What is Pact good for?

When all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail...

Like every tool, there are situtations that Pact is great for, and situations where other tools would be better. In the right situation, Pact should make testing your integrations less painful than traditional integration tests. In the wrong situation, it will probably be just as painful!

Pact is most valuable for designing and testing integrations where:

  • You (or your team/organisation/partner organisation) control the development of both the consumer and the provider.
  • The requirements of the consumer(s) are going to be used to drive the features of the provider.
  • There is a small enough number of consumers for a given provider that the provider team can manage an individual relationship with each consumer team.

Pact is fantastic tool for developing and testing intra-organisation microservices.

What is it not good for?

  • Testing APIs where the consumers cannot be individually identified (eg. public APIs).
  • Testing new or existing providers where the functionality is not being driven or altered by the needs of particular consumers (eg. a public API or an OAuth provider)
  • Testing providers where the consumer and provider teams do not have good communication channels.
  • Performance and load testing.
  • Functional testing of the provider - that is what the provider's own tests should do. Pact is about checking the contents and format of requests and responses.
  • Situations where you cannot load data into the provider without using the API that you're actually testing (eg. public APIs). Why?
  • Testing "pass through" APIs, where the provider merely passes on the request contents to a downstream service without validating them. Why?

results matching ""

    No results matching ""