Skip to content

Persistence Tests and Backend Swappability

Page Maps

graph LR
  family["Python Programming"]
  program["Python Object-Oriented Programming"]
  section["Persistence Serialization Schema Evolution"]
  page["Persistence Tests and Backend Swappability"]
  capstone["Capstone evidence"]

  family --> program --> section --> page
  page -.applies in.-> capstone
flowchart LR
  orient["Orient on the page map"] --> read["Read the main claim and examples"]
  read --> inspect["Inspect the related code, proof, or capstone surface"]
  inspect --> verify["Run or review the verification path"]
  verify --> apply["Apply the idea back to the module and capstone"]

Read the first diagram as a placement map: this page is one concept inside its parent module, not a detached essay, and the capstone is the pressure test for whether the idea holds. Read the second diagram as the working rhythm for the page: name the problem, study the example, identify the boundary, then carry one review question forward.

Purpose

Verify repository behavior as a contract so backend changes do not silently alter domain semantics.

1. Repository Contracts Need Executable Proof

If you promise that every repository implementation:

  • preserves invariants,
  • detects stale writes,
  • round-trips aggregates faithfully,

then those promises need tests that every backend must pass.

2. Contract Tests Beat One-Off Happy Paths

Write backend-agnostic tests once, then run them against:

  • an in-memory repository
  • a file-backed repository
  • a database-backed repository

That gives you storage flexibility without semantic drift.

3. Test Real Failure Modes

Focus on behaviors that often change across backends:

  • missing aggregate semantics
  • duplicate identity handling
  • version conflicts
  • codec mismatch

Do not stop at “save then load works once.”

4. Swappability Has a Cost

Not every backend deserves full interchangeability. Sometimes backend differences are real and should appear in separate contracts. Swappability is valuable only when the shared contract is honest.

Practical Guidelines

  • Write backend-independent repository contract tests.
  • Include corruption, conflict, and missing-object cases.
  • Share fixtures across implementations to keep expectations aligned.
  • Split contracts when backend capabilities truly differ.

Exercises for Mastery

  1. Write one repository contract test and run it against two implementations.
  2. Add a failure case for a stale save or malformed stored payload.
  3. Decide whether one backend-specific behavior belongs in the shared contract or outside it.