@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
@ContextConfiguration
public class MyTest {

    @Autowired
    private ApplicationContext applicationContext;

    // class body...
}

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
@WebAppConfiguration
@ContextConfiguration
public class MyWebAppTest {
    @Autowired
    private WebApplicationContext wac;

    // class body...
}

To load an ApplicationContext for your tests using XML configuration files, annotate your test class with @ContextConfiguration and configure the locations attribute with an array that contains the resource locations of XML configuration metadata. A plain or relative path — for example "context.xml" — will be treated as a classpath resource that is relative to the package in which the test class is defined. A path starting with a slash is treated as an absolute classpath location, for example "/org/example/config.xml". A path which represents a resource URL (i.e., a path prefixed with classpath:, file:, http:, etc.) will be used as is.

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
// ApplicationContext will be loaded from "/app-config.xml" and
// "/test-config.xml" in the root of the classpath
@ContextConfiguration(locations={"/app-config.xml", "/test-config.xml"})
public class MyTest {
    // class body...
}

@ContextConfiguration supports an alias for the locations attribute through the standard Java value attribute. Thus, if you do not need to declare additional attributes in @ContextConfiguration, you can omit the declaration of the locations attribute name and declare the resource locations by using the shorthand format demonstrated in the following example.

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
@ContextConfiguration({"/app-config.xml", "/test-config.xml"})
public class MyTest {
    // class body...
}

If you omit both the locations and value attributes from the @ContextConfiguration annotation, the TestContext framework will attempt to detect a default XML resource location. Specifically, GenericXmlContextLoader detects a default location based on the name of the test class. If your class is named com.example.MyTest, GenericXmlContextLoader loads your application context from "classpath:/com/example/MyTest-context.xml".

package com.example;

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
// ApplicationContext will be loaded from
// "classpath:/com/example/MyTest-context.xml"
@ContextConfiguration
public class MyTest {
    // class body...
}

To load an ApplicationContext for your tests using annotated classes (see Section 4.12, “Java-based container configuration”), annotate your test class with @ContextConfiguration and configure the classes attribute with an array that contains references to annotated classes.

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
// ApplicationContext will be loaded from AppConfig and TestConfig
@ContextConfiguration(classes = {AppConfig.class, TestConfig.class})
public class MyTest {
    // class body...
}

If you omit the classes attribute from the @ContextConfiguration annotation, the TestContext framework will attempt to detect the presence of default configuration classes. Specifically, AnnotationConfigContextLoader will detect all static inner classes of the test class that meet the requirements for configuration class implementations as specified in the Javadoc for @Configuration. In the following example, the OrderServiceTest class declares a static inner configuration class named Config that will be automatically used to load the ApplicationContext for the test class. Note that the name of the configuration class is arbitrary. In addition, a test class can contain more than one static inner configuration class if desired.

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
// ApplicationContext will be loaded from the
// static inner Config class
@ContextConfiguration
public class OrderServiceTest {

    @Configuration
    static class Config {

        // this bean will be injected into the OrderServiceTest class
        @Bean
        public OrderService orderService() {
            OrderService orderService = new OrderServiceImpl();
            // set properties, etc.
            return orderService;
        }
    }

    @Autowired
    private OrderService orderService;

    @Test
    public void testOrderService() {
        // test the orderService
    }

}

It may sometimes be desirable to mix XML resources and annotated classes (i.e., typically @Configuration classes) to configure an ApplicationContext for your tests. For example, if you use XML configuration in production, you may decide that you want to use @Configuration classes to configure specific Spring-managed components for your tests, or vice versa. As mentioned in the section called “Spring Testing Annotations” the TestContext framework does not allow you to declare both via @ContextConfiguration, but this does not mean that you cannot use both.

If you want to use XML and @Configuration classes to configure your tests, you will have to pick one as the entry point, and that one will have to include or import the other. For example, in XML you can include @Configuration classes via component scanning or define them as normal Spring beans in XML; whereas, in a @Configuration class you can use @ImportResource to import XML configuration files. Note that this behavior is semantically equivalent to how you configure your application in production: in production configuration you will define either a set of XML resource locations or a set of @Configuration classes that your production ApplicationContext will be loaded from, but you still have the freedom to include or import the other type of configuration.

To configure an ApplicationContext for your tests using context initializers, annotate your test class with @ContextConfiguration and configure the initializers attribute with an array that contains references to classes that implement ApplicationContextInitializer. The declared context initializers will then be used to initialize the ConfigurableApplicationContext that is loaded for your tests. Note that the concrete ConfigurableApplicationContext type supported by each declared initializer must be compatible with the type of ApplicationContext created by the SmartContextLoader in use (i.e., typically a GenericApplicationContext). Furthermore, the order in which the initializers are invoked depends on whether they implement Spring’s Ordered interface or are annotated with Spring’s @Order annotation.

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
// ApplicationContext will be loaded from TestConfig
// and initialized by TestAppCtxInitializer
@ContextConfiguration(
    classes = TestConfig.class,
    initializers = TestAppCtxInitializer.class)
public class MyTest {
    // class body...
}

It is also possible to omit the declaration of XML configuration files or annotated classes in @ContextConfiguration entirely and instead declare only ApplicationContextInitializer classes which are then responsible for registering beans in the context — for example, by programmatically loading bean definitions from XML files or configuration classes.

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
// ApplicationContext will be initialized by EntireAppInitializer
// which presumably registers beans in the context
@ContextConfiguration(initializers = EntireAppInitializer.class)
public class MyTest {
    // class body...
}

@ContextConfiguration supports boolean inheritLocations and inheritInitializers attributes that denote whether resource locations or annotated classes and context initializers declared by superclasses should be inherited. The default value for both flags is true. This means that a test class inherits the resource locations or annotated classes as well as the context initializers declared by any superclasses. Specifically, the resource locations or annotated classes for a test class are appended to the list of resource locations or annotated classes declared by superclasses. Similarly, the initializers for a given test class will be added to the set of initializers defined by test superclasses. Thus, subclasses have the option of extending the resource locations, annotated classes, or context initializers.

If @ContextConfiguration's inheritLocations or inheritInitializers attribute is set to false, the resource locations or annotated classes and the context initializers, respectively, for the test class shadow and effectively replace the configuration defined by superclasses.

In the following example that uses XML resource locations, the ApplicationContext for ExtendedTest will be loaded from "base-config.xml" and "extended-config.xml", in that order. Beans defined in "extended-config.xml" may therefore override (i.e., replace) those defined in "base-config.xml".

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
// ApplicationContext will be loaded from "/base-config.xml"
// in the root of the classpath
@ContextConfiguration("/base-config.xml")
public class BaseTest {
    // class body...
}

// ApplicationContext will be loaded from "/base-config.xml" and
// "/extended-config.xml" in the root of the classpath
@ContextConfiguration("/extended-config.xml")
public class ExtendedTest extends BaseTest {
    // class body...
}

Similarly, in the following example that uses annotated classes, the ApplicationContext for ExtendedTest will be loaded from the BaseConfig and ExtendedConfig classes, in that order. Beans defined in ExtendedConfig may therefore override (i.e., replace) those defined in BaseConfig.

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
// ApplicationContext will be loaded from BaseConfig
@ContextConfiguration(classes = BaseConfig.class)
public class BaseTest {
    // class body...
}

// ApplicationContext will be loaded from BaseConfig and ExtendedConfig
@ContextConfiguration(classes = ExtendedConfig.class)
public class ExtendedTest extends BaseTest {
    // class body...
}

In the following example that uses context initializers, the ApplicationContext for ExtendedTest will be initialized using BaseInitializer and ExtendedInitializer. Note, however, that the order in which the initializers are invoked depends on whether they implement Spring’s Ordered interface or are annotated with Spring’s @Order annotation.

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
// ApplicationContext will be initialized by BaseInitializer
@ContextConfiguration(initializers=BaseInitializer.class)
public class BaseTest {
    // class body...
}

// ApplicationContext will be initialized by BaseInitializer
// and ExtendedInitializer
@ContextConfiguration(initializers=ExtendedInitializer.class)
public class ExtendedTest extends BaseTest {
    // class body...
}

Spring 3.1 introduced first-class support in the framework for the notion of environments and profiles (a.k.a., bean definition profiles), and integration tests can be configured to activate particular bean definition profiles for various testing scenarios. This is achieved by annotating a test class with the @ActiveProfiles annotation and supplying a list of profiles that should be activated when loading the ApplicationContext for the test.

Let’s take a look at some examples with XML configuration and @Configuration classes.

<!-- app-config.xml -->
<beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans"
    xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
    xmlns:jdbc="http://www.springframework.org/schema/jdbc"
    xmlns:jee="http://www.springframework.org/schema/jee"
    xsi:schemaLocation="...">

    <bean id="transferService"
            class="com.bank.service.internal.DefaultTransferService">
        <constructor-arg ref="accountRepository"/>
        <constructor-arg ref="feePolicy"/>
    </bean>

    <bean id="accountRepository"
            class="com.bank.repository.internal.JdbcAccountRepository">
        <constructor-arg ref="dataSource"/>
    </bean>

    <bean id="feePolicy"
        class="com.bank.service.internal.ZeroFeePolicy"/>

    <beans profile="dev">
        <jdbc:embedded-database id="dataSource">
            <jdbc:script
                location="classpath:com/bank/config/sql/schema.sql"/>
            <jdbc:script
                location="classpath:com/bank/config/sql/test-data.sql"/>
        </jdbc:embedded-database>
    </beans>

    <beans profile="production">
        <jee:jndi-lookup id="dataSource" jndi-name="java:comp/env/jdbc/datasource"/>
    </beans>

</beans>

package com.bank.service;

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
// ApplicationContext will be loaded from "classpath:/app-config.xml"
@ContextConfiguration("/app-config.xml")
@ActiveProfiles("dev")
public class TransferServiceTest {

    @Autowired
    private TransferService transferService;

    @Test
    public void testTransferService() {
        // test the transferService
    }
}

When TransferServiceTest is run, its ApplicationContext will be loaded from the app-config.xml configuration file in the root of the classpath. If you inspect app-config.xml you’ll notice that the accountRepository bean has a dependency on a dataSource bean; however, dataSource is not defined as a top-level bean. Instead, dataSource is defined twice: once in the production profile and once in the dev profile.

By annotating TransferServiceTest with @ActiveProfiles("dev") we instruct the Spring TestContext Framework to load the ApplicationContext with the active profiles set to {"dev"}. As a result, an embedded database will be created, and the accountRepository bean will be wired with a reference to the development DataSource. And that’s likely what we want in an integration test.

The following code listings demonstrate how to implement the same configuration and integration test but using @Configuration classes instead of XML.

@Configuration
@Profile("dev")
public class StandaloneDataConfig {

    @Bean
    public DataSource dataSource() {
        return new EmbeddedDatabaseBuilder()
            .setType(EmbeddedDatabaseType.HSQL)
            .addScript("classpath:com/bank/config/sql/schema.sql")
            .addScript("classpath:com/bank/config/sql/test-data.sql")
            .build();
    }
}

@Configuration
@Profile("production")
public class JndiDataConfig {

    @Bean
    public DataSource dataSource() throws Exception {
        Context ctx = new InitialContext();
        return (DataSource) ctx.lookup("java:comp/env/jdbc/datasource");
    }
}

@Configuration
public class TransferServiceConfig {

    @Autowired DataSource dataSource;

    @Bean
    public TransferService transferService() {
        return new DefaultTransferService(accountRepository(), feePolicy());
    }

    @Bean
    public AccountRepository accountRepository() {
        return new JdbcAccountRepository(dataSource);
    }

    @Bean
    public FeePolicy feePolicy() {
        return new ZeroFeePolicy();
    }

}

package com.bank.service;

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
@ContextConfiguration(classes = {
        TransferServiceConfig.class,
        StandaloneDataConfig.class,
        JndiDataConfig.class})
@ActiveProfiles("dev")
public class TransferServiceTest {

    @Autowired
    private TransferService transferService;

    @Test
    public void testTransferService() {
        // test the transferService
    }
}

In this variation, we have split the XML configuration into three independent @Configuration classes:

As with the XML-based configuration example, we still annotate TransferServiceTest with @ActiveProfiles("dev"), but this time we specify all three configuration classes via the @ContextConfiguration annotation. The body of the test class itself remains completely unchanged.

It is often the case that a single set of profiles is used across multiple test classes within a given project. Thus, to avoid duplicate declarations of the @ActiveProfiles annotation it is possible to declare @ActiveProfiles once on a base class, and subclasses will automatically inherit the @ActiveProfiles configuration from the base class. In the following example, the declaration of @ActiveProfiles (as well as other annotations) has been moved to an abstract superclass, AbstractIntegrationTest.

package com.bank.service;

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
@ContextConfiguration(classes = {
        TransferServiceConfig.class,
        StandaloneDataConfig.class,
        JndiDataConfig.class})
@ActiveProfiles("dev")
public abstract class AbstractIntegrationTest {
}

package com.bank.service;

// "dev" profile inherited from superclass
public class TransferServiceTest extends AbstractIntegrationTest {

    @Autowired
    private TransferService transferService;

    @Test
    public void testTransferService() {
        // test the transferService
    }
}

@ActiveProfiles also supports an inheritProfiles attribute that can be used to disable the inheritance of active profiles.

package com.bank.service;

// "dev" profile overridden with "production"
@ActiveProfiles(profiles = "production", inheritProfiles = false)
public class ProductionTransferServiceTest extends AbstractIntegrationTest {
    // test body
}

Furthermore, it is sometimes necessary to resolve active profiles for tests programmatically instead of declaratively — for example, based on:

To resolve active bean definition profiles programmatically, simply implement a custom ActiveProfilesResolver and register it via the resolver attribute of @ActiveProfiles. The following example demonstrates how to implement and register a custom OperatingSystemActiveProfilesResolver. For further information, refer to the respective Javadoc.

package com.bank.service;

// "dev" profile overridden programmatically via a custom resolver
@ActiveProfiles(
    resolver = OperatingSystemActiveProfilesResolver.class,
    inheritProfiles = false)
public class TransferServiceTest extends AbstractIntegrationTest {
    // test body
}

package com.bank.service.test;

public class OperatingSystemActiveProfilesResolver implements ActiveProfilesResolver {

    @Override
    String[] resolve(Class<?> testClass) {
        String profile = ...;
        // determine the value of profile based on the operating system
        return new String[] {profile};
    }
}

Spring 3.2 introduced support for loading a WebApplicationContext in integration tests. To instruct the TestContext framework to load a WebApplicationContext instead of a standard ApplicationContext, simply annotate the respective test class with @WebAppConfiguration.

The presence of @WebAppConfiguration on your test class instructs the TestContext framework (TCF) that a WebApplicationContext (WAC) should be loaded for your integration tests. In the background the TCF makes sure that a MockServletContext is created and supplied to your test’s WAC. By default the base resource path for your MockServletContext will be set to "src/main/webapp". This is interpreted as a path relative to the root of your JVM (i.e., normally the path to your project). If you’re familiar with the directory structure of a web application in a Maven project, you’ll know that "src/main/webapp" is the default location for the root of your WAR. If you need to override this default, simply provide an alternate path to the @WebAppConfiguration annotation (e.g., @WebAppConfiguration("src/test/webapp")). If you wish to reference a base resource path from the classpath instead of the file system, just use Spring’s classpath: prefix.

Please note that Spring’s testing support for WebApplicationContexts is on par with its support for standard ApplicationContexts. When testing with a WebApplicationContext you are free to declare either XML configuration files or @Configuration classes via @ContextConfiguration. You are of course also free to use any other test annotations such as @TestExecutionListeners, @TransactionConfiguration, @ActiveProfiles, etc.

The following examples demonstrate some of the various configuration options for loading a WebApplicationContext.

Conventions. 

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)

// defaults to "file:src/main/webapp"
@WebAppConfiguration

// detects "WacTests-context.xml" in same package
// or static nested @Configuration class
@ContextConfiguration

public class WacTests {
    //...
}

The above example demonstrates the TestContext framework’s support for convention over configuration. If you annotate a test class with @WebAppConfiguration without specifying a resource base path, the resource path will effectively default to "file:src/main/webapp". Similarly, if you declare @ContextConfiguration without specifying resource locations, annotated classes, or context initializers, Spring will attempt to detect the presence of your configuration using conventions (i.e., "WacTests-context.xml" in the same package as the WacTests class or static nested @Configuration classes).

Default resource semantics. 

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)

// file system resource
@WebAppConfiguration("webapp")

// classpath resource
@ContextConfiguration("/spring/test-servlet-config.xml")

public class WacTests {
    //...
}

This example demonstrates how to explicitly declare a resource base path with @WebAppConfiguration and an XML resource location with @ContextConfiguration. The important thing to note here is the different semantics for paths with these two annotations. By default, @WebAppConfiguration resource paths are file system based; whereas, @ContextConfiguration resource locations are classpath based.

Explicit resource semantics. 

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)

// classpath resource
@WebAppConfiguration("classpath:test-web-resources")

// file system resource
@ContextConfiguration("file:src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/servlet-config.xml")

public class WacTests {
    //...
}

In this third example, we see that we can override the default resource semantics for both annotations by specifying a Spring resource prefix. Contrast the comments in this example with the previous example.

To provide comprehensive web testing support, Spring 3.2 introduced a ServletTestExecutionListener that is enabled by default. When testing against a WebApplicationContext this TestExecutionListener sets up default thread-local state via Spring Web’s RequestContextHolder before each test method and creates a MockHttpServletRequest, MockHttpServletResponse, and ServletWebRequest based on the base resource path configured via @WebAppConfiguration. ServletTestExecutionListener also ensures that the MockHttpServletResponse and ServletWebRequest can be injected into the test instance, and once the test is complete it cleans up thread-local state.

Once you have a WebApplicationContext loaded for your test you might find that you need to interact with the web mocks — for example, to set up your test fixture or to perform assertions after invoking your web component. The following example demonstrates which mocks can be autowired into your test instance. Note that the WebApplicationContext and MockServletContext are both cached across the test suite; whereas, the other mocks are managed per test method by the ServletTestExecutionListener.

Injecting mocks. 

@WebAppConfiguration
@ContextConfiguration
public class WacTests {

    @Autowired
    WebApplicationContext wac; // cached

    @Autowired
    MockServletContext servletContext; // cached

    @Autowired
    MockHttpSession session;

    @Autowired
    MockHttpServletRequest request;

    @Autowired
    MockHttpServletResponse response;

    @Autowired
    ServletWebRequest webRequest;

    //...
}

Once the TestContext framework loads an ApplicationContext (or WebApplicationContext) for a test, that context will be cached and reused for all subsequent tests that declare the same unique context configuration within the same test suite. To understand how caching works, it is important to understand what is meant by unique and test suite.

An ApplicationContext can be uniquely identified by the combination of configuration parameters that are used to load it. Consequently, the unique combination of configuration parameters are used to generate a key under which the context is cached. The TestContext framework uses the following configuration parameters to build the context cache key:

For example, if TestClassA specifies {"app-config.xml", "test-config.xml"} for the locations (or value) attribute of @ContextConfiguration, the TestContext framework will load the corresponding ApplicationContext and store it in a static context cache under a key that is based solely on those locations. So if TestClassB also defines {"app-config.xml", "test-config.xml"} for its locations (either explicitly or implicitly through inheritance) but does not define @WebAppConfiguration, a different ContextLoader, different active profiles, or different context initializers, then the same ApplicationContext will be shared by both test classes. This means that the setup cost for loading an application context is incurred only once (per test suite), and subsequent test execution is much faster.

In the unlikely case that a test corrupts the application context and requires reloading — for example, by modifying a bean definition or the state of an application object — you can annotate your test class or test method with @DirtiesContext (see the discussion of @DirtiesContext in the section called “Spring Testing Annotations”). This instructs Spring to remove the context from the cache and rebuild the application context before executing the next test. Note that support for the @DirtiesContext annotation is provided by the DirtiesContextTestExecutionListener which is enabled by default.

When writing integration tests that rely on a loaded Spring ApplicationContext, it is often sufficient to test against a single context; however, there are times when it is beneficial or even necessary to test against a hierarchy of ApplicationContext s. For example, if you are developing a Spring MVC web application you will typically have a root WebApplicationContext loaded via Spring’s ContextLoaderListener and a child WebApplicationContext loaded via Spring’s DispatcherServlet. This results in a parent-child context hierarchy where shared components and infrastructure configuration are declared in the root context and consumed in the child context by web-specific components. Another use case can be found in Spring Batch applications where you often have a parent context that provides configuration for shared batch infrastructure and a child context for the configuration of a specific batch job.

As of Spring Framework 3.2.2, it is possible to write integration tests that use context hierarchies by declaring context configuration via the @ContextHierarchy annotation, either on an individual test class or within a test class hierarchy. If a context hierarchy is declared on multiple classes within a test class hierarchy it is also possible to merge or override the context configuration for a specific, named level in the context hierarchy. When merging configuration for a given level in the hierarchy the configuration resource type (i.e., XML configuration files or annotated classes) must be consistent; otherwise, it is perfectly acceptable to have different levels in a context hierarchy configured using different resource types.

The following JUnit-based examples demonstrate common configuration scenarios for integration tests that require the use of context hierarchies.

ControllerIntegrationTests represents a typical integration testing scenario for a Spring MVC web application by declaring a context hierarchy consisting of two levels, one for the root WebApplicationContext (loaded using the TestAppConfig @Configuration class) and one for the dispatcher servlet WebApplicationContext (loaded using the WebConfig @Configuration class). The WebApplicationContext that is autowired into the test instance is the one for the child context (i.e., the lowest context in the hierarchy).

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
@WebAppConfiguration
@ContextHierarchy({
    @ContextConfiguration(classes = TestAppConfig.class),
    @ContextConfiguration(classes = WebConfig.class)
})
public class ControllerIntegrationTests {

    @Autowired
    private WebApplicationContext wac;

    // ...
}

The following test classes define a context hierarchy within a test class hierarchy. AbstractWebTests declares the configuration for a root WebApplicationContext in a Spring-powered web application. Note, however, that AbstractWebTests does not declare @ContextHierarchy; consequently, subclasses of AbstractWebTests can optionally participate in a context hierarchy or simply follow the standard semantics for @ContextConfiguration. SoapWebServiceTests and RestWebServiceTests both extend AbstractWebTests and define a context hierarchy via @ContextHierarchy. The result is that three application contexts will be loaded (one for each declaration of @ContextConfiguration), and the application context loaded based on the configuration in AbstractWebTests will be set as the parent context for each of the contexts loaded for the concrete subclasses.

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
@WebAppConfiguration
@ContextConfiguration("file:src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/applicationContext.xml")
public abstract class AbstractWebTests {}

@ContextHierarchy(@ContextConfiguration("/spring/soap-ws-config.xml")
public class SoapWebServiceTests extends AbstractWebTests {}

@ContextHierarchy(@ContextConfiguration("/spring/rest-ws-config.xml")
public class RestWebServiceTests extends AbstractWebTests {}

The following classes demonstrate the use of named hierarchy levels in order to merge the configuration for specific levels in a context hierarchy. BaseTests defines two levels in the hierarchy, parent and child. ExtendedTests extends BaseTests and instructs the Spring TestContext Framework to merge the context configuration for the child hierarchy level, simply by ensuring that the names declared via ContextConfiguration's name attribute are both "child". The result is that three application contexts will be loaded: one for "/app-config.xml", one for "/user-config.xml", and one for {"/user-config.xml", "/order-config.xml"}. As with the previous example, the application context loaded from "/app-config.xml" will be set as the parent context for the contexts loaded from "/user-config.xml" and {"/user-config.xml", "/order-config.xml"}.

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
@ContextHierarchy({
    @ContextConfiguration(name = "parent", locations = "/app-config.xml"),
    @ContextConfiguration(name = "child", locations = "/user-config.xml")
})
public class BaseTests {}

@ContextHierarchy(
    @ContextConfiguration(name = "child", locations = "/order-config.xml")
)
public class ExtendedTests extends BaseTests {}

In contrast to the previous example, this example demonstrates how to override the configuration for a given named level in a context hierarchy by setting ContextConfiguration's inheritLocations flag to false. Consequently, the application context for ExtendedTests will be loaded only from "/test-user-config.xml" and will have its parent set to the context loaded from "/app-config.xml".

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
@ContextHierarchy({
    @ContextConfiguration(name = "parent", locations = "/app-config.xml"),
    @ContextConfiguration(name = "child", locations = "/user-config.xml")
})
public class BaseTests {}

@ContextHierarchy(
    @ContextConfiguration(
        name = "child",
        locations = "/test-user-config.xml",
        inheritLocations = false
))
public class ExtendedTests extends BaseTests {}

The org.springframework.test.context.junit4 package provides support classes for JUnit 4.5+ based test cases.

The Spring TestContext Framework offers full integration with JUnit 4.5+ through a custom runner (tested on JUnit 4.5 — 4.11). By annotating test classes with @RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class), developers can implement standard JUnit-based unit and integration tests and simultaneously reap the benefits of the TestContext framework such as support for loading application contexts, dependency injection of test instances, transactional test method execution, and so on. The following code listing displays the minimal requirements for configuring a test class to run with the custom Spring Runner. @TestExecutionListeners is configured with an empty list in order to disable the default listeners, which otherwise would require an ApplicationContext to be configured through @ContextConfiguration.

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
@TestExecutionListeners({})
public class SimpleTest {

    @Test
    public void testMethod() {
        // execute test logic...
    }
}

The org.springframework.test.context.testng package provides support classes for TestNG based test cases.

import static org.springframework.test.web.servlet.request.MockMvcRequestBuilders.*;
import static org.springframework.test.web.servlet.result.MockMvcResultMatchers.*;

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
@WebAppConfiguration
@ContextConfiguration("test-servlet-context.xml")
public class ExampleTests {

    @Autowired
    private WebApplicationContext wac;

    private MockMvc mockMvc;

    @Before
    public void setup() {
        this.mockMvc = MockMvcBuilders.webAppContextSetup(this.wac).build();
    }

    @Test
    public void getAccount() throws Exception {
        this.mockMvc.perform(get("/accounts/1").accept(MediaType.parseMediaType("application/json;charset=UTF-8")))
            .andExpect(status().isOk())
            .andExpect(content().contentType("application/json"))
            .andExpect(jsonPath("$.name").value("Lee"));
    }

}

The fluent API in the example above requires a few static imports such as MockMvcRequestBuilders.*, MockMvcResultMatchers.*, and MockMvcBuilders.*. An easy way to find these classes is to search for types matching "MockMvc*". If using Eclipse, be sure to add them as "favorite static members" in the Eclipse preferences underJava → Editor → Content Assist → Favorites. That will allow use of content assist after typing the first character of the static method name. Other IDEs (e.g. IntelliJ) may not require any additional configuration. Just check the support for code completion on static members.

The goal of server-side test setup is to create an instance of MockMvc that can be used to perform requests. There are two main options.

The first option is to point to Spring MVC configuration through the TestContext framework, which loads the Spring configuration and injects a WebApplicationContext into the test to use to create a MockMvc:

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
@WebAppConfiguration
@ContextConfiguration("my-servlet-context.xml")
public class MyWebTests {

    @Autowired
    private WebApplicationContext wac;

    private MockMvc mockMvc;

    @Before
    public void setup() {
        this.mockMvc = MockMvcBuilders.webAppContextSetup(this.wac).build();
    }

    // ...

}

The second option is to simply register a controller instance without loading any Spring configuration. Instead basic Spring MVC configuration suitable for testing annotated controllers is automatically created. The created configuration is comparable to that of the MVC JavaConfig (and the MVC namespace) and can be customized to a degree through builder-style methods:

public class MyWebTests {

    private MockMvc mockMvc;

    @Before
    public void setup() {
        this.mockMvc = MockMvcBuilders.standaloneSetup(new AccountController()).build();
    }

    // ...

}

Which option should you use?

The "webAppContextSetup" loads the actual Spring MVC configuration resulting in a more complete integration test. Since the TestContext framework caches the loaded Spring configuration, it helps to keep tests running fast even as more tests get added. Furthermore, you can inject mock services into controllers through Spring configuration, in order to remain focused on testing the web layer. Here is an example of declaring a mock service with Mockito:

<bean id="accountService" class="org.mockito.Mockito" factory-method="mock">
    <constructor-arg value="org.example.AccountService"/>
</bean>

Then you can inject the mock service into the test in order set up and verify expectations:

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
@WebAppConfiguration
@ContextConfiguration("test-servlet-context.xml")
public class AccountTests {

    @Autowired
    private WebApplicationContext wac;

    private MockMvc mockMvc;

    @Autowired
    private AccountService accountService;

    // ...

}

The "standaloneSetup" on the other hand is a little closer to a unit test. It tests one controller at a time, the controller can be injected with mock dependencies manually, and it doesn’t involve loading Spring configuration. Such tests are more focused in style and make it easier to see which controller is being tested, whether any specific Spring MVC configuration is required to work, and so on. The "standaloneSetup" is also a very convenient way to write ad-hoc tests to verify some behavior or to debug an issue.

Just like with integration vs unit testing, there is no right or wrong answer. Using the "standaloneSetup" does imply the need for some additional "webAppContextSetup" tests to verify the Spring MVC configuration. Alternatively, you can decide write all tests with "webAppContextSetup" and always test against actual Spring MVC configuration.

To perform requests, use the appropriate HTTP method and additional builder-style methods corresponding to properties of MockHttpServletRequest. For example:

mockMvc.perform(post("/hotels/{id}", 42).accept(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON));

In addition to all the HTTP methods, you can also perform file upload requests, which internally creates an instance of MockMultipartHttpServletRequest:

mockMvc.perform(fileUpload("/doc").file("a1", "ABC".getBytes("UTF-8")));

Query string parameters can be specified in the URI template:

mockMvc.perform(get("/hotels?foo={foo}", "bar"));

Or by adding Servlet request parameters:

mockMvc.perform(get("/hotels").param("foo", "bar"));

If application code relies on Servlet request parameters, and doesn’t check the query string, as is most often the case, then it doesn’t matter how parameters are added. Keep in mind though that parameters provided in the URI template will be decoded while parameters provided through the param(...) method are expected to be decoded.

In most cases it’s preferable to leave out the context path and the Servlet path from the request URI. If you must test with the full request URI, be sure to set the contextPath and servletPath accordingly so that request mappings will work:

mockMvc.perform(get("/app/main/hotels/{id}").contextPath("/app").servletPath("/main"))

Looking at the above example, it would be cumbersome to set the contextPath and servletPath with every performed request. That’s why you can define default request properties when building the MockMvc:

public class MyWebTests {

    private MockMvc mockMvc;

    @Before
    public void setup() {
        mockMvc = standaloneSetup(new AccountController())
            .defaultRequest(get("/")
            .contextPath("/app").servletPath("/main")
            .accept(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON).build();
    }

The above properties will apply to every request performed through the MockMvc. If the same property is also specified on a given request, it will override the default value. That is why, the HTTP method and URI don’t matter, when setting default request properties, since they must be specified on every request.

Expectations can be defined by appending one or more .andExpect(..) after call to perform the request:

mockMvc.perform(get("/accounts/1")).andExpect(status().isOk());

MockMvcResultMatchers.* defines a number of static members, some of which return types with additional methods, for asserting the result of the performed request. The assertions fall in two general categories.

The first category of assertions verify properties of the response, i.e the response status, headers, and content. Those are the most important things to test for.

The second category of assertions go beyond the response, and allow inspecting Spring MVC specific constructs such as which controller method processed the request, whether an exception was raised and handled, what the content of the model is, what view was selected, what flash attributes were added, and so on. It is also possible to verify Servlet specific constructs such as request and session attributes. The following test asserts that binding/validation failed:

mockMvc.perform(post("/persons"))
    .andExpect(status().isOk())
    .andExpect(model().attributeHasErrors("person"));

Many times when writing tests, it’s useful to dump the result of the performed request. This can be done as follows, where print() is a static import from MockMvcResultHandlers:

mockMvc.perform(post("/persons"))
    .andDo(print())
    .andExpect(status().isOk())
    .andExpect(model().attributeHasErrors("person"));

As long as request processing causes an unhandled exception, the print() method will print all the available result data to System.out.

In some cases, you may want to get direct access to the result and verify something that cannot be verified otherwise. This can be done by appending .andReturn() at the end after all expectations:

MvcResult mvcResult = mockMvc.perform(post("/persons")).andExpect(status().isOk()).andReturn();
// ...

When all tests repeat the same expectations, you can define the common expectations once when building the MockMvc:

standaloneSetup(new SimpleController())
    .alwaysExpect(status().isOk())
    .alwaysExpect(content().contentType("application/json;charset=UTF-8"))
    .build()

Note that the expectation is always applied and cannot be overridden without creating a separate MockMvc instance.

When JSON response content contains hypermedia links created with Spring HATEOAS, the resulting links can be verified:

mockMvc.perform(get("/people").accept(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON))
    .andExpect(jsonPath("$.links[?(@.rel == self)].href").value("http://localhost:8080/people"));

When XML response content contains hypermedia links created with Spring HATEOAS, the resulting links can be verified:

Map<String, String> ns = Collections.singletonMap("ns", "http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom");
mockMvc.perform(get("/handle").accept(MediaType.APPLICATION_XML))
    .andExpect(xpath("/person/ns:link[@rel=self]/@href", ns).string("http://localhost:8080/people"));

When setting up a MockMvc, you can register one or more Filter instances:

mockMvc = standaloneSetup(new PersonController()).addFilters(new CharacterEncodingFilter()).build();

Registered filters will be invoked through MockFilterChain from spring-test and the last filter will delegates to the DispatcherServlet.

The framework’s own tests include many sample tests intended to demonstrate how to use Spring MVC Test. Browse these examples for further ideas. Also the spring-mvc-showcase has full test coverage based on Spring MVC Test.

RestTemplate restTemplate = new RestTemplate();

MockRestServiceServer mockServer = MockRestServiceServer.createServer(restTemplate);
mockServer.expect(requestTo("/greeting")).andRespond(withSuccess("Hello world", "text/plain"));

// use RestTemplate ...

mockServer.verify();

Just like with server-side tests, the fluent API for client-side tests requires a few static imports. Those are easy to find by searching "MockRest*". Eclipse users should add "MockRestRequestMatchers.*" and "MockRestResponseCreators.*" as "favorite static members" in the Eclipse preferences under Java → Editor → Content Assist → Favorites. That allows using content assist after typing the first character of the static method name. Other IDEs (e.g. IntelliJ) may not require any additional configuration. Just check the support for code completion on static members.

Spring MVC Test’s own tests include example tests of client-side REST tests.