DEV Community

Mohammad Waseem
Mohammad Waseem

Posted on

Mastering Email Flow Validation in Kubernetes: A Lead QA Engineer's Approach Without Documentation

#kubernetes #qa #testing

Validating Email Flows in Kubernetes: A QA Engineer’s Hands-On Strategy

Ensuring the integrity of email delivery flows within containerized environments like Kubernetes can become a complex challenge, especially when comprehensive documentation is lacking. In this post, I’ll share the approach I took as a Lead QA Engineer to validate email workflows leveraging Kubernetes' native tools and observability features, without relying on any pre-existing documentation.

Understanding the Challenge

The core issue was verifying that emails generated by our application traversed correctly through various stages: production, queuing, processing, and delivery. Kubernetes orchestrates these components—pods, services, ingress—but lacks specialized email validation tooling.

Without explicit documentation, I had to infer system architecture from deployment manifests, environment variables, and logs. The goal was to build a reliable, automated verification process.

Establishing the Testing Environment

First, I identified the key components involved in email flow:

  • Email generation service (pod)
  • Message queue or broker
  • Processing worker
  • SMTP server or email gateway

Using kubectl and helm, I gathered details on these components. An example command to inspect a deployment:

kubectl get deployments -n email-system
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

I also pinpointed how logs are emitted, as they’re critical for tracing email transactions.

Leveraging Kubernetes for Validation

Without documentation, the main tools to check flow were logs, port forwarding, and metrics.

Step 1: Log Inspection

I set up port forwarding to the email worker pod to monitor logs in real-time:

kubectl port-forward -n email-system pod/email-worker-xyz 8080:8080
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Then, I tailed the logs:

kubectl logs -f pod/email-worker-xyz
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

From logs, I tracked email IDs, status messages, and errors.

Step 2: Simulating Email Requests

Using kubectl exec, I sent mock email requests through the service endpoints:

kubectl exec -n email-system deployment/email-api -- curl -X POST -H "Content-Type: application/json" -d '{"to":"test@example.com","subject":"Test"}' http://localhost:8080/send
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

This triggered actual flows, which I observed via logs.

Step 3: Observability and Metrics

I checked metrics exposed by the services via Prometheus, ensuring email-related counters increased as expected. If metrics were not present, I would recommend instrumenting each service with relevant Prometheus metrics for status, success count, and failures.

Step 4: Email Reception Verification

While internal logs verify flow, external validation was necessary. I configured a temporary SMTP test server (like MailHog or MailSlurp) to intercept outgoing emails.

Automation and Continuous Validation

To bootstrap ongoing validation, I scripted these steps into a CI/CD pipeline that each deployment could invoke. Sample bash snippet:

#!/bin/bash
# Trigger email flow
curl -X POST -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"to":"test@example.com","subject":"Validation"}' \
http://<service-endpoint>/send

sleep 10
# Check logs for confirmation
kubectl logs -l app=email-worker -n email-system | grep "Email sent to test@example.com"

if [ $? -eq 0 ]; then
  echo "Email flow validated successfully."
else
  echo "Email flow validation failed."
  exit 1
fi
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Key Takeaways

  • When documentation is absent, leverage Kubernetes' native tools (logs, exec, port-forward).
  • Combine log analysis, metrics, and external test servers for comprehensive validation.
  • Automate where possible to ensure repeatability.
  • Maintain an evolving internal map of the system architecture using inferred information.

This approach, although initially ad hoc, proved effective in maintaining confidence in email workflows within a Kubernetes environment. The key is a methodical inspection, incremental validation, and automation to compensate for the lack of formal documentation.

Remember: Active system understanding paired with Kubernetes' observability features can compensate for gaps in documentation, ensuring reliable validation of complex flows like email delivery.

🛠️ QA Tip

To test this safely without using real user data, I use TempoMail USA.

Top comments (0)