Javascript

Testing a Fastify app with the NodeJS test runner

Published Nov 29, 2023

Updated Nov 29, 2023

5 min read

Introduction

Node.js has shipped a built-in test runner for a couple of major versions. Since its release I haven’t heard much about it so I decided to try it out on a simple Fastify API server application that I was working on. It turns out, it’s pretty good! It’s also really nice to start testing a node application without dealing with the hassle of installing some additional dependencies and managing more configurations.

Since it’s got my stamp of approval, why not write a post about it? In this post, we will hit the highlights of the testing API and write some basic but real-life tests for an API server. This server will be built with Fastify, a plugin-centric API framework. They have some good documentation on testing that should make this pretty easy. We’ll also add a SQL driver for the plugin we will test.

Setup

Let's set up our simple API server by creating a new project, adding our dependencies, and creating some files. Ensure you’re running node v20 or greater (Test runner is a stable API as of the 20 major releases)

Overview

index.js - node entry that initializes our Fastify app and listens for incoming http requests on port 3001
app.js - this file exports a function that creates and returns our Fastify application instance
sql-plugin.js - a Fastify plugin that sets up and connects to a SQL driver and makes it available on our app instance

Application Code

A simple first test

For our first test we will just test our servers index route. If you recall from the app.js code above, our index route returns a 501 response for “not implemented”.

In this test, we're using the createApp function to create a new instance of our Fastify app, and then using the inject method from the Fastify API to make a request to the / route. We import our test utilities directly from the node. Notice we can pass async functions to our test to use async/await. Node’s assert API has been around for a long time, this is what we are using to make our test assertions.

To run this test, we can use the following command:

By default the Node.js test runner uses the TAP reporter. You can configure it using other reporters or even create your own custom reporters for it to use.

Testing our SQL plugin

Next, let's take a look at how to test our Fastify Postgres plugin. This one is a bit more involved and gives us an opportunity to use more of the test runner features.

In this example, we are using a feature called Subtests. This simply means when nested tests inside of a top-level test. In our top-level test call, we get a test parameter t that we call methods on in our nested test structure. In this example, we use t.beforeEach to create a new Fastify app instance for each test, and call the test method to register our nested tests. Along with beforeEach the other methods you might expect are also available: afterEach, before, after.

Since we don’t want to connect to our Postgres database in our tests, we are using the available Mocking API to mock out the client. This was the API that I was most excited to see included in the Node Test Runner. After the basics, you almost always need to mock some functions, methods, or libraries in your tests. After trying this feature, it works easily and as expected, I was confident that I could get pretty far testing with the new Node.js core API’s.

Since my plugin only uses the end method of the Postgres driver, it’s the only method I provide a mock function for. Our second test confirms that it gets called when our Fastify server is shutting down.

Additional features

A lot of other features that are common in other popular testing frameworks are also available.

Test styles and methods

Along with our basic test based tests we used for our Fastify plugins - test also includes skip, todo, and only methods. They are for what you would expect based on the names, skipping or only running certain tests, and work-in-progress tests.

If you prefer, you also have the option of using the describe → it test syntax. They both come with the same methods as test and I think it really comes down to a matter of personal preference.

Test coverage

This might be the deal breaker for some since this feature is still experimental. As popular as test coverage reporting is, I expect this API to be finalized and become stable in an upcoming version. Since this isn’t something that’s being shipped for the end user though, I say go for it. What’s the worst that could happen really?

Other CLI flags

—watch - https://nodejs.org/dist/latest-v20.x/docs/api/cli.html#--watch

—test-name-pattern - https://nodejs.org/dist/latest-v20.x/docs/api/cli.html#--test-name-pattern

TypeScript support

You can use a loader like you would for a regular node application to execute TypeScript files. Some popular examples are tsx and ts-node. In practice, I found that this currently doesn’t work well since the test runner only looks for JS file types. After digging in I found that they added support to locate your test files via a glob string but it won’t be available until the next major version release.

Conclusion

The built-in test runner is a lot more comprehensive than I expected it to be. I was able to easily write some real-world tests for my application. If you don’t mind some of the features like coverage reporting being experimental, you can get pretty far without installing any additional dependencies. The biggest deal breaker on many projects at this point, in my opinion, is the lack of straightforward TypeScript support.

This is the test command that I ended up with in my application:

I’ll be honest, I stole this from a GitHub issue thread and I don’t know exactly how it works (but it does). If TypeScript is a requirement, maybe stick with Jest or Vitest for now 🙂

This Dot is a consultancy dedicated to guiding companies through their modernization and digital transformation journeys. Specializing in replatforming, modernizing, and launching new initiatives, we stand out by taking true ownership of your engineering projects.

We love helping teams with projects that have missed their deadlines or helping keep your strategic digital initiatives on course. Check out our case studies and our clients that trust us with their engineering.

About the author(s)

Dane Grant
JavaScript developer building things on web, native, and server environments. Free time filled with reading, cooking, dog, sports, comedy, and music.
@danecando @danecando

React Version Transitions, Library Updates, and Why Standards Bodies are so Complex with JLarky

On this episode of Modern Web, hosts Tracy Lee, Ben Lesh, Adam Rackis, and guest JLarky share their latest takes on the JavaScript ecosystem, including React version transitions and TypeScript compatibility. They also explore the challenges of library updates, as well as web standards and the complexities within standards bodies. One recurring theme in the podcast is the heavy reliance on third-party libraries and the potential JavaScript bloat in React applications. They express concerns about the long-term sustainability of this approach and emphasize the need for industry support and collaboration. They discuss the challenges faced when updating libraries and the importance of carefully considering the impact on the overall application. This highlights the need for developers to strike a balance between leveraging the benefits of third-party libraries and maintaining control over their codebase. The conversation also explores the evolution of web standards and the complexities within standards bodies. The hosts discuss the resistance to adopting new technologies, such as React server components, and the challenges faced in driving industry-wide adoption. This highlights the importance of understanding the broader context in which web development operates and the need for developers to stay informed about emerging standards and technologies. By keeping an eye on the evolving landscape, developers can make informed decisions about the tools and frameworks they choose to work with. Throughout the podcast, they emphasize the importance of considering production-level considerations in software development. They discuss the challenges of dealing with hydration errors and the need for robust error handling mechanisms. This highlights the significance of thorough testing, performance optimization, and maintaining a strong focus on user experience. By prioritizing production-level considerations, developers can ensure their applications are reliable, performant, and user-friendly. Download this episode here....

Jun 27, 2024

2 mins

ReactTypeScript

What’s Great About TypeScript ESLint v8 + The “Trough of Disillusionment” in Adoption with Josh Goldberg

In this episode of Modern Web, Josh Goldberg discusses the benefits of TypeScript ESLint v8 and as well as other various topics related to JavaScript tools, AI in coding, and industry dynamics. Josh breaks down the latest version of TypeScript ESLint, v8. He points out the big performance boosts and introduces the cool new feature of type-aware linting. With this, developers can catch potential errors and follow best practices by using TypeScript's static type checking. This not only cuts down on bugs but also makes the code easier to read and maintain. Tracy and Josh talk about the importance of using the right tools for better coding results. They discuss how the Gartner hype cycle can influence developers' choices and warn against adopting tools just because they’re trendy. Instead, they suggest carefully evaluating tools based on specific needs and project requirements. By picking the right tools, developers can simplify their workflows, improve code quality, and get better outcomes overall. The conversation also touches on the impact of companies like Vercel and the unexpected consequences in tech development. While new tools and technologies can be super beneficial, they can also bring unexpected challenges. It’s important for developers to be aware of these potential issues and address them to ensure smooth development and successful projects. They also chat about the "trough of disillusionment" in tech adoption and mention upcoming typed linting tools which aim to further improve code quality and developer productivity. Lastly, the two talk about the SquiggleConf conference, which focuses on web development tools. They explain the term "squiggle" in error indicators and why clear, informative error messages are important for helping developers debug and troubleshoot. The conference is a great place for developers to learn about the latest web development tools and share tips on improving the developer experience. Check it out on October 3-4, 2024 in Boston, MA! Download this episode here....

Jul 19, 2024

2 mins

TypeScript

D1 SQLite: Schema, migrations and seeds

I’ve written posts about some of the popular ORM’s in TypeScript and covered their pros and cons. Prisma is probably the most well known and Drizzle is a really popular up and comer. I like and use ORM’s in most of my projects but there’s also a camp of folks who believe they shouldn’t be used. I started a small Cloudflare Workers project recently and decided to try using their D1 SQLite database without adding any ORM. This is the first post in a 2 part series where we’ll explore what this experience is like using only the driver and utilities made available in the Wrangler CLI. Introduction If you’re unfamiliar with Cloudflare D1 - it’s a distributed SQLite database for the Cloudflare Workers platform. Workers are lightweight serverless functions/compute distributed across a global network. The platform includes services and API’s like D1 that provide extended capabilities to your Workers. At the time of this writing, there are only two ways to interact with a D1 database that I’m aware of. * From a Worker using the D1 Client API * D1 HTTP API In this 2 part series, we will create a simple Workers project and use the D1 Client API to build out our queries. Getting Started For this tutorial, we’ll create a simple Cloudflare Worker project and treat it like a simple node script/http server to do our experiments. The first step is initializing a new Cloudflare Worker and D1 database: ` ` We need to take our binding and add it to our project wrangler.toml configuration. Once our binding is added we can re-generate the types for our Worker project. ` We now have our DB binding added to our project Env types. Let’s add a simple query to our worker script to make sure our database is setup and working: ` Start the development server with npm run dev and access the server at http://localhost:8787 . When the page loads we should see a successful result {"1 + 1":2} . We now have a working SQLite database available. Creating a schema Since we’re not using an ORM with some kind of DSL to define a schema for our database, we’re going to do things the old fashioned way. “Schema” will just refer to the data model that we create for our database. We’ll define it using SQL and the D1 migrations utility. Let’s create a migration to define our initial schema: ` For our demo purposes we will build out a simple blog application database. It includes posts, authors, and tags to include some relational data. We need to write the SQL in our migration to create all the tables and columns that we need: ` The SQL above defines our tables, columns, and their relations with foreign keys. It also includes a join table for posts and tags to represent a many-to-many relationship. If you don’t have a lot of experience writing SQL queries it might look a little bit intimidating at first. Once you take some time to learn it it’s actually pretty nice. DataLemur is a pretty great resource for learning SQL. If you need help with a specific query, Copilot and GPT are quite good at generating SQL queries. Just make sure you take some time to try to understand them and check for any potential issues. After completing a migration script it needs to be applied: ` I added the --local flag so that we’re working against a local database for now. Typing our Schema One of the downsides of our ORMless approach is we don’t get TypeScript types out of the box. In a smaller project, I think the easiest approach is just to manage your own types. It’s not hard, you can even have GPT help if you want. If managing type definitions for your schema is not acceptable for your project or use case you can look for a code generation tool or switch to an ORM / toolset that provides types. For this example I created some basic types to map to our schema so that we can get help from the lsp when working with our queries. ` Seeding development data Outside of our migrations, we can write SQL scripts and execute them against our D1 SQLite database using wrangler. To start we can create a simple seeds/dev.sql script to load some initial development seed data into our local database. Another example might be a reset.sql that drops all of our tables so we can easily reset our database during development as we rework the schema or run other experiments. Since our database is using auto incrementing integer ID’s, we can know up front what the ID’s for the rows we are creating are since our database is initially empty. This can be a bit tricky if you’re using randomly generated ID’s. In that case you would probably want to write a script that can collect ID’s of newly created records and use them for creating related records. Here we are just passing the integer ID directly in our SQL script. As an example, we know up front that the author Alice Smith will have the id 1, Bob Johnson 2, and so on. Post_tags looks a little bit crazy since it’s just a join table. Each row is just a post_id and a tag_id. (1, 1), (1 2), etc. Here’s the code for a dev seed script: ` Here’s the code for a reset script - it’s important to remember to drop the migrations table in your reset so you can apply your migrations. ` Using the wrangler CLI we can execute our script files against our local development and remote d1 database instances. Since we have already applied our migrations to our local database, we can use our dev.sql seed script to load some data into our db. ` The Wrangler output is pretty helpful - it lets us know to add the --remote flag to run against our remote instance. We can also use execute to run commands against our database. Lets run a select to look at the data added to our posts table. ` This command should output a table showing the columns of our db and the 7 rows we added from the dev seed script. Summary Using wrangler and the Cloudflare D1 platform we’ve already gotten pretty far without an ORM or any other additional tooling. We have a simple but effective migrations system in place and some initial scripts for easily seeding and resetting our databases. There are also some other really great things built-in to the D1 platform like time travel and backups. I definitely recommend at least skimming through the documentation at some point. In the next post we will start interacting with our database and sample data using the D1 Client API....

Aug 30, 2024

5 mins

Cloudflare

Introduction to Zod for Data Validation

As web developers, we're often working with data from external sources like APIs we don't control or user inputs submitted to our backends. We can't always rely on this data to take the form we expect, and we can encounter unexpected errors when it deviates from expectations. But with the Zod library, we can define what our data ought to look like and parse the incoming data against those defined schemas. This lets us work with that data confidently, or to quickly throw an error when it isn't correct. Why use Zod? TypeScript is great for letting us define the shape of our data in our code. It helps us write more correct code the first time around by warning us if we are doing something we shouldn't. But TypeScript can't do everything for us. For example, we can define a variable as a string or a number, but we can't say "a string that starts with user_id_ and is 20 characters long" or "an integer between 1 and 5". There are limits to how much TypeScript can narrow down our data for us. Also, TypeScript is a tool for us developers. When we compile our code, our types are not available to the vanilla JavaScript. JavaScript can't validate that the data we actually use in our code matches what we thought we'd get when we wrote our TypeScript types unless you're willing to manually write code to perform those checks. This is where we can reach for a tool like Zod. With Zod, we can write data schemas. These schemas, in the simplest scenarios, look very much like TypeScript types. But we can do more with Zod than we can with TypeScript alone. Zod schemas let us create additional rules for data parsing and validation. A 20-character string that starts with user_id_? It's z.string().startsWith('user_id_').length(20). An integer between 1 and 5 inclusive? It's z.number().int().gte(1).lte(5). Zod's primitives give us many extra functions to be more specific about *exactly* what data we expect. Unlike TypeScript, Zod schemas aren't removed on compilation to JavaScript—we still have access to them! If our app receives some data, we can verify that it matches the expected shape by passing it to your Zod schema's parse function. You'll either get back your data in exactly the shape you defined in your schema, or Zod will give you an error to tell you what was wrong. Zod schemas aren't a replacement for TypeScript; rather, they are an excellent complement. Once we've defined our Zod schema, it's simple to derive a TypeScript type from it and to use that type as we normally would. But when we really need to be sure our data conforms to the schema, we can always parse the data with our schema for that extra confidence. Defining Data Schemas Zod schemas are the variables that define our expectations for the shape of our data, validate those expectations, and transform the data if necessary to match our desired shape. It's easy to start with simple schemas, and to add complexity as required. Zod provides different functions that represent data structures and related validation options, which can be combined to create larger schemas. In many cases, you'll probably be building a schema for a data object with properties of some primitive type. For example, here's a schema that would validate a JavaScript object representing an order for a pizza: ` Zod provides a number of primitives for defining schemas that line up with JavaScript primitives: string, number, bigint, boolean, date, symbol, undefined, and null. It also includes primitives void, any, unknown, and never for additional typing information. In addition to basic primitives, Zod can define object, array, and other native data structure schemas, as well as schemas for data structures not natively part of JavaScript like tuple and enum. The documentation contains considerable detail on the available data structures and how to use them. Parsing and Validating Data with Schemas With Zod schemas, you're not only telling your program what data should look like; you're also creating the tools to easily verify that the incoming data matches the schema definitions. This is where Zod really shines, as it greatly simplifies the process of validating data like user inputs or third party API responses. Let's say you're writing a website form to register new users. At a minimum, you'll need to make sure the new user's email address is a valid email address. For a password, we'll ask for something at least 8 characters long and including one letter, one number, and one special character. (Yes, this is not really the best way to write strong passwords; but for the sake of showing off how Zod works, we're going with it.) We'll also ask the user to confirm their password by typing it twice. First, let's create a Zod schema to model these inputs: ` So far, this schema is pretty basic. It's only making sure that whatever the user types as an email is an email, and it's checking that the password is at least 8 characters long. But it is *not* checking if password and confirmPassword match, nor checking for the complexity requirements. Let's enhance our schema to fix that! ` By adding refine with a custom validation function, we have been able to verify that the passwords match. If they don't, parsing will give us an error to let us know that the data was invalid. We can also chain refine functions to add checks for our password complexity rules: ` Here we've chained multiple refine functions. You could alternatively use superRefine, which gives you even more fine grained control. Now that we've built out our schema and added refinements for extra validation, we can parse some user inputs. Let's see two test cases: one that's bound to fail, and one that will succeed. ` There are two main ways we can use our schema to validate our data: parse and safeParse. The main difference is that parse will throw an error if validation fails, while safeParse will return an object with a success property of either true or false, and either a data property with your parsed data or an error property with the details of a ZodError explaining why the parsing failed. In the case of our example data, userInput2 will parse just fine and return the data for you to use. But userInput1 will create a ZodError listing all of the ways it has failed validation. ` ` We can use these error messages to communicate to the user how they need to fix their form inputs if validation fails. Each error in the list describes the validation failure and gives us a human readable message to go with it. You'll notice that the validation errors for checking for a valid email and for checking password length have a lot of details, but we've got three items at the end of the error list that don't really tell us anything useful: just a custom error of Invalid input. The first is from our refine checking if the passwords match, and the second two are from our refine functions checking for password complexity (numbers and special characters). Let's modify our refine functions so that these errors are useful! We'll add our own error parameters to customize the message we get back and the path to the data that failed validation. ` Now, our error messages from failures in refine are informative! You can figure out which form fields aren't validating from the path, and then display the messages next to form fields to let the user know how to remedy the error. ` By giving our refine checks a custom path and message, we can make better use of the returned errors. In this case, we can highlight specific problem form fields for the user and give them the message about what is wrong. Integrating with TypeScript Integrating Zod with TypeScript is very easy. Using z.infer<typeof YourSchema> will allow you to avoid writing extra TypeScript types that merely reflect the intent of your Zod schemas. You can create a type from any Zod schema like so: ` Using a TypeScript type derived from a Zod schema does *not* give you any extra level of data validation at the type level beyond what TypeScript is capable of. If you create a type from z.string.min(3).max(20), the TypeScript type will still just be string. And when compiled to JavaScript, even that will be gone! That's why you still need to use parse/safeParse on incoming data to validate it before proceeding as if it really does match your requirements. A common pattern with inferring types from Zod schemas is to use the same name for both. Because the schema is a variable, there's no name conflict if the type uses the same name. However, I find that this can lead to confusing situations when trying to import one or the other—my personal preference is to name the Zod schema with Schema at the end to make it clear which is which. Conclusion Zod is an excellent tool for easily and confidently asserting that the data you're working with is exactly the sort of data you were expecting. It gives us the ability to assert at runtime that we've got what we wanted, and allows us to then craft strategies to handle what happens if that data is wrong. Combined with the ability to infer TypeScript types from Zod schemas, it lets us write and run more reliable code with greater confidence....

Nov 15, 2024

7 mins

JavaScriptZod

Let's innovate together!

We're ready to be your trusted technical partners in your digital innovation journey.

Whether it's modernization or custom software solutions, our team of experts can guide you through best practices and how to build scalable, performant software that lasts.

Testing a Fastify app with the NodeJS test runner

Introduction

Setup

Overview

Application Code

A simple first test

Testing our SQL plugin

Additional features

Test styles and methods

Test coverage

Other CLI flags

TypeScript support

Conclusion

Dane Grant

You might also like

React Version Transitions, Library Updates, and Why Standards Bodies are so Complex with JLarky

What’s Great About TypeScript ESLint v8 + The “Trough of Disillusionment” in Adoption with Josh Goldberg

D1 SQLite: Schema, migrations and seeds

Introduction to Zod for Data Validation

Let's innovate together!

You might also like

React Version Transitions, Library Updates, and Why Standards Bodies are so Complex with JLarky

What’s Great About TypeScript ESLint v8 + The “Trough of Disillusionment” in Adoption with Josh Goldberg

D1 SQLite: Schema, migrations and seeds

Introduction to Zod for Data Validation