Feature/dynamodb enhanced increase functional tests coverage by iulianbudau · Pull Request #6946 · aws/aws-sdk-java-v2

iulianbudau · 2026-05-07T09:41:56Z

Motivation and Context

The goal of this work is to increase functional tests coverage of the aws-sdk-java-v2/services-custom/dynamodb-enhanced module through cross configuration (e.g. mixed schema types, shared client behavior, mixed extensions interaction) scenarios to prevent regressions for future changes.

This PR also includes a bugfix in AutoGeneratedTimestampRecordExtension: when a custom or third-party TableSchema does not support converterForAttribute (default method throws UnsupportedOperationException), the extension now skips timestamp insertion for that attribute instead of failing the write. The same handling applies for nested schemas.

Testing

Expanded functional tests with scenarios on the below cross configurations:

Mixed-schema multi-table request scenarios
Shared client cross-table behavior
Extensions interaction combinations
Nested/flattened cross-operation invariants
@DynamoDbConvertedBy list-attribute regression coverage for AutoGeneratedTimestampRecordExtension across put/update/batchWrite/transact (sync and async)
Extension SPI contract tests for standalone extensions (AutoGeneratedTimestampRecordExtension, AutoGeneratedUuidExtension, AtomicCounterExtension, VersionedRecordExtension) verifying graceful no-op behavior when optional capabilities are absent, across put/update/batchWrite/transact write operations

Screenshots (if appropriate)

Types of changes

Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)

Checklist

I have read the CONTRIBUTING document
Local run of mvn install succeeds
My code follows the code style of this project
My change requires a change to the Javadoc documentation
I have updated the Javadoc documentation accordingly
I have added tests to cover my changes
All new and existing tests passed
I have added a changelog entry. Adding a new entry must be accomplished by running the scripts/new-change script and following the instructions. Commit the new file created by the script in .changes/next-release with your changes.
My change is to implement 1.11 parity feature and I have updated LaunchChangelog

License

I confirm that this pull request can be released under the Apache 2 license

…verage refactoring Added changelog file for "Increase functional tests coverage on dynamodb-enhanced module" removed fully qualified references

alextwoods · 2026-07-29T17:02:41Z

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+{
+    "type": "feature",


Nit: I'd argue this should be a bugfix rather than a feature - I notice there are more than just test changes in the PR - we're including additional bugfixes in the AutoGeneratedTimestampRecordExtensionnced - that should be mentioned in the description as well.

Updated the changelog entry to bugfix and adjusted the description to call out the AutoGeneratedTimestampRecordExtension change for converterForAttribute throwing UnsupportedOperationException. I also updated the PR description to mention that bugfix.

alextwoods · 2026-07-29T17:04:18Z

+            AttributeConverter<?> converter;
+            try {
+                converter = nestedSchema.converterForAttribute(key);
+            } catch (UnsupportedOperationException e) {


Do the test cases actually cover this? When I removed this check, all the tests still passed which implies we don't actually have sufficient coverage of a nested schema case that hits this.

Added coverage specifically for nested schemas that throw UnsupportedOperationException from converterForAttribute. This is now exercised by AutoGeneratedTimestampExtensionTest#beforeWrite_nestedSchemaWithoutConverterForAttribute_doesNotThrow_nestedTimestampsSkipped, which verifies the write does not fail and nested timestamp insertion is skipped.

alextwoods · 2026-07-29T17:08:05Z

+    @Test
+    public void queryRecords_withEmptyProjectionString_shouldThrowAssertionError() {
+        insertNestedRecords();
+        assertThatExceptionOfType(AssertionError.class).isThrownBy(


I think this test could pass for the wrong reason since its just looking for assertion failures in drain publisher.

I think we can change this to use the existing drainPublisherToError and then look for CompletionException. (and update the test name)

Note - I think this comment applies to a few tests:

AsyncBasicQueryTest.queryRecords_withEmptyProjectionString_shouldThrowAssertionError

AsyncBasicQueryTest.queryRecords_withEmptyNestedProjectionName_shouldThrowAssertionError

AsyncBasicScanTest.scanRecords_withEmptyNestedAttributeName_shouldThrowAssertionError

AsyncBasicScanTest.scanRecords_withEmptyTopLevelAttributeName_shouldThrowAssertionError

Updated these tests to use drainPublisherToError and assert CompletionException, and renamed them accordingly. This applies to the empty projection/attribute-name cases in AsyncBasicQueryTest and AsyncBasicScanTest.

alextwoods · 2026-07-29T17:10:52Z

+        assertThat(persisted.getDefaultCounter()).isEqualTo(2L);
+        assertThat(persisted.getCustomCounter()).isEqualTo(20L);
+        assertThat(persisted.getDecreasingCounter()).isEqualTo(-22L);


These feel like magic numbers. Where do they come from? We should at least comment how they were derived so that when they fail in the future we can understand why

I added a comment explaining how the expected counter values are derived from the AtomicCounterRecord annotation defaults (start / delta) across the three updateItem calls.

alextwoods · 2026-07-29T17:11:11Z

+        assertThat(persisted.getDefaultCounter()).isEqualTo(1L);
+        assertThat(persisted.getCustomCounter()).isEqualTo(15L);
+        assertThat(persisted.getDecreasingCounter()).isEqualTo(-21L);


These feel like magic numbers. Where do they come from? We should at least comment how they were derived so that when they fail in the future we can understand why

I added a comment explaining how the expected counter values are derived from the AtomicCounterRecord annotation defaults (start / delta) for the put followed by a conditioned update.

alextwoods · 2026-07-29T17:13:30Z

@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+package software.amazon.awssdk.enhanced.dynamodb.functionaltests;


Nit: This file, along with other new ones are missing the copyright header.

Added the standard Apache 2.0 copyright header to the new async test files called out here, including AsyncAtomicCounterTest, AsyncAutoGeneratedUuidRecordTest, AsyncUpdateBehaviorTest, AsyncUpdateExpressionTest, and AsyncVersionedRecordTest.

alextwoods · 2026-07-29T17:16:16Z

                                                           .setter(Record2::setAttribute))
                         .build();

+    private static final TableSchema<TimestampedRecord> TIMESTAMPED_TABLE_SCHEMA =


It looks like the TimestampedRecord and this TIMESTAMPED_TABLE_SCHEMA table schema are repeated in a number of places - should probably be extracted

I extracted the shared TimestampedRecord model and schema into functionaltests.models.TimestampedRecord and updated the batch/transact write tests (sync and async) to use TimestampedRecord.TABLE_SCHEMA.

alextwoods · 2026-07-29T17:19:48Z

+        String extensionTableName = getConcreteTableName("doc-extension-table");
+        DynamoDbEnhancedClient extensionClient = DynamoDbEnhancedClient.builder()
+                                                                       .dynamoDbClient(getDynamoDbClient())
+                                                                       .extensions(AutoGeneratedTimestampRecordExtension.create())
+                                                                       .build();
+        DynamoDbTable<EnhancedDocument> extensionTable =
+            extensionClient.table(extensionTableName,
+                                  TableSchema.documentSchemaBuilder()
+                                             .addIndexPartitionKey(TableMetadata.primaryIndexName(), "id", AttributeValueType.S)
+                                             .attributeConverterProviders(defaultProvider())
+                                             .build());
+        extensionTable.createTable(r -> r.provisionedThroughput(getDefaultProvisionedThroughput()));


This looks like a lot of duplicated code between the new methods

I reduced the duplicated setup by introducing shared helpers for creating the extension client/table and cleaning up the table in the dedicated document extension CRUD test classes.

alextwoods · 2026-07-29T17:23:52Z

    }
+
+    @Test
+    public void documentSchema_withExtension_putAndUpdate_shouldSucceed() {


It looks like these tests do not depend on the Paramaterized testData at all - which I believe means they will get run 10x+ times with identical data (and report the same success/failure many times). Assuming that is true, these should be moved out to a non parameterized test class.
I think this applies for the BasicAsyncCrudTest as well.

Moved these document-schema extension scenarios out of the parameterized BasicCrudTest / BasicAsyncCrudTest into DocumentSchemaExtensionCrudTest and DocumentSchemaExtensionAsyncCrudTest, since they do not depend on testData.

alextwoods · 2026-08-13T16:27:52Z

CI passes in: #7272

iulianbudau requested a review from a team as a code owner May 7, 2026 09:41

anasatirbasa approved these changes May 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

add dynamodb cross configuration functional tests to increase test co…

08b4044

…verage refactoring Added changelog file for "Increase functional tests coverage on dynamodb-enhanced module" removed fully qualified references

iulianbudau force-pushed the feature/dynamodb-enhanced-increase-functional-tests-coverage branch from edd446a to 08b4044 Compare June 23, 2026 14:36

alextwoods requested changes Jul 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

debora-ito added the dynamodb-enhanced label Aug 4, 2026

Expand enhanced client regression and extension test coverage

ae13100

alextwoods approved these changes Aug 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

alextwoods mentioned this pull request Aug 13, 2026

[do not merge, CI RUN] Run CI for 6946 #7272

Closed

alextwoods merged commit 1c845aa into aws:master Aug 13, 2026
9 of 11 checks passed

		@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
		package software.amazon.awssdk.enhanced.dynamodb.functionaltests;

Uh oh!

Conversation

iulianbudau commented May 7, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Motivation and Context

Testing

Screenshots (if appropriate)

Types of changes

Checklist

License

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!

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!

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!

alextwoods commented Aug 13, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

iulianbudau commented May 7, 2026 •

edited

Loading