expand_path("../../config/environment", __FILE__)
require 'rspec/rails'
require 'rspec/autorun'
require 'capybara'

# Requires supporting ruby files with custom matchers and macros, etc,
# in spec/support/ and its subdirectories.
Dir[Rails.root.join("spec/support/**/*.rb")].each { |f| require f }

# Checks for pending migrations before tests are run.
# If you are not using ActiveRecord, you can remove this line.
ActiveRecord::Migration.check_pending! if defined?(ActiveRecord::Migration)

RSpec.configure do |config|
# Remove this when upgrading to RSpec 3
# Allows us to write just :js instead of js: true in tests

# Remove this line if you're not using ActiveRecord or ActiveRecord
fixtures
config.fixture_path = "#{::Rails.root}/spec/fixtures"

# If you're not using ActiveRecord, or you'd prefer not to run each of
your
# database_cleaner below
config.use_transactional_fixtures = false

# If true, the base class of anonymous controllers will be inferred
# automatically. This will be the default behavior in future versions of
# rspec-rails.
config.infer_base_class_for_anonymous_controllers = false

# Run specs in random order to surface order dependencies. If you find an
# order dependency and want to debug it, you can fix the order by
providing
# the seed, which is printed after each run.
#     --seed 1234
config.order = "random"

# Insist on 'expect' syntax rather than 'should'
config.expect_with :rspec do |c|
c.syntax = :expect
end

config.before(:suite) do
# First, in case the database contains data from a previous run (e.g.
# from a run that crashed), run a full clean using the truncation
# strategy.
DatabaseCleaner.clean_with(:truncation)

# *** The following is specific to this project
#     Here we set up the default tenant to be used in each test

# Drop the default tenant if it exists
Apartment::Database.drop(PracticeManager::DEFAULT_TENANT_NAME) rescue
nil

# Create the default tenant
default_account = Subscriptions::Account.create!(name:"Test Customer
#1", subdomain: PracticeManager::DEFAULT_TENANT_NAME)
default_account.create_schema

owner = Subscriptions::User.create!(email: "customer@example.com",

default_account.owner = owner
default_account.save!

default_account.users << default_account.owner

# *** End of project-specific portion
end

config.before(:each) do
# If the test is a Javascript test, set the strategy to truncation
# as transactional cleaning will not work due to the test runner
# and app not sharing the same process when testing from a browser.
# For non-Javascript tests use the transaction strategy as it is faster.
DatabaseCleaner.strategy = :truncation
else
DatabaseCleaner.strategy = :transaction
end

DatabaseCleaner.start

# Before each test, switch into the schema of the default tenant
Apartment::Database.switch(PracticeManager::DEFAULT_TENANT_NAME)
end

config.after(:each) do |group|
DatabaseCleaner.clean
Apartment::Database.reset
end

config.include FactoryGirl::Syntax::Methods
end

# Explicitly set the test server process to a particular port
# so that we can access it directly at will.
Capybara.server_port = 10000

# To ensure that browser tests can find the test server process,
# always include the port number in URLs.
Capybara.always_include_port = true

# For all tests except Javascript tests we will use :rack_test
# (the default) as it is the fastest. For Javascript tests we will
# use Selenium as it is the most robust/mature browser driver
# available.
Capybara.javascript_driver = :selenium


#### Database Cleaner

The database_cleaner gem feels intuitively like an unpleasant hack, but with the right configuration it can work in such a way that we only change the test runner behaviour slightly for JS tests.

It is well known that once you are using Factory Girl and/or browser testing then you will want to stop using transactional fixtures as they won’t work as expected:

config.use_transactional_fixtures = false


Then, when cleaning up after tests it is common to use the cleaner’s truncation strategy after browsers tests and the transaction strategy (basically the same as that enabled by config.use_transactional_fixtures) for all other tests.

Many tutorials and StackOverflow answers out there have JS and non-JS tests mixed together, with the strategy being switched between transaction and truncation on each test.

In my experience this has resulted in database access race conditions that have caused otherwise well-written, independent tests to fail intermittently.

The solution I have settled on is to run all non-JS tests first (shuffled), and then all JS tests (also shuffled). This allows for discovery of tests that incorrectly expect certain state, or fail to clean up after themselves (by virtue of the random execution order), while not attempting to freely mix JS and non-JS tests. As these different classes of test have different purposes, I see no disadvantage in this approach, with the exception of it being somewhat non-standard.

In RSpec 3 we would be able to provide our own ordering scheme to achieve this, but as we are still on RSpec 2 this needs to be set up outside of the spec helper.

First, in .rspec we set the default runner to exclude all Javascript tests:

--color --tag ~js


(We also colour all output)

Now when we run rspec in the shell it will run all tests not marked with :js.

To run our browser tests, we now need to run rspec --tag js. While this could perhaps be seen as inconvenient, I find this preferable as generally I am not looking to run the (very slow) browser tests unless I am working on a Javascript-based feature, or I am committing code.

I have a git pre-commit hook which handles the running of both suites of tests, and only allows the commit to go ahead if both suites pass.

In a file symlinked to .git/hooks/pre-commit:

#!/bin/sh

# Based on
http://codeinthehole.com/writing/tips-for-using-a-git-pre-commit-hook/

clean_up_and_exit () {
git stash pop -q
exit $1 } # Run all tests and ensure that they pass before continuing git stash -q --keep-index rspec --tag ~js RESULT=$?

[ $RESULT -ne 0 ] && clean_up_and_exit 1 rspec --tag js JS_RESULT=$?

[ \$JS_RESULT -ne 0 ] && clean_up_and_exit 1

# All tests passed
clean_up_and_exit 0


So in general I’ll be running individual test files as I work, and then before committing I will be sure to exercise the whole test suite.

#### Why Selenium?

Initially I was using the capybara-webkit gem to allow for headless testing but unfortunately ran into some sporadic errors/hangs which were hard to nail down.

Running the tests without a live browsers instance is both faster, easier to integrate with a CI server and has the advantage of not popping up windows on your machine when testing. That said, as my primary goal here is to set up the most reliable test harness I have gone for Selenium as the driver as it is a more mature offering by virtue of it having been in production use for longer.

#### FactoryGirl

FactoryGirl makes generating test data trivially easy, but it also makes tests unpredictable if the cleanup of this data is not handled appropriately.

By completely separating our JS and non-JS test suites, and using the truncation strategy for DatabaseCleaner on JS tests we get the best of both worlds: JS tests are run cleanly with no database-related race conditions, and all other tests run as quickly as possible using the transaction strategy.

#### Multi-tenant / Subdomain Testing

The multi-tenant aspect of the system is provided by a Rails engine, custom-built for the purpose of managing accounts, users, authentication and scoping of data based on the current subdomain. The engine has its own test suite which exercises this logic and tests the data scoping in particular. The test suite runs on rack_test only.

When testing, FactoryGirl is used to create multiple accounts, each with their own subdomain and database (or schema, in the case of Postgres).

Initially when testing the behaviour of the host application I continued with this approach. Now however, to greatly simplify the testing process, all tests for the host app (and not the engine) run against a single default tenant.

One of the key reasons for doing this is to avoid needing to resolve potentially hundreds of subdomains to localhost when running browser tests. In rack_test it doesn’t matter that customer20.example.com doesn’t resolve as it doesn’t resolve names by DNS in the first place.

When using Selenium however the address must resolve. Setting up a local DNS server like dnsmasq is one option, but now your development and test environments need to have this external software installed and running. An alternative could be to use Pow, which I am already using for development, to automatically resolve all subdomains at an appropriate .dev domain.

While both approaches work, both would behave erratically on occasion. The solution in the case of Pow was to upgrade to the latest version, but this highlighted the fragility of the approach. With dnsmasq again you have a fragile solution that could break the next time you update your OS, making it undesirable too.

By sticking to the one tenant in all tests, all that needs to be done to have browser tests work is to map the one tenant domain to localhost in /etc/hosts, e.g. customer1.yourappname-test.com.

To make this work in your Capybara tests, you can define a helper function that will temporarily override Capybara.app_host to point all requests at this domain.

For example in lib/testing_support/subdomain_helpers.rb I have:

module TestingSupport
module SubdomainHelpers
def within_account_subdomain
before {
if Capybara.current_driver != :rack_test
Capybara.app_host =
"http://#{account.subdomain}.yourappname-test.com"
else
Capybara.app_host = "http://#{account.subdomain}.example.com"
end
}

after { Capybara.app_host = "http://www.example.com" }

yield
end

RSpec.configure do |config|
config.extend SubdomainHelpers, :type => :feature
end
end
end


So now on each test invocation, Capybara.app_host will be set appropriately and the correct tenant (which in our case is always the default tenant) will be targeted.

Note: While this approach works and has been reliable, the author of Capybara does not recommend or explicitly support the setting of Capybara.app_host more than once. We can alternatively set this value just once, in our spec helper, and it will work fine with the caveat that we will truly be locked to using just the one tenant in our test suite.

The relevant RSpec settings from the spec helper are:

# Explicitly set the test server process to a particular port
# so that we can access it directly at will.
Capybara.server_port = 10000

# To ensure that browser tests can find the test server process,
# always include the port number in URLs.
Capybara.always_include_port = true


With the port set and Capybara ensuring that every request includes the port, we can be sure that all browser tests will hit http://customer1.yourappname-test.com:10000.

#### Asset Generation and Serving in Tests

Chances are, with your stock Rails/RSpec/Capybara setup, when you call save_and_open_page in a feature spec you will be presented with a completely unstyled version of your app, as both the CSS and JS asset creation and serving will be broken.

This isn’t particularly important when you’re testing non-Javascript interaction with your app but as soon as you get into browser testing then this will be an issue for two key reasons:

• If Javascript from the asset pipeline is not served then it will of course not be available to test.
• The stock asset settings for the test environment can cause RSpec/Capybara to hang (requiring kill -9 to halt the process).

Searching online you will find various solutions, such as precompiling all assets on each test run and serving them using file:// URLs pointing to the public directory of your Rails app.

The simplest approach that I have found, and which works well, is simply to set config.assets.debug = true in config/environments/test.rb.

Doing so causes assets to be generated and served just as if you were using the development server; all assets (JS and CSS) should now be generated and served correctly.

## Wrapping Up

This is more than likely a work in progress. While the combination of RSpec, Capybara, FactoryGirl and Selenium have provided a welcome productivity boost on the development side, they have also caused a great deal of time to be spent on getting them all to work together reliably, particularly in a multi-tenant setting.

Your mileage may vary but I hope these notes will help you to avoid some of the less-well-documented pitfalls, and so spend more time on actually shipping features.

As previously mentioned, I will be taking an in-depth look at the stock Rails testing framework and methodologies again in the near future. While I appreciate the neatness of these various 3rd party libraries that have generally made me more productive, Rails is always on the move and the more moving parts we have that must keep up, the more points of failure we have, and so the more time we spend debugging issues that have nothing to do with shipping features and providing value to users and customers.

I think it’s valuable to keep going back to the point of testing, which is (in my mind) to ship reliable software and to make refactoring safer, so that we can always be working to reduce the technical debt that we normally incur when evolving software over time. While tools like RSpec and FactoryGirl seem on the surface to be neat solutions to real problems, it is perhaps the case that sticking with the standard Rails testing methods will better serve that goal.

Did you find this post useful? If you would like help with anything then you can contact me any time via Twitter.