bottlenecked
Hi all, I’m thinking about creating a many-to-many association on one of my schemas like this
many_to_many :active_foos, MyApp.Foo,
join_through: MyApp.FooJoinTable,
join_where: [state: :current],
where: [state: :active],
preload_order: [asc: :name]
The above reads like configuration - but it feels complex enough that it might merit writing a couple of sanity tests. However there’s also advice that when it comes to tests, we should be testing our own code, not the library/framework code - and it would seem that a test like this
test "correctly loads active_foos" do
...
end
would be testing that many_to_many works as advertised as opposed to testing that some business logic is correct.
What have others done here? Did/would you write tests like that? Or would you rather indirectly test at the call site instead (e.g. in a test for the page that renders the active_foos).
Thanks for your thoughts!
Where Next?
Trending in Questions
Other Trending Topics
Latest on Elixir Forum
Sponsor Spotlight
Build Elixir applications with speed and confidence.
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Popular Tags
- #ecto
- #liveview
- #troubleshooting
- #learning-elixir
- #library
- #deployment
- #erlang
- #testing
- #genserver
- #mix
- #absinthe
- #remote-other
- #otp
- #plug
- #how-to-question
- #macros
- #postgres
- #elixirconf
- #channels
- #exunit
- #discussion
- #code-sync
- #podcasts
- #javascript
- #onsite
- #dialyzer
- #docker
- #authentication
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ecto-query
- #ai
- #elixirconf-us
- #blog-post
- #elixir-ls
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #graphql
- #genstage
- #websockets
- #supervisor
- #advent-of-code
- #distillery
- #processes
- #api
- #forms
- #elixirconf-eu
- #metaprogramming
- #hex
Our Sponsors
Build Elixir applications with speed and confidence.
Supporting innovation across the BEAM ecosystem.
We build reliable cloud platforms for business-critical systems.
Error tracking, logs, uptime, and Just Enough APM. Built for developers.
Elixir, Erlang & BEAM conferences from Code Sync - join us in 2026!
Master modern tools, write cleaner code, and tackle real-world challenges.
Producing high quality Elixir screencasts since 2017.
The deployment platform built for Elixir: PaaS ease, VPS control.
The team behind Membrane, Popcorn, LiveDebugger. Available for hire.
Courses that'll move you from confusion to "Aha, now I get it!"
Showing Posts 1 to 3- Show Best Posts
- Show All (oldest first)
- Show All (newest first)
dimitarvp
I would be the first to tell you to not test Ecto itself, though in your case I believe it’s fair to test if those m2m records are inserted properly if f.ex. you also have metadata fields inside them, want to check if the preload order is indeed respected etc.
There’s a fine line between unfounded paranoia and simply making sure your stuff works. I’d say in this case it’s a bit of both but I’d still add tests.
LostKobrakai
I’d say you don’t want to test the “definition”, but you want to test the code making use of the definition according to how that powers actual usecases of your application. Tests should not break if you switch to e.g. has_many/through, if there’s no user facing behaviour changes. But things should break if you mess something up in that definition, which would result in user facing behaviour changes.
bottlenecked
Thank you both for your thoughtful input.
In the end I decided to to test both that the relation returns the expected records in the order expected while leaving out unwanted ones, and also at the call site to make sure that it’s correctly used.