[DRILL-2812] Regularize JDBC unit-level unit test class naming - ASF JIRA

Attach files

Attach Screenshot

Add vote

Voters

Watch issue

Watchers

Create sub-task

Link

Clone

Update Comment Author

Replace String in Comment

Update Comment Visibility

Delete Comments

XML

Word

Printable

JSON

Details

Type: Bug
Status: Open
Priority: Minor
Resolution: Unresolved
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: Future
Component/s: Client - JDBC
Labels:
None

Description

For JDBC Driver unit-level unit tests (those focused on particular classes or interfaces and named based on those types, vs. those focused on, say SQL-level features), the naming pattern(s) should be cleaned up (reviewed/designed and made more consistent).

Background on non-test files (per ~~DRILL-2089~~'s started and planned changes):

For (non-test) interfaces and classes for JDBC-defined interfaces, the usual pattern is:

there is an interface java.sql.Something defined by JDBC,
there is a Drill interface org.apache.drill.jdbc.DrillSomething (for Drill-specific Javadoc and any Drill-specific extension methods; in Drill's driver's published interface), and
there is a Drill implementation class org.apache.drill.jdbc.impl.DrillSomethingImpl with the main implementation of the interfaces' methods (in itself or a superclass).

Also, there is the driver class at org.apache.drill.jdbc.Driver, also in Drill's driver's published interface, which delegates as much as possible to implementation class org.apache.drill.jdbc.impl.DriverImpl.

There are also various implementation-only classes.

[EDITING STILL IN PROGRESS; FOLLOWING IS STILL TO BE ASSIMILATED:]

?? 1:

...jdbc.impl.DrillSomethingImplTest for unit-level unit tests (calling DrillSomethingImpl without setting up a connection to a Drillbit, including methods not defined by interfaces Something or DrillSomething)
...jdbc.DrillSomethingTest and/or ...jdbc.SomethingTest for integration-level unit tests (usually with setting up a connection to a Drillbit, calling only methods defined by the related interfaces)

?? 2: any need for DrillSomethingTest and SomethingTest (testing extensions separately)? (probably not)

// Maybe:
// - DrillResultSetImplTest, for typical Xyz -> XyzTest pattern, with Xyz being
// class implementing JDBC interface and Drill's derived interface.
// - DrillResultSetTest, for mostly-typical Xyz -> XyzTest pattern, but with Xyz
// based on full Drill interface whose methods are being tested
// - ResultSetTest, for mostly-typical Xyz -> XyzTest pattern, but with Xyz
// based on just JDBC interface whose methods are being tested.
// - Multiple tests, perhaps:
// - DrillResultSetImplTest for implementation-class-specific tests (e.g.,
// non-public methods), plus
// - DrillResultSetTest (or ResultSetTest) for tests for public methods.
// Recall that although main pattern for non-test types is (to be)
// java.sql.Xyz vs. ...drill.jdbc.DrillXyx vs. ...drill.jdbc impl.DrillXyzImpl,
// there are exceptions, such as java.sql.DatabaseMetaData vs.
// ...drill.jdbc.DrillDatabaseMetadata vs. ...drill.jdbc.impl.MetaImpl, since
// the implementation class for DrillDatabaseMetadata used MetaImpl.
// (Any low-level unit test for MetaImpl should be in a MetaImplTest, while
// higher-/integration-level tests should be in DrillDatabaseMetadataTest.)
// Factor in the subdividing into separate test classes (e.g.,
// DatabaseMetaDataGetColumnsTest).
// (Related to ~~DRILL-2089~~ (moving internal types to ...jdbc.impl package).)