fix(testcontainers): new port-forwarder container per test file execution

[LNSD]

Context

From Jest documentation:

^{Source: https://jestjs.io/docs/configuration#resetmodules-boolean}

Since each test file gets its independent module registry (i.e., independent "static" JS module state), the PortForwarderInstance.instance singleton field is undefined when a test file starts the execution. This causes the PortForwarderInstance class to believe that no other port-forwarder container is running and tries to start a new one with the same name.

Proposed solution

Note

This PR fixes the limitation found in #677

A sub-optimal but working solution is to spin up a port-forwarder container per test file with a unique random name. This avoids the container name clash issue reported in #677.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for testcontainers-node ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	195897b
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/testcontainers-node/deploys/655e40dced9cfe0008294562
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-678--testcontainers-node.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[LNSD]

cc @javierlopezdeancos @mdelapenya

[javierlopezdeancos]

Hey, thanks @LNSD to push this suggest, we will talk about it tomorrow.

[LNSD]

Alternatively, if having a container name that starts with testcontainers-port-forwarder- is not important, removing the .withName(...) statement would have a similar effect: When the Container engine creates the container instance, it will give it a random name that won't clash with other existing containers.

Suggested change

	const portForwarderId = new RandomUuid().nextUuid();
	const container = await new GenericContainer(SSHD_IMAGE)
	.withName(`testcontainers-port-forwarder-${reaper.sessionId}`)
	.withName(`testcontainers-port-forwarder-${portForwarderId}`)
	.withExposedPorts(containerPort)
	.withEnvironment({ PASSWORD: password })
	.withCommand([
	const container = await new GenericContainer(SSHD_IMAGE)
	.withName(`testcontainers-port-forwarder-${reaper.sessionId}`)
	.withExposedPorts(containerPort)
	.withEnvironment({ PASSWORD: password })
	.withCommand([

[cristianrgreco]

Hey @LNSD, there is some discussion about the solution in the linked issue #677. This PR or the suggestion to remove the name could result in several PortForwarder containers running for a given test suite which would create its own issues

[LNSD]

Hey @LNSD, there is some discussion about the solution in the linked issue #677. This PR or the suggestion to remove the name could result in several PortForwarder containers running for a given test suite which would create its own issues

Sure. This is, yet suboptimal (due to the multiple containers), a possible solution.

IIRC, testcontainers-java does something similar (random name by docker).

But, please, feel free to close this PR if you find a more suitable solution, or reach me via slack if you want to discuss anything) 🙂