Is it possible to somehow intercept the logging (SLF4J + logback) and get an InputStream
(or something else that is readable) via a JUnit test case...?
You can use slf4j-test from http://projects.lidalia.org.uk/slf4j-test/. It replaces the entire logback slf4j implementation by it's own slf4j api implementation for tests and provides an api to assert against logging events.
example:
<build>
<plugins>
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-surefire-plugin</artifactId>
<configuration>
<classpathDependencyExcludes>
<classpathDependencyExcludes>ch.qos.logback:logback-classic</classpathDependencyExcludes>
</classpathDependencyExcludes>
</configuration>
</plugin>
</plugins>
</build>
public class Slf4jUser {
private static final Logger logger = LoggerFactory.getLogger(Slf4jUser.class);
public void aMethodThatLogs() {
logger.info("Hello World!");
}
}
public class Slf4jUserTest {
Slf4jUser slf4jUser = new Slf4jUser();
TestLogger logger = TestLoggerFactory.getTestLogger(Slf4jUser.class);
@Test
public void aMethodThatLogsLogsAsExpected() {
slf4jUser.aMethodThatLogs();
assertThat(logger.getLoggingEvents(), is(asList(info("Hello World!"))));
}
@After
public void clearLoggers() {
TestLoggerFactory.clear();
}
}
The Slf4j API doesn't provide such a way but Logback provides a simple solution.
You can use ListAppender : a whitebox logback appender where log entries are added in a public List
field that we could use to make our assertions.
Here is a simple example.
Foo class :
import org.slf4j.Logger;
import org.slf4j.LoggerFactory;
public class Foo {
static final Logger LOGGER = LoggerFactory.getLogger(Foo .class);
public void doThat() {
logger.info("start");
//...
logger.info("finish");
}
}
FooTest class :
import org.slf4j.LoggerFactory;
import ch.qos.logback.classic.Level;
import ch.qos.logback.classic.Logger;
import ch.qos.logback.classic.spi.ILoggingEvent;
import ch.qos.logback.core.read.ListAppender;
public class FooTest {
@Test
void doThat() throws Exception {
// get Logback Logger
Logger fooLogger = (Logger) LoggerFactory.getLogger(Foo.class);
// create and start a ListAppender
ListAppender<ILoggingEvent> listAppender = new ListAppender<>();
listAppender.start();
// add the appender to the logger
fooLogger.addAppender(listAppender);
// call method under test
Foo foo = new Foo();
foo.doThat();
// JUnit assertions
List<ILoggingEvent> logsList = listAppender.list;
assertEquals("start", logsList.get(0)
.getMessage());
assertEquals(Level.INFO, logsList.get(0)
.getLevel());
assertEquals("finish", logsList.get(1)
.getMessage());
assertEquals(Level.INFO, logsList.get(1)
.getLevel());
}
}
You can also use Matcher/assertion libraries as AssertJ or Hamcrest.
With AssertJ it would be :
import org.assertj.core.api.Assertions;
Assertions.assertThat(listAppender.list)
.extracting(ILoggingEvent::getFormattedMessage, ILoggingEvent::getLevel)
.containsExactly(Tuple.tuple("start", Level.INFO), Tuple.tuple("finish", Level.INFO));
Although creating a custom logback appender is a good solution, it is only the first step, you will eventually end up developing/reinventing slf4j-test, and if you go a bit further: spf4j-slf4j-test or other frameworks that I don't know of yet.
You will eventually need to worry about how many events you keep in memory, fail unit tests when a error is logged (and not asserted), make debug logs available on test failure, etc...
Disclaimer: I am the author of spf4j-slf4j-test, I wrote this backend to be able to better test spf4j, which is a good place to look at for examples on how to use spf4j-slf4j-test. One of the main advantages I achieved was reducing my build output (which is limited with Travis), while still having all the detail I need when failure happens.
private ListAppender<ILoggingEvent> logWatcher;
@BeforeEach
void setup() {
this.logWatcher = new ListAppender<>();
this.logWatcher.start();
((Logger) LoggerFactory.getLogger(MyClass.class)).addAppender(this.logWatcher);
}
@Test
void myMethod_logs2Messages() {
...
int logSize = logWatcher.list.size();
assertThat(logWatcher.list.get(logSize - 2).getFormattedMessage()).contains("EXPECTED MSG 1");
assertThat(logWatcher.list.get(logSize - 1).getFormattedMessage()).contains("EXPECTED MSG 2");
}
credits to: @davidxxx's answer. See it for import ch.qos.logback...
details: https://stackoverflow.com/a/52229629/601844
You can create a custom appender
public class TestAppender extends AppenderBase<LoggingEvent> {
static List<LoggingEvent> events = new ArrayList<>();
@Override
protected void append(LoggingEvent e) {
events.add(e);
}
}
and configure logback-test.xml to use it. Now we can check logging events from our test:
@Test
public void test() {
...
Assert.assertEquals(1, TestAppender.events.size());
...
}
NOTE: Use ILoggingEvent
if you do not get any output - see the comment section for the reasoning.
I had problems when testing logs line like: LOGGER.error(message, exception).
The solution described in http://projects.lidalia.org.uk/slf4j-test/ tries to assert as well on the exception and it is not easy (and in my opinion worthless) to recreate the stacktrace.
I resolved in this way:
import org.junit.Test;
import org.slf4j.Logger;
import uk.org.lidalia.slf4jext.LoggerFactory;
import uk.org.lidalia.slf4jtest.TestLogger;
import uk.org.lidalia.slf4jtest.TestLoggerFactory;
import static org.assertj.core.api.Assertions.assertThat;
import static org.assertj.core.groups.Tuple.tuple;
import static uk.org.lidalia.slf4jext.Level.ERROR;
import static uk.org.lidalia.slf4jext.Level.INFO;
public class Slf4jLoggerTest {
private static final Logger LOGGER = LoggerFactory.getLogger(Slf4jLoggerTest.class);
private void methodUnderTestInSomeClassInProductionCode() {
LOGGER.info("info message");
LOGGER.error("error message");
LOGGER.error("error message with exception", new RuntimeException("this part is not tested"));
}
private static final TestLogger TEST_LOGGER = TestLoggerFactory.getTestLogger(Slf4jLoggerTest.class);
@Test
public void testForMethod() throws Exception {
// when
methodUnderTestInSomeClassInProductionCode();
// then
assertThat(TEST_LOGGER.getLoggingEvents()).extracting("level", "message").contains(
tuple(INFO, "info message"),
tuple(ERROR, "error message"),
tuple(ERROR, "error message with exception")
);
}
}
This has as well the advantage to not having depend on Hamcrest matchers library.