SOLR-18068: POC of keeping existing assertQ logic with solrTestRule by epugh · Pull Request #4042 · apache/solr

epugh · 2026-01-11T01:10:32Z

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-18068

Description

Experimenting with how to move us from extending SolrTestCaseJ4 and using initCore to using a SolrTestRule

Solution

I didn't want to change any of the assert logic like:

 assertQ(
        req("qt", URI, "q", "the f", SpellingParams.SPELLCHECK_COUNT, "4"),
        "//lst[@name='spellcheck']/lst[@name='suggestions']/lst[@name='the f']/int[@name='numFound'][.='3']",
        "//lst[@name='spellcheck']/lst[@name='suggestions']/lst[@name='the f']/arr[@name='suggestion']/str[1][.='the final phrase']",
        "//lst[@name='spellcheck']/lst[@name='suggestions']/lst[@name='the f']/arr[@name='suggestion']/str[2][.='the fifth phrase']",
        "//lst[@name='spellcheck']/lst[@name='suggestions']/lst[@name='the f']/arr[@name='suggestion']/str[3][.='the first phrase']");

It is all xpath based, and to change that to the json equivalents would be a lot of error prone work.

I introduced a class SolrXPathTestCase between TestPhraseSuggestions and SolrTestCase, cutting out the old extension on SolrTestCaseJ4. I then added the req and assertQ methods to that class, but with the various new types.

Tests

Modified existing test and made sure it still passes.

epugh · 2026-01-11T18:26:49Z

solr/core/src/test/org/apache/solr/spelling/suggest/TestPhraseSuggestions.java

  @BeforeClass
  public static void beforeClass() throws Exception {
-    initCore("solrconfig-phrasesuggest.xml", "schema-phrasesuggest.xml");
-    assertQ(req("qt", URI, "q", "", SpellingParams.SPELLCHECK_BUILD, "true"));


I had to move the assertQ into the public void test() because appparently this is static and assertQ and req couldn't be called from a static method.

dsmiley

Thanks for starting work on this!

dsmiley · 2026-01-11T17:58:55Z

solr/core/src/test/org/apache/solr/spelling/suggest/TestPhraseSuggestions.java

+    solrTestRule
+        .newCollection()
+        .withConfigSet("../collection1")
+        .withConfigFile("conf/solrconfig-phrasesuggest.xml")


is that leading "conf" really necessary? I hope not. Something to improve... the presence of those intermediate conf directories is a sad accident of history.

dsmiley · 2026-01-11T18:13:37Z

solr/test-framework/src/java/org/apache/solr/SolrXPathTestCase.java

You are assuming an InputStreamResponseParser requesting XML but don't see the logic for it.

dsmiley · 2026-01-11T18:14:17Z

solr/test-framework/src/java/org/apache/solr/SolrXPathTestCase.java

+  }
+
+  public SolrClient getSolrClient(){
+    throw new RuntimeException("This method needs to be overridden");


then make it abstract?!

dsmiley · 2026-01-11T18:15:12Z

solr/test-framework/src/java/org/apache/solr/SolrXPathTestCase.java

+      throw new RuntimeException("XPath is invalid", e1);
+    } catch (Throwable e3) {
+      log.error("REQUEST FAILED: {}", req.getParams(), e3);
+      throw new RuntimeException("Exception during query", e3);


Not assertionFailure?

dsmiley · 2026-01-11T18:19:55Z

solr/core/src/test/org/apache/solr/spelling/suggest/TestPhraseSuggestions.java

+    // This was part of the SolrTestCaseJ4.setupTestCases method and appears to be needed.  Ugh.
+    // Is this a direction we want, this randomness and need in SolrTestCase?
+    SolrTestCaseJ4Test.newRandomConfig();


Hmm, this is a struggle/tension. On one hand, I want to see SolrTestCase leaner; not a kitchen sink that STCJ4 became. And I want it to be usable by 3rd parties as well. Including logic for newRandomConfig definitely fails the latter. Maybe we need another subclass for first-party. Or have STC be able to recognize 1P from 3P and be graceful... which I think for some specific methods it may (and/or STCJ4 does. TEST_HOME() is one). Or maybe put certain functionality as static methods in other classes, like TEST_HOME() -- like a 1PTest.TEST_Home().

dsmiley · 2026-01-11T18:24:21Z

solr/test-framework/src/java/org/apache/solr/SolrXPathTestCase.java

+    if (path != null) {
+      req.setPath(path);
+    }
+    req.setResponseParser(new InputStreamResponseParser("xml"));


IMO this doesn't belong here.

dsmiley · 2026-01-11T18:25:25Z

solr/test-framework/src/java/org/apache/solr/SolrXPathTestCase.java

+    params.set("wt", "xml");
+    params.set("indent", params.get("indent", "off"));


wt should not be be set since it's the job of the ResponseParser to declare it's wt

dsmiley · 2026-01-11T18:26:20Z

solr/test-framework/src/java/org/apache/solr/SolrXPathTestCase.java

+          "The length of the string array (query arguments) needs to be even");
+    }
+    for (int i = 0; i < q.length; i += 2) {
+      params.set(q[i], q[i + 1]);


use "add" not "set" since params can repeat

dsmiley · 2026-01-11T18:27:07Z

solr/test-framework/src/java/org/apache/solr/SolrXPathTestCase.java

+      QueryResponse rsp = req.process(getSolrClient());
+      NamedList<Object> rawResponse = rsp.getResponse();
+      InputStream stream = (InputStream) rawResponse.get("stream");
+      String response = new String(stream.readAllBytes(), StandardCharsets.UTF_8);


call this responseXml to clearly show it's format

…tatic method

dsmiley · 2026-01-16T05:28:36Z

solr/test-framework/src/java/org/apache/solr/SolrXPathTestCase.java

+import org.slf4j.Logger;
+import org.slf4j.LoggerFactory;
+
+public class SolrXPathTestCase extends SolrTestCase {


Instead I could imagine an Interface like AssertSolrXPath. A test wishing to call such methods need only implement the interface and implement getClient; a one-liner against the rule. There would be a separate Json equivalent as well having assertJQ.

POC of keeping existing assertQ logic with solrTestRule

7ac0d89

github-actions bot added test-framework tests cat:search labels Jan 11, 2026

Lint!

f33120e

epugh added the no-changelog label Jan 11, 2026

Better name for XPath supporting class.

f704ece

epugh commented Jan 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

dsmiley reviewed Jan 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

epugh added 2 commits January 12, 2026 08:34

By passing in a solr client to assertQ, we can use that method in a s…

f6a3f42

…tatic method

thinking about other ways of maninging calls

7f244b2

dsmiley reviewed Jan 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

SOLR-18068: POC of keeping existing assertQ logic with solrTestRule#4042

SOLR-18068: POC of keeping existing assertQ logic with solrTestRule#4042
epugh wants to merge 5 commits intoapache:mainfrom
epugh:SOLR-18068

epugh commented Jan 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

epugh Jan 11, 2026

Uh oh!

dsmiley left a comment

Uh oh!

dsmiley Jan 11, 2026

Uh oh!

dsmiley Jan 11, 2026

Uh oh!

dsmiley Jan 11, 2026

Uh oh!

dsmiley Jan 11, 2026

Uh oh!

dsmiley Jan 11, 2026

Uh oh!

dsmiley Jan 11, 2026

Uh oh!

dsmiley Jan 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

dsmiley Jan 11, 2026

Uh oh!

dsmiley Jan 11, 2026

Uh oh!

dsmiley Jan 16, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Comments

		params.set("wt", "xml");
		params.set("indent", params.get("indent", "off"));

Conversation

epugh commented Jan 11, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description

Solution

Tests

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dsmiley left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dsmiley Jan 11, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Comments

epugh commented Jan 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading

dsmiley Jan 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading