hass.tibber_prices/tests/test_peak_price_e2e.py
Julian Pawlowski 2de793cfda refactor: migrate from multi-home to single-home-per-coordinator architecture
Changed from centralized main+subentry coordinator pattern to independent
coordinators per home. Each config entry now manages its own home data
with its own API client and access token.

Architecture changes:
- API Client: async_get_price_info() changed from home_ids: set[str] to home_id: str
  * Removed GraphQL alias pattern (home0, home1, ...)
  * Single-home query structure without aliasing
  * Simplified response parsing (viewer.home instead of viewer.home0)

- Coordinator: Removed main/subentry distinction
  * Deleted is_main_entry() and _has_existing_main_coordinator()
  * Each coordinator fetches its own data independently
  * Removed _find_main_coordinator() and _get_configured_home_ids()
  * Simplified _async_update_data() - no subentry logic
  * Added _home_id instance variable from config_entry.data

- __init__.py: New _get_access_token() helper
  * Handles token retrieval for both parent and subentries
  * Subentries find parent entry to get shared access token
  * Creates single API client instance per coordinator

- Data structures: Flat single-home format
  * Old: {"homes": {home_id: {"price_info": [...]}}}
  * New: {"home_id": str, "price_info": [...], "currency": str}
  * Attribute name: "periods" → "pricePeriods" (consistent with priceInfo)

- helpers.py: Removed get_configured_home_ids() (no longer needed)
  * parse_all_timestamps() updated for single-home structure

Impact: Each home operates independently with its own lifecycle tracking,
caching, and period calculations. Simpler architecture, easier debugging,
better isolation between homes.
2025-11-24 16:24:37 +00:00

386 lines
13 KiB
Python

"""
End-to-End Tests for Peak Price Period Generation (Nov 2025 Bug Fix).
These tests validate that the sign convention bug fix works correctly:
- Bug: Negative flex (-20%) wasn't normalized → 100% FLEX filtering
- Fix: abs() normalization in periods.py + removed redundant condition
Test coverage matches manual testing checklist:
1. ✅ Peak periods generate (not 0)
2. ✅ FLEX filter stats reasonable (~40-50%, not 100%)
3. ✅ Relaxation succeeds at reasonable flex (not maxed at 50%)
"""
from __future__ import annotations
from unittest.mock import Mock
import pytest
from custom_components.tibber_prices.coordinator.period_handlers import (
TibberPricesPeriodConfig,
calculate_periods_with_relaxation,
)
from custom_components.tibber_prices.coordinator.time_service import (
TibberPricesTimeService,
)
from homeassistant.util import dt as dt_util
def _create_realistic_intervals() -> list[dict]:
"""
Create realistic test data matching German market Nov 22, 2025.
Pattern: Morning peak (6-9h), midday low (9-15h), evening moderate (15-24h).
Daily stats: Min=30.44ct, Avg=33.26ct, Max=36.03ct
"""
# Use CURRENT date so tests work regardless of when they run
now_local = dt_util.now()
base_time = now_local.replace(hour=0, minute=0, second=0, microsecond=0)
daily_min, daily_avg, daily_max = 0.3044, 0.3326, 0.3603
def _create_interval(hour: int, minute: int, price: float, level: str, rating: str) -> dict:
"""Create a single interval dict."""
return {
"startsAt": base_time.replace(hour=hour, minute=minute), # datetime object
"total": price,
"level": level,
"rating_level": rating,
"_original_price": price,
"trailing_avg_24h": daily_avg,
"daily_min": daily_min,
"daily_avg": daily_avg,
"daily_max": daily_max,
}
# Build all intervals as list comprehensions
intervals = []
# Overnight (00:00-06:00) - NORMAL
intervals.extend(
[_create_interval(hour, minute, 0.318, "NORMAL", "NORMAL") for hour in range(6) for minute in [0, 15, 30, 45]]
)
# Morning spike (06:00-09:00) - EXPENSIVE
intervals.extend(
[
_create_interval(
hour,
minute,
price := 0.33 + (hour - 6) * 0.01,
"EXPENSIVE" if price > 0.34 else "NORMAL",
"HIGH" if price > 0.35 else "NORMAL",
)
for hour in range(6, 9)
for minute in [0, 15, 30, 45]
]
)
# Midday low (09:00-15:00) - CHEAP
intervals.extend(
[
_create_interval(hour, minute, 0.305 + (hour - 12) * 0.002, "CHEAP", "LOW")
for hour in range(9, 15)
for minute in [0, 15, 30, 45]
]
)
# Evening moderate (15:00-24:00) - NORMAL to EXPENSIVE
intervals.extend(
[
_create_interval(
hour,
minute,
price := 0.32 + (hour - 15) * 0.005,
"EXPENSIVE" if price > 0.34 else "NORMAL",
"HIGH" if price > 0.35 else "NORMAL",
)
for hour in range(15, 24)
for minute in [0, 15, 30, 45]
]
)
return intervals
@pytest.mark.unit
@pytest.mark.freeze_time("2025-11-22 12:00:00+01:00")
class TestPeakPriceGenerationWorks:
"""Validate that peak price periods generate successfully after bug fix."""
def test_peak_periods_generate_successfully(self) -> None:
"""
✅ PRIMARY TEST: Peak periods generate (not 0 like the bug).
Bug: 192/192 intervals filtered by FLEX (100%) → 0 periods
Fix: Negative flex normalized → periods generate
"""
intervals = _create_realistic_intervals()
# Mock coordinator (minimal setup)
mock_coordinator = Mock()
mock_coordinator.config_entry = Mock()
time_service = TibberPricesTimeService(mock_coordinator)
# Mock now() to return test date
test_time = dt_util.parse_datetime("2025-11-22T12:00:00+01:00")
time_service.now = Mock(return_value=test_time)
# Create config with normalized positive flex (simulating fix)
config = TibberPricesPeriodConfig(
flex=0.20, # 20% positive (after abs() normalization)
min_distance_from_avg=5.0,
min_period_length=30,
reverse_sort=True, # Peak price mode
)
# Calculate periods with relaxation
result = calculate_periods_with_relaxation(
intervals,
config=config,
enable_relaxation=True,
min_periods=2,
max_relaxation_attempts=11,
should_show_callback=lambda _: True, # Allow all levels
time=time_service,
)
periods = result.get("periods", [])
# Bug validation: periods found (not 0)
assert len(periods) > 0, "Peak periods should generate after bug fix"
assert 2 <= len(periods) <= 5, f"Expected 2-5 periods, got {len(periods)}"
def test_negative_flex_normalization_effect(self) -> None:
"""
✅ TEST: Positive flex (normalized) produces periods.
Bug: Would use negative flex (-20%) directly in math → 100% FLEX filter
Fix: abs() ensures positive flex → reasonable filtering
"""
intervals = _create_realistic_intervals()
mock_coordinator = Mock()
mock_coordinator.config_entry = Mock()
time_service = TibberPricesTimeService(mock_coordinator)
# Mock now() to return test date
test_time = dt_util.parse_datetime("2025-11-22T12:00:00+01:00")
time_service.now = Mock(return_value=test_time)
# Test with positive flex (simulates normalized result)
config_positive = TibberPricesPeriodConfig(
flex=0.20, # Positive after normalization
min_distance_from_avg=5.0,
min_period_length=30,
reverse_sort=True,
)
result_pos = calculate_periods_with_relaxation(
intervals,
config=config_positive,
enable_relaxation=True,
min_periods=2,
max_relaxation_attempts=11,
should_show_callback=lambda _: True,
time=time_service,
)
periods_pos = result_pos.get("periods", [])
# With normalized positive flex, should find periods
assert len(periods_pos) >= 2, f"Should find periods with positive flex, got {len(periods_pos)}"
def test_periods_contain_high_prices(self) -> None:
"""
✅ TEST: Peak periods contain high prices (not cheap ones).
Validates periods include expensive intervals, not cheap ones.
"""
intervals = _create_realistic_intervals()
mock_coordinator = Mock()
mock_coordinator.config_entry = Mock()
time_service = TibberPricesTimeService(mock_coordinator)
# Mock now() to return test date
test_time = dt_util.parse_datetime("2025-11-22T12:00:00+01:00")
time_service.now = Mock(return_value=test_time)
config = TibberPricesPeriodConfig(
flex=0.20,
min_distance_from_avg=5.0,
min_period_length=30,
reverse_sort=True,
)
result = calculate_periods_with_relaxation(
intervals,
config=config,
enable_relaxation=True,
min_periods=2,
max_relaxation_attempts=11,
should_show_callback=lambda _: True,
time=time_service,
)
periods = result.get("periods", [])
daily_min = intervals[0]["daily_min"]
# Check period averages are NOT near daily minimum
for period in periods:
period_avg = period.get("price_avg", 0)
assert period_avg > daily_min * 1.05, (
f"Peak period has too low avg: {period_avg:.4f} vs daily_min={daily_min:.4f}"
)
def test_relaxation_works_at_reasonable_flex(self) -> None:
"""
✅ TEST: Relaxation succeeds without maxing flex at 50%.
Validates relaxation finds periods at reasonable flex levels.
"""
intervals = _create_realistic_intervals()
mock_coordinator = Mock()
mock_coordinator.config_entry = Mock()
time_service = TibberPricesTimeService(mock_coordinator)
# Mock now() to return test date
test_time = dt_util.parse_datetime("2025-11-22T12:00:00+01:00")
time_service.now = Mock(return_value=test_time)
# Lower flex to trigger relaxation
config = TibberPricesPeriodConfig(
flex=0.15, # 15% - may need relaxation
min_distance_from_avg=5.0,
min_period_length=30,
reverse_sort=True,
)
result = calculate_periods_with_relaxation(
intervals,
config=config,
enable_relaxation=True,
min_periods=2,
max_relaxation_attempts=11,
should_show_callback=lambda _: True,
time=time_service,
)
periods = result.get("periods", [])
# Should find periods via relaxation
assert len(periods) >= 2, "Relaxation should find periods"
# Check if relaxation was used
relaxation_meta = result.get("metadata", {}).get("relaxation", {})
if "max_flex_used" in relaxation_meta:
max_flex_used = relaxation_meta["max_flex_used"]
# Bug would need ~50% flex
# Fix: reasonable flex (15-35%) is sufficient
assert max_flex_used <= 0.35, f"Flex should stay reasonable, got {max_flex_used * 100:.1f}%"
@pytest.mark.unit
@pytest.mark.freeze_time("2025-11-22 12:00:00+01:00")
class TestBugRegressionValidation:
"""Regression tests for the Nov 2025 sign convention bug."""
def test_metadata_shows_reasonable_flex_used(self) -> None:
"""
✅ REGRESSION: Metadata shows flex used was reasonable (not 50%).
This indirectly validates FLEX filter didn't block everything.
"""
intervals = _create_realistic_intervals()
mock_coordinator = Mock()
mock_coordinator.config_entry = Mock()
time_service = TibberPricesTimeService(mock_coordinator)
# Mock now() to return test date
test_time = dt_util.parse_datetime("2025-11-22T12:00:00+01:00")
time_service.now = Mock(return_value=test_time)
config = TibberPricesPeriodConfig(
flex=0.20,
min_distance_from_avg=5.0,
min_period_length=30,
reverse_sort=True,
)
result = calculate_periods_with_relaxation(
intervals,
config=config,
enable_relaxation=True,
min_periods=2,
max_relaxation_attempts=11,
should_show_callback=lambda _: True,
time=time_service,
)
# Check metadata from result
metadata = result.get("metadata", {})
config_used = metadata.get("config", {})
if "flex" in config_used:
flex_used = config_used["flex"]
# Bug would need ~50% flex to find anything
# Fix: reasonable flex (~20-30%) is sufficient
assert 0.15 <= flex_used <= 0.35, (
f"Expected flex 15-35%, got {flex_used * 100:.1f}% (Bug would require near 50%)"
)
# Also check relaxation metadata
relaxation_meta = result.get("metadata", {}).get("relaxation", {})
if "max_flex_used" in relaxation_meta:
max_flex = relaxation_meta["max_flex_used"]
assert max_flex <= 0.35, f"Max flex should be reasonable, got {max_flex * 100:.1f}%"
def test_periods_include_expensive_intervals(self) -> None:
"""
✅ REGRESSION: Peak periods include intervals near daily max.
Bug had redundant condition: price >= ref AND price <= ref
Fix: Removed redundant condition → high prices included
"""
intervals = _create_realistic_intervals()
mock_coordinator = Mock()
mock_coordinator.config_entry = Mock()
time_service = TibberPricesTimeService(mock_coordinator)
# Mock now() to return test date
test_time = dt_util.parse_datetime("2025-11-22T12:00:00+01:00")
time_service.now = Mock(return_value=test_time)
config = TibberPricesPeriodConfig(
flex=0.20,
min_distance_from_avg=5.0,
min_period_length=30,
reverse_sort=True,
)
result = calculate_periods_with_relaxation(
intervals,
config=config,
enable_relaxation=True,
min_periods=2,
max_relaxation_attempts=11,
should_show_callback=lambda _: True,
time=time_service,
)
periods = result.get("periods", [])
daily_avg = intervals[0]["daily_avg"]
daily_max = intervals[0]["daily_max"]
# At least one period should have high average
max_period_avg = max(p.get("price_avg", 0) for p in periods)
assert max_period_avg >= daily_avg * 1.05, (
f"Peak periods should have high avg: {max_period_avg:.4f} vs daily_avg={daily_avg:.4f}"
)
# Check proximity to daily max
assert max_period_avg >= daily_max * 0.85, (
f"At least one period near daily_max: {max_period_avg:.4f} vs daily_max={daily_max:.4f}"
)