Download to read offline
Uploaded byBizTalk360
Testing for Logic App Solutions | Integration Monday
The document presents a comprehensive overview of logic app solutions testing, highlighting the author's extensive experience and past contributions to the field. It details several demos on unit testing components, complex logic app testing, and leveraging Power Platform for manual testing, while outlining real-world challenges and the effectiveness of various testing approaches. The document concludes with reflections on current capabilities and future directions for logic app integration with DevOps and Terraform.
More Related Content
Similar to Testing for Logic App Solutions | Integration Monday
Testing for Logic App Solutions | Integration Monday
- 1. Testing for LogicApp Solutions Michael Stephenson
- 2. About Me • Work •FreelanceCloud& IntegrationConsultant • Realworldprojectsw/Azurefor10+years • Community • MicrosoftMVP = 12years • Twitter = @michael_stephen https://www.integration-playbook.io/ - - http://www.integrationusergroup.com/
- 3. Agenda • Real-world Project •History of Logic App Testing • Hello World • Real-world Developer Example • Integration Account Testing • Logic App Unit Testing • System Testing • Manual • Automated • Common Real-world Challenges
- 4. The Project • BigEnergy Company • Azure Integration Platform • Many concurrent projects running • Many interfaces in Production • Many interfaces in development • 2000+ Azure resources • Many Azure DevOps pipelines • Logic Apps • Functions • Terraform • APIM Service Bus • etc • Many Automated Tests
- 5. History Apr. 2017 Integration MondaySession where took a look at how you might do Integration Testing http://www.integrationusergroup.com/automated-testing-logic-apps- specflow/ Nov. 2017 Shankar Chandrasekar created Logic App Unit Test Manager on GitHub/NuGet https://github.com/shankarmaha/LogicAppUnitTestManager 2019 Kent Weare talked about using Mock Data feature in Logic Apps to help https://www.serverless360.com/blog/testing-azure-logic-apps-with- mock-data
- 6. Demo 1 -Basic Specflow + Logic App • Specflow for human readable test intention • C# & MsTest (or whatever fx you like) for test implementation • Trigger your Logic App • Make assertions about the actions that have ran Azure My Logic App My Visual Studio Project Trigger Assert
- 7. Real-World Example Azure IntegrationAccount SFTP Server Source System Service Bus Receiver Processing Logic Look up user data Create File
- 8. Demo 2 –Unit Testing Components What • Flat File Encode • Flat File Decode • XML Transform How Azure Integration Account My Visual Studio Project Map Helper Flat File Decode Helper Flat File Encode Helper
- 9. Demo 3 -Complex Logic App Unit Testing What • Specflow to describe behavior • .net to implement test How Azure My Logic App My Visual Studio Project Trigger Assert Integration Account SFTP Server
- 10. Demo 4 –Using Power Platform & BAM for Manual Testing Azure Integration Account SFTP Server Source System Service Bus Receiver Processing Logic Look up user data Create File BAM Events Assert PrepareTrigger Assert
- 11. Demo 5 –Automating the System Test Can I automate some of the previous Test? How can I handle the challenge of not knowing which Logic App run is for my test?
- 12. Demo 5 –Automating the System Test Azure Integration Account SFTP Server Source System Service Bus Receiver Processing Logic Look up user data Create File BAM Events Assert Trigger Assert My Visual Studio Project
- 13.
- 14. Static Result + Positives- Negatives • You cant really support multiple responses for an action • It’s a bit fiddly to turn on/off static result • Hard to change between which action is static and which isnt • Good for simple scenarios • Supports many connectors • Great for LOB connectors • Good for working on interfaces which are “In Progress” Verdict: Good for POC but we don’t really use it
- 15. Stub API + Positives- Negatives • Not easy to use for non HTTP based connectors • More components to maintain • 3rd Party Solutions (eg Mockaroo) • Build Custom (logic app/functions/APIM) • Quite easy to do • Helps with complex scenarios Verdict: We use this quite a bit but in the right places
- 16. Helper Logic AppsPatterns + Positives - Negatives • Performance trade off• Lowers overall maintenance and less code • Rely on a tested reusable unit • Simplify your logic apps make easier to test • Can “swap” logic app call at deployment time Verdict: We use this quite a bit Data Services Business Interfaces
- 17. Routers & RoutingSlip Pattern + Positives - Negatives • Performance trade off so use in the right place • Need to test the routing rules • Helps to break your Logic Apps down into composable Easier to test • More flexibility Verdict: Good when used in the right place Article by Toon: https://www.codit.eu/blog/the-routing-slip-pattern/?country_sel=uk
- 18. Logic App TestingSummary Now • Capability • Approach is solid • Maintenance overhead is minimal • Benefits • Lowers risk • Fewer defects • Self documenting • Gaps • There are some • There are trade offs for coupling of connectors to logic Next • How will this work with Logic Apps on Functions Runtime? • Run locally on function host? • Will the management api change? • How will integration accounts work?
- 19. Future Sessions We havedone some Terraform Would anyone like to see More Terraform (APIM, Service Bus, etc) Logic Apps + DevOps Functions + DevOps Testing Integrated with DevOps Other?
- 20.