The claim: given an integration test class that is annotated with
@ContextConfiguration and declares a configuration class that is missing
an @Configuration annotation, if a transactional test method (i.e., one
annotated with @Transactional) changes the state of the database then
the
changes will not be rolled back as would be expected with the default
rollback semantics of the Spring TestContext Framework (TCF).
TransactionalAnnotatedConfigClassWithAtConfigurationTests is a concrete
implementation of AbstractTransactionalAnnotatedConfigClassTests that
uses
a true @Configuration class and thereby demonstrates the expected
behavior
of such transactional tests with automatic rollback.
TransactionalAnnotatedConfigClassesWithoutAtConfigurationTests is a
concrete implementation of
AbstractTransactionalAnnotatedConfigClassTests
that does NOT use a true @Configuration class but rather a 'lite mode'
configuration class (see the Javadoc for @Bean for details).
Using such a 'lite mode' configuration class results in the following:
- Its @Bean methods act as factory methods instead of singleton beans.
- The dataSource() method is invoked multiple times instead of once.
- The test instance and the TCF operate on different data sources.
- The transaction managed (and rolled back) by the TCF is not the
transaction that the application code or test instance uses.
Ultimately, the use of a 'lite mode' configuration class gives the false
appearance that there is a bug in the TCF (in that the transaction is
not
rolled back); however, the transaction managed by the TCF is in fact
rolled back.
In conclusion, these tests demonstrate both the intended behavior of the
TCF and the fact that using 'lite mode' configuration classes can lead
to
confusing results (both in tests and production code).
Issue: SPR-9051
1cec0f9c65