Background
I'm referring to this documentation about timeEvent:
MixpanelAPI mixpanel =
MixpanelAPI.getInstance(context, MIXPANEL_TOKEN);
// start the timer for the event "Image Upload"
mixpanel.timeEvent("Image Upload");
// stop the timer if the imageUpload() method returns true
if(imageUpload()){
mixpanel.track("Image Upload");
}
The method description explains:
Begin timing of an event. Calling timeEvent("Thing") will not send an
event, but when you eventually call track("Thing"), your tracked event
will be sent with a "$duration" property, representing the number of
seconds between your calls.
Question
It looks like imageUpload() will return a boolean. if it's true then Mixpanel will track this event with duration property specified..
However, it does not state what will happen if imageUpload() returns false.. What if I have two consecutive calls to this uploadImage() method and the first one returns false and the following returns true? will that mess up the event tracking?
the calling sequence will be:
// first upload
mixpanel.timeEvent("Image Upload");
// first upload failed
// second upload
mixpanel.timeEvent("Image Upload");
// second upload succeeded
mixpanel.track("Image Upload");
will the second timeEvent override the first one?
After checking the source code on GitHub (here), it is clear that if the first upload doesn't call track("Image Upload"), then the second timeEvent("Image Upload") will override the first timing, and only the second event will be tracked.
Related
I'm trying to cache http calls in the service so all subsequent calls returns same response. This is fairly easy with shareReplay:
data = this.http.get(url).pipe(
shareReplay(1)
);
But it doesn't work in case of backend / network errors. ShareReplay spams the backend with requests in case of any error when this Observable is bound to the view through async pipe.
I tried with retryWhen etc but the solution I got is untestable:
data = this.http.get(url).pipe(
retryWhen(errors => errors.pipe(delay(10000))),
shareReplay(1)
);
fakeAsync tests fails with "1 timer(s) still in the queue" error because delay timer has no end condition. I also don't want to have some hanging endless timer in the background - it should stop with the last subscription.
The behavior I would like:
Multicast - make only one subscription to source even with many subscribers.
Do not count refs for successful queries - reuse same result when subscriber count goes to 0 and back to 1.
In case of error - retry every 10 seconds but only if there are any subscribers.
My 2 cents:
This code is for rxjs > 6.4 (here V6.6)
To use a shared observable, you need to return the same observable for all the subscribers (or you will create an observable which has nothing to share)
Multicasting can be done using shareReplay and you can replay the last emitted value (even after the last subscriber to have unsubscribed) using the {refCount: false} option.
As long as there is no subscription, the observable does nothing. You will not have any fetch on the server before the first subscriber.
beware:
If refCount is false, the source will not be
unsubscribed meaning that the inner ReplaySubject will still be
subscribed to the source (and potentially run for ever).
Also:
A successfully completed source will stay cached in the shareReplayed
observable forever, but an errored source can be retried.
The problem is using shareReplay, you have to choose between:
Always getting the last value even if the refCount went back to 0 and having possible never ending retries in case of error (remember shareReplay with refCount to false never unsubscribes)
Or keeping the default refCount:true which mean you won't have the second "first subscriber" cache benefit. Conversely the retry will also stop if no subscriber is there.
Here is a dummy example:
class MyServiceClass {
private data;
// assuming you are injecting the http service
constructor(private http: HttpService){
this.data = this.buildData("http://some/data")
}
// use this accessor to get the unique (shared) instance of data observable.
public getData(){
return this.data;
}
private buildData(url: string){
return this.http.get(url).pipe(
retryWhen(errors => errors.pipe(delay(10000))),
shareReplay({refCount: false})
);
}
}
Now in my opinion, to fix the flow you should prevent your retry to run forever, adding for instance a maximum number of retries
I am learner in Ionic and present in my application I am trying to get user location using below code but it's not working properly.
I mean lat and longs are coming but very slowly location lat and longs changing when user move one place to another. Is there any better solution for getting user current location?
this.geolocation.getCurrentPosition().then((resp) => {
}).catch((error) => {
console.log('Error getting location', error);
});
let watch = this.geolocation.watchPosition();
watch.subscribe((data) => {
this.data = data;
console.log("----->Watch latitude" + data.coords.latitude);
console.log("-----> Watch logitude" + data.coords.longitude)
console.log("-----> Watch accuracy" + data.coords.accuracy)
});
You can increase the accuracy by passing the enableHighAccuracy option:
this.geolocation.getCurrentPosition({ enableHighAccuracy: true })
or
this.geolocation.watchPosition({ enableHighAccuracy : true, timeout: 10000 })
You can also pass params for increasing the frequency the call is made such as timeout, this is explained in the README:
"enableHighAccuracy: Provides a hint that the application needs the best possible results. By default, the device attempts to retrieve a Position using network-based methods. Setting this property to true tells the framework to use more accurate methods, such as satellite positioning. (Boolean)
timeout: The maximum length of time (milliseconds) that is allowed to pass from the call to navigator.geolocation.getCurrentPosition or geolocation.watchPosition until the corresponding geolocationSuccess callback executes. If the geolocationSuccess callback is not invoked within this time, the geolocationError callback is passed a PositionError.TIMEOUT error code. (Note that when used in conjunction with geolocation.watchPosition, the geolocationError callback could be called on an interval every timeout milliseconds!) (Number)
maximumAge: Accept a cached position whose age is no greater than the specified time in milliseconds. (Number)"
https://github.com/apache/cordova-plugin-geolocation
I'm new in RxSwift, I don't understand what is difference between do(onNext:) and subscribe(onNext:).
I google it but did't found good resources to explain the difference.
At the beginning of a cold Observable chain there is a function that generates events, for e.g. the function that initiates a network request.
That generator function will not be called unless the Observable is subscribed to (and by default, it will be called each time the observable is subscribed to.) So if you add a do(onNext:) to your observable chain, the function will not be called and the action that generates events will not be initiated. You have to add a subscribe(onNext:) for that to happen.
(The actual internals are a bit more complex than the above description, but close enough for this explanation.)
The do operator allows you to insert side effects; that is, handlers to do things that will not change the emitted event in any way. do will just pass the event through to the next operator in the chain.
The method for using the do operator is here.
And you can provide handlers for any or all of these events.
Let's say We have an observable that never emits anything. Even though it emits nothing, it is still an observable and we can subscribe to it. do operator allows us to do something when a subscription was made to it.
So below example will print "Subscribed" when a subscription was made to that observable.
Feel free to include any of the other handlers if you’d like; they work just like subscribe’s handlers do
let observable = Observable<Any>.never()
let disposeBag = DisposeBag()
observable
.do(onSubscribe: {
print("Subscribed")
})
.subscribe(
onNext: { element in
print(element)
},
onCompleted: {
print("Completed")
},
onDisposed: {
print("Disposed")
}
)
.disposed(by: disposeBag)
I'm working on something that is recording data coming from a queue. It was easy enough to process the queue into an Observable so that I can have multiple endpoints in my code receiving the information in the queue.
Furthermore, I can be sure that the information arrives in order. That bit works nicely as well since the Observables ensure that. But, one tricky bit is that I don't want the Observer to be notified of the next thing until it has completed processing the previous thing. But the processing done by the Observer is asynchronous.
As a more concrete example that is probably simple enough to follow. Imagine my queue contains URLs. I'm exposing those as an Observable in my code. The I subscribe an Observer whose job is to fetch the URLs and write the content to disk (this is a contrived example, so don't take issue with these specifics). The important point is that fetching and saving are async. My problem is that I don't want the observer to be given the "next" URL from the Observable until they have completed the previous processing.
But the call to next on the Observer interface returns void. So there is no way for the Observer to communicate back to me that has actually completed the async task.
Any suggestions? I suspect there is probably some kind of operator that could be coded up that would basically withhold future values (queue them up in memory?) until it somehow knew the Observer was ready for it. But I was hoping something like that already existed following some established pattern.
similar use case i ran into before
window.document.onkeydown=(e)=>{
return false
}
let count=0;
let asyncTask=(name,time)=>{
time=time || 2000
return Rx.Observable.create(function(obs) {
setTimeout(function() {
count++
obs.next('task:'+name+count);
console.log('Task:',count ,' ', time, 'task complete')
obs.complete();
}, time);
});
}
let subject=new Rx.Subject()
let queueExec$=new Rx.Subject()
Rx.Observable.fromEvent(btnA, 'click').subscribe(()=>{
queueExec$.next(asyncTask('A',4000))
})
Rx.Observable.fromEvent(btnB, 'click').subscribe(()=>{
queueExec$.next(asyncTask('B',4000))
})
Rx.Observable.fromEvent(btnC, 'click').subscribe(()=>{
queueExec$.next(asyncTask('C',4000))
})
queueExec$.concatMap(value=>value)
.subscribe(function(data) {
console.log('onNext', data);
},
function(error) {
console.log('onError', error);
},function(){
console.log('completed')
});
What you describe sounds like "backpressure". You can read about it in RxJS 4 documentation https://github.com/Reactive-Extensions/RxJS/blob/master/doc/gettingstarted/backpressure.md. However this is mentioning operators that don't exist in RxJS 5. For example have a look at "Controlled Observables" that should refer to what you need.
I think you could achieve the same with concatMap and an instance of Subject:
const asyncOperationEnd = new Subject();
source.concatMap(val => asyncOperationEnd
.mapTo(void 0)
.startWith(val)
.take(2) // that's `val` and the `void 0` that ends this inner Observable
)
.filter(Boolean) // Always ignore `void 0`
.subscribe(val => {
// do some async operation...
// call `asyncOperationEnd.next()` and let `concatMap` process another value
});
Fro your description it actually seems like the "observer" you're mentioning works like Subject so it would make maybe more sense to make a custom Subject class that you could use in any Observable chain.
Isn't this just concatMap?
// Requests are coming in a stream, with small intervals or without any.
const requests=Rx.Observable.of(2,1,16,8,16)
.concatMap(v=>Rx.Observable.timer(1000).mapTo(v));
// Fetch, it takes some time.
function fetch(query){
return Rx.Observable.timer(100*query)
.mapTo('!'+query).startWith('?'+query);
}
requests.concatMap(q=>fetch(q));
https://rxviz.com/v/Mog1rmGJ
If you want to allow multiple fetches simultaneously, use mergeMap with concurrency parameter.
In rxjs5, I'm trying to implement a Throttler class.
import Rx from 'rxjs/rx';
export default class Throttler {
constructor(interval) {
this.timeouts = [];
this.incomingActions = new Rx.Subject();
this.incomingActions
.concatMap(action => Rx.Observable.just(action).delay(interval / 2))
.subscribe(action => action());
}
clear() {
// How do I do this?
}
do(action) {
this.incomingActions.next(action);
}
}
The following invariants must hold:
every action passed to do gets added to an action queue
the action queue gets processed in order and at a fixed interval as determined by the constructor parameter
the action queue can be cleared using clear().
My current implementation, as seen above, handles the fixed interval, but I don't know how to clear the queue. It also has the problem that all actions are delayed by interval / 2ms even when the queue is empty.
P.S. The way I describe the invariants maps very easily to an implementation with setInterval and an array as a queue, but I'm wondering how I would do this with Rx.
This seems like not a good place for the default Subject class. Extending it with your own subclass would be better because of reasons you listed.
However, in your case I'd try to identify each action that comes to .do(action) method with some index and add .filter() operator before subscribe() to be able to cancel particular actions by checking some array for what indices are marked as canceled. Since you're using concatMap() you know that actions will be always called in the order they were added. Then clear() method that you want would just mark all actions to be canceled in the array.
You can also add .do() operator after concatMap() and keep track of how many action are scheduled at the moment with some accumulator. Adding action would cause scheduledAction++ while passing .do() right before .subscribe() would scheduledAction--. Then you can use this variable to decide whether you want to chain a new action with .delay(interval / 2) or not.