I'm writing a library that can interact with a socket server that transmits data as events to certain actions my library sends it.
I created an Actions module that formats the actions so that the server can read it. It also generates an action_id, because the events parser can identify it with the action that sent it. There are more than one event per action possible.
While I'm sending my action to the server, the event parser is still getting data from the server, so they work independent from each other (but then again they do work together: events response aggregator triggers the action callback).
In my model, I want to get a list of some resource from the server. The server sends its data one line at a time, but that's being handled by the events aggregator, so don't worry about that.
Okay, my problem:
In my model I am requesting the resources, but since the events are being parsed in another thread, I need to do a "infinite" loop that checks if the list is filled, and then break out to return it to the consumer of the model (e.g. my controller).
Is there another (better) way of doing this or am I on the right track? I would love your thoughts :)
Here is my story in code: https://gist.github.com/anonymous/8652934
Check out Ruby EventMachine.
It's designed to simplify this sort of reactor pattern application.
It depends on the implementation. In the code you provide you're not showing how actually the request and responses are processed.
If you know exactly the number of responses you're supposed to receive, in each one you could check if all are completed, then execute an specific action. e.g.
# suppose response_receiver is the method which receives the server response
def response_receiver data
#responses_list << data
if #response_list.size == #expected_size
# Execute some action
end
end
Related
I have an application where users can take part of puzzle solving events. I have an API endpoint /events/{id} that is used to get data associated to a certain event.
Based on whether the event has ended, the response will differ:
If the event has ended, the endpoint will return event name, participants, scores etc. with status code 200
If the event has not ended, the endpoint will return event name, start time, end time, puzzles etc. with status code 200.
On the client-side, what is the best way to distinguish these two responses from each other to decide which page to display, results page or event page? Is this a good way to accomplish my goal?
Some might answer that I should already know on the client-side whether the event has ended and then query for data accordingly. But what if user uses the address bar to navigate to an event? Then I will have no data to know, whether it truly has ended. I wouldn't like to first make an API call to know that it has (not) ended and then make another one for results/puzzles.
pass a boolean isFinished and return it inside of response object. If your response object is already defined, create a wrapper that has the previous response dto and a boolean flag.
Also we did use a solution like this in one of our projects at work for a big company so I would say it is somewhat industry accepted way of doing it.
Is there a way for all Receive samplers to ignore specific responses in JMeter and wait for the one that we are interested?
To be more precise, we have created a jmx file that contains a large flow like a user would create on the browser. Each request sent is followed by a response, so we use a request handler followed by the corresponding receive handler for each call. And everything seems to work fine.
But there are cases that another kind of response may arrive, which is not the one we expect in our flow, but it is triggered by another independent mechanism. You can think of it like notifications sent to the user that is doing the flow and are independent of the flow itself, but theu are received in the channel (for us inside the websocket connection).
So we are trying to find a way to ignore a specific set of responses that may come while we are running the tests.
We firstly tried to add a While Controller in each receive sampler that checks if the content is of the desired type and if not loops again. But this solution has 3 disadvantages :
we have to add the sampler for the specific receive twice - one before the while element and one inside the element because we have to first extract the received data and while does not execute its contents before doing the while condition check
we have so many pairs of send-receive in our jmeter test script , that we have to add so many while controllers inside the script
since the received message may not be of the type we expect but another one that we want to ignore, then we cannot add a Response Assertion because it will fail if the notification arrives, so we have to verify the content indirect -> in the condition of the while loop
We use apache-jmeter-5.3.
So we are wondering if we could do another kind of configuration in order to avoid all these while loops.
It may be irrelevant to the solution, but we use websocket through "WebSocket Samplers by Peter Doornbosch".
Thanks
You don't have to, just amend your While Controller's condition to accept undefined variable as well
Sounds like a potential use case for using Module Controller to avoid code duplication
If you're getting the response you don't expect you can change the response body using JSR223 PostProcessor to the one you expect, example code
if (!prev.getResponseDataAsString().contains('foo')) {
prev.setResponseData('foo', 'UTF-8')
}
I am trying to make sense of which one should be called before and which one later between wl_display_dispatch and wl_display_roundtrip. I have seen both order so wondering which one is correct.
1st order:
wl_display_get_registry(display); wl_registry_add_listener() // this call is just informational
wl_display_dispatch();
wl_display_roundtrip();
what i think : wl_display_dispatch() will read and dispatch events from display fd, whatever is sent by server but in between server might be still processing requests and for brief time fd might be empty.
wl_display_dispatch returns assuming all events are dispatched. Then wl_display_roundtrip() is called and will block until server has processed all request and put then in event queue. So after this, event queue still has pending events, but there is no call to wl_display_dispatch(). How those pending events will be dispatched ? Is that wl_display_dispatch() wait for server to process all events and then dispatch all events?
2nd order:
wl_display_get_registry(display); wl_registry_add_listener() // this call is just informational
wl_display_roundtrip();
wl_display_dispatch();
In this case, wl_display_roundtrip() wait for server to process all events and put them in event queue, So once this return we can assume all events sent from server are available in queue. Then wl_display_dispatch() is called which will dispatch all pending events.
Order 2nd looks correct and logical to me, as there is no chance of leftover pending events in queue. but I have seen Order 1st in may places including in weston client examples code so I am confused whats the correct order of calling.
It would be great if someone could clarify here.
Thanks in advance
2nd order is correct.
client can't do much without getting proxy(handle for global object). what i mean is client can send request by binding to the global object advertised by server so for this client has to block until all global object are bind in registry listener callback.
for example for client to create surface you need to bind wl_compositor interface then to shell interface to give role and then shm(for share memory) and so on.wl_display_dispatch cannot guaranty all the events are processed if your lucky it may dispatch all events too but cannot guarantee every-time. so you should use wl_display_roundtrip for registry at-least.
I'm trying to use Backbone.Marionette, and I read the docs on github about wreqr.
So, whats the difference between Event Aggregator, Commands and Request/Response. And when to use one or another?
They bascially all use messaging, and their difference is mainly semantic:
event aggregator: send a message when something happens. Code somewhere else might be listening for that message, but maybe not
request/response: have code send a request, and it will expect a response (e.g. send me refreshed data)
commands: code in one place commands code somewhere else to carry out an action. There usually isn't a return value.
I would like to add to David Sulc's answer.
Request/response is very different from event aggregator and commands. It is used for cases where one part your code requests something from another part of the code. A response would always be expected. Now lets see how event aggregator and commands are different.
Marionette's Event Aggregator allows you to implement publish-subscribe behaviour. Using the 'on' method you can subscribe to an event and bind an event to any object. You cannot implement this binding behaviour using commands. Also you can have multiple objects listening to any particular event. There may also be a case where no object is bound to or listening to any event.
Commands are specifically meant for performing some action in some other part of the code. There can only be 1 handler for a particular command, unlike events where you can have multiple listeners.
So to summarize, the use cases for each would be:
1) Request/Response: When you need some response from another part of the code.
2) Event Aggregator: When you want to bind objects to events
3) Commands: You just want some other part of your code to perform a task.
Morning,
I'm using the SimpleEvent bus to send data from my centralized data reviver to the Widgets. This works really fine, I get one set of new Data form the server, the success method of the RPC call puts it on the Eventbus, each widget looks if the data is for it, if yes it 'displays' it, if not, it does nothing.There is only one data set per request and the widgets don't depend on other data being already sent.
Now I have a Tree widget. The child nodes of the Tree are created throw this data sets too, and this child nodes register itself to the Eventbus to revive the data for their child nodes. The data shall be received in on rush (for performance reasons obv), so I will get multiple data sets which are put on the Eventbus at the 'same time' (in a for loop). I only control the order in which they are put there (first the root, then the data for the first child......). How does the Eventbus now proceeds the events?
Does he wait till the first event is completed, so the first child of
the tree already finished creation and register itself to the
Eventbus, to revive the data to create it's child's.
Does he handle them simultaneous, so a widget isn't even registered to the Eventbus.
Does he mix up the order?!?!
Current solution approaches:
The best solution I can think of, is to only put new events on the
Eventbus when the previous got completed. However I found a method
which does so, or if it is the standard behavior of the Eventbus .
Fire a request processing finished event, when a event was processed by a widget. Yucks... this leads to a lot of additional code and causes big problems, when data is put on the Eventbus which doesn't belong to any widget....
Register a static variable which is set to true when the request got handled and the Eventbus waits this long till he puts the next request on the Eventbus (Quiet similar to two, but way worse coding style and the same problems)
All events are handled by the root tree element, which sends them upwards to the respective child's.
Which solution would you prefer and why?
Regards,
Stefan
PS: my favorite answer would be that 1. is the standard behavior of the Eventbus^^
PPS: The solution should also be working on when introducing Webworkers.
The EventBus#fireEvent is synchronous. It's by design. You can pass an event to the bus, have handlers possibly modify it, and when execution returns to your method you can check the event; this is used for PlaceChangeRequestEvent and its setMessage for instance.
FYI, if a handler throws an exception, it won't prevent other handlers from being executed. The fireEvent will then wrap the exceptions (plural; several handlers can throw) in an UmbrellaException.
Although EventBus is a nice way of de-coupling parts of your application it doesn't mean it should be "overused".
I also think you should be careful not to circumvent the asynchronous behavior of your client-side code by introducing synchronous/blocking like behavior.
Javascript is single threaded so I don't think you can have two events at the same time. They will be executed one after the other.
If you fire an event on the EventBus (i.e. SimpleEventBus) it will just iterator through the list of attached handlers and execute them. If no handler is attached nothing happens.
I personally would prefer the 4th. approach especially if you plan to use a CellTree some time in the future. The Tree widget/CellTree widget handles the event and constructs its structure by traversing through the object.