I''m trying to use preloaded test fixtures + transactions. I wrote a rake script to load the test database with all of my fixtures. *BUT* when I use the fixture command, rails still inserts the .yaml files into the db. If I don''t use the fixture command, the .yaml files aren''t accessible to the test methods. (I tried setting use preloaded fixtures , but I may have done this wrong). Could someone explain to me how to tell rails to NOT insert the yaml fixtures into the DB, but to nonetheless make them available to my test classes? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
If anyone needs more information to help answer this, please let me know. I''d really like to get this working! lstrecv wrote:> I''m trying to use preloaded test fixtures + transactions. > > I wrote a rake script to load the test database with all of my fixtures. > > *BUT* when I use the fixture command, rails still inserts the .yaml > files into the db. If I don''t use the fixture command, the .yaml files > aren''t accessible to the test methods. > > (I tried setting use preloaded fixtures , but I may have done this > wrong). > > Could someone explain to me how to tell rails to NOT insert the yaml > fixtures into the DB, but to nonetheless make them available to my test > classes?-- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Could you explain why you would want to do this? If the test fixtures get loaded automatically, as they do normally, why do you need to preload them? What advantage does it get you? Maybe there is another way to get what you are trying to accomplish. On 12/7/05, List Recv <listrecv-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> I''m trying to use preloaded test fixtures + transactions. > > I wrote a rake script to load the test database with all of my fixtures. > > *BUT* when I use the fixture command, rails still inserts the .yaml > files into the db. If I don''t use the fixture command, the .yaml files > aren''t accessible to the test methods. > > (I tried setting use preloaded fixtures , but I may have done this > wrong). > > Could someone explain to me how to tell rails to NOT insert the yaml > fixtures into the DB, but to nonetheless make them available to my test > classes? > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >
nicholas.stuart wrote:> Could you explain why you would want to do this? If the test fixtures > get loaded automatically, as they do normally, why do you need to > preload them? What advantage does it get you? > > Maybe there is another way to get what you are trying to accomplish.Loading fixtures into the db for each test is sloooow. I have a rake script to preload them once. Since each test runs under a transaction, they leave the db just like they were beforehand. So far, so good. Buuut.... For my tests to work properly, they need to know what''s in the yaml fixture files. They reference them using instance variables. So, I''d like to tell the test routines to load the fixtures into the instane vars but NOT the db. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
On 12/11/05, List Recv <listrecv-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> nicholas.stuart wrote: > > Could you explain why you would want to do this? If the test fixtures > > get loaded automatically, as they do normally, why do you need to > > preload them? What advantage does it get you? > > > > Maybe there is another way to get what you are trying to accomplish. > > Loading fixtures into the db for each test is sloooow. I have a rake > script to preload them once. Since each test runs under a transaction, > they leave the db just like they were beforehand. > > So far, so good. > > Buuut.... > > For my tests to work properly, they need to know what''s in the yaml > fixture files. They reference them using instance variables. So, I''d > like to tell the test routines to load the fixtures into the instane > vars but NOT the db.You just want objects that you can play around with then, but not have them be records in your db? If that''s the case, why not just create another ruby file that instantiates the objects you want, and then include that file in the tests that need them? I know it kinda sucks and is not very DRY, but that''s the best way I can think of it. Maybe you could use eRB in your fixtures to be like "name = <% @instance.name %>" kinda thing, and that way you have a fixtures file that gets its info from the instances file. Not sure if you can do that, but it''d eliminate the duplication of instance data at least (though you''d still have to duplicate attribute names). Pat