On 2019-07-26 09:52:52 +0200, Cyril Champier wrote: > No, the code I pasted was an existing production bug: the last_name > should have been unique, so the selected patient would always be the > same. This should have been detected in tests, but since the order was > "almost always the same", our test was green 99% of the time, so we > discarded it as flaky. > > Fuzzy testing could be an option, but this would go too far, as for > Peter extension suggestion. We have huge existing codebase with more > than 10K tests, and I do not want to modify our whole testing > strategy. > > Meanwhile, I went for an ORM patch (ActiveRecord) and forbid usages > that can workaround it.
Another idea:
How do ypu prepare your test data? Do you have a (possibly large) test
database or do you populate a test database with test-specific data in a
fixture?
If you do the latter, you might be able insert the data in random order.
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | we build much bigger, better disasters now
|_|_) | | because we have much more sophisticated
| | | h...@hjp.at | management tools.
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | -- Ross Anderson <https://www.edge.org/>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
