Contract Testing Google Pub/Sub: Using AsyncAPI specs as Executable Contracts

Share this page

Shift-Left the identification of integration issues in applications built with Event Driven Architecture (EDA) by leveraging AsyncAPI specs as Executable Contracts

Introduction

The surge in popularity of microservices has revolutionized the way we think about software architecture. However, as systems grow and inter-service communication increases, the risk of integration issues can also rise. One such communication challenge appears when services interact through asynchronous messaging systems like Google Pub/Sub. To ensure reliability and adherence to predefined protocols, contract testing emerges as a crucial strategy. In this blog post, we’ll dive deeper into how Specmatic simplifies contract testing for services dependent on Google Pub/Sub, paving the way for faultless microservices communication through early identification of integration issues.

Github Repo: https://github.com/znsio/specmatic-google-pubsub-sample

See other demos of Specmatic in action with AsyncAPI:

Kafka Mocking with AsyncAPI using Specmatic
JMS Mocking with AsyncAPI using Specmatic

Understanding Google Pub/Sub and Contract Testing

Google Pub/Sub is a fully-managed real-time messaging service that allows applications to exchange messages effectively. A common scenario entails a service publishing a message to a topic, and another subscribing to that topic to receive the message. The challenge lies in ensuring that both parties agree on the message format—this is where contract testing comes into play.

Contract testing verifies interaction between service providers and consumers, confirming each side adheres to the agreed-upon contract. Specmatic, a tool adept at managing contract tests, uses the AsyncAPI specification to automate these tests using the provided schema of messages.

AsyncAPI Specifications and Specmatic

The AsyncAPI specification acts as a blueprint for your messaging API, defining the message structure, protocols, and channels used for communication. It’s what Specmatic relies on to ensure your Google Pub/Sub messages are both syntactically and functionally correct. Through the use of named examples within the AsyncAPI specification, Specmatic can publish and subscribe to messages, simulating the actions of actual services during the testing process.

Utilizing the Google Pub/Sub Emulator

Instead of interacting with a live instance of Google Pub/Sub, in this demo we opt for an emulator during testing. This approach accelerates the testing process and removes external dependencies, enabling local and CI pipeline-based executions that provide immediate feedback.

Specmatic Contract Test running as part of Github Action

Automating with Specmatic

In this demonstration of Specmatic’s capabilities, we see how Specmatic operates as an intelligent client for microservices. It sends messages and validates both the presence and correctness of the responses it receives. If requirements aren’t met, Specmatic flags the test as a failure, alerting developers to discrepancies between the service and the contract.

The Construction of a Contract Test with Specmatic

Constructing contract tests with Specmatic begins by pointing to the AsyncAPI specification within the `specmatic.json` file. Doing so allows Specmatic to generate tests automatically, fostering a seamless integration process.

The Value of Specmatic Testing

This testing approach facilitated by Specmatic offers a proactive measure for preventing integrations veering off-spec. The demonstration showcases a scenario where deliberately deviating from the AsyncAPI specification causes the contract test to fail. This illustrates Specmatic’s ability to catch errors early, preventing potential bugs from progressing down the deployment pipeline.

Specmatic’s Role in Maintaining Contract Integrity

Specmatic also ensures consistency across examples used within the AsyncAPI specification, associating messages across publish and subscribe operations via common naming conventions. This feature solidifies the link between message expectations, ensuring that changes in one area of the specification are consistently replicated throughout.

Collaborative and Efficient Development

Specmatic’s approach of treating AsyncAPI spec as the source of truth for the mutual agreement between microservice teams fosters a collaborative culture where all stakeholder teams can co-create how services interact with each other through asynchronous channels and capture the same as AsyncAPI spec in an iterative manner. This also allows for independent parallel development where teams can confidently build their respective components since Specmatic will ensure contract compatibility of services based on the AsyncAPI spec.

Conclusion

As services and their communication evolve, Specmatic’s approach to contract testing offers a scalable, efficient, and secure method for ensuring that all messages pass seamlessly between services, keeping the system in harmony. By automating contract tests utilizing the AsyncAPI specification to test Google Pub/Sub integrations, Specmatic allows developers to confidently build and maintain systems that are robust, reliable, and ready to communicate effectively. This exemplifies how automating and aligning software development practices with contract testing can vastly improve the overall software delivery lifecycle.

Related Posts

specmatic genie mcp

By Jaydeep Kulkarni

Curate, Validate and Publish an MCP Server from an OpenAPI Spec with Specmatic Genie

In this walk-through we'll show exactly how we took the Postman APIs, curated the set of API end points we want to expose via MCP,
Read More

API Resiliency and Contract Testing for GraphQL

Transform your GraphQL API specs into executable contracts in seconds Now you can easily leverage your GraphQL APIs for contract testing, intelligent service virtualisation and
Read More
testing 202 responses thumb

By Naresh Jain

When Downstream Services Lag, Does Your API Gracefully Accept with 202 Responses?

When Downstream Services Lag: Designing Reliable APIs with 202 responses As systems get distributed, synchronous calls to downstream services become fragile. When a downstream service
Read More
Specmatic + Kafka demo video thumbnail

Kafka Mocking with AsyncAPI using Specmatic

The Specmatic Kafka mock is wire compatible and entirely within the control of the test, the test can run locally and in CI and deliver
Read More

Contract vs. Approval Testing: Identifying Bugs in RESTfulBooker’s API with Specmatic and TextTest

Testing APIs: Specmatic vs TextTest Emily Bache wanted to compare TextTest with Specmatic and has published a video about her experience: The BEST way to
Read More
mcp auto test exposed mcp servers lying

By Yogesh Nikam

Exposed: MCP Servers Are Lying About Their Schemas

Table of Contents Practical Lessons from MCP Server Testing Over the last few weeks the Specmatic team ran a focused series of MCP server testing
Read More
api proxy recording thumb

By Naresh Jain

Replace Live Services with OpenAPI Mocks from Real HTTP Traffic with Specmatic Proxy

API proxy recording: Capture traffic, generate mocks, and simulate faults When you need to test how a system behaves when a downstream API misbehaves, API
Read More

By Jaydeep Kulkarni

JMS Mocking with AsyncAPI using Specmatic

The JMS mock is wire compatible and can be controlled entirely from within the test. This means you can run the test locally or also
Read More
specmaticmcpdemo linkedin mcp

By Hari Krishnan

Specmatic MCP as guardrails for Coding Agents: API Spec to Full Stack implementation in minutes

Table of Contents In this walkthrough we'll show how to use Specmatic MCP server for API testing (Contract and Resiliency) and Mocking as a guardrail
Read More

By Naresh Jain

gRPC Flaws​ – The Illusion of Safety & Frustrating DevEx in Proto3’s Type-Safe Contracts​

Understanding the Shortcomings of gRPC and How Contract Testing Can Bridge the Gap  In the ever-evolving world of API design, development, and testing, the pursuit
Read More