Sequelize nested promise on model create inside a loop - node.js

I have an async function (createObjects) that needs to create some models into the database, so, until all the objects are created (inside a forEach loop), the function needs to wait. After the last model is created, then it should return the "Data Synchronized!" string, but the "Data Synchronized!" message never waits for createObjects() to finish. I think I need to return all the model.create promises to the mainPromise, like an array of promises, but I don't know the best way to do that. Any suggestions?
PS: The calculateCost that is called inside createObjects is async and is working fine.
mainPromise()
.then( (data) => {
return proccessData(data); //this is a sync function
})
.then( (newData) => {
createObjects(newData); // this is a async function
})
.then( () => {
return "Data Synchronized!";
})
//this needs to be an async function
function createObjects(newData){
newData.forEach((bills) => {
//if the object bills has the Groups array attributes...
if (bills.Groups.length !== 0) {
//iterate through groups
bills.Groups.forEach( (group) => {
var uid = group.id;
var usage = group.Metric.UsageAmount;
var cost = calculateCost(usage, uid); //async function
//the problem is here
cost.then((result) => {
models.Billing.create({
group_id: uid,
cost: result,
usage: usage
});
});
})
}
});
}
var calculateCost = (usage, uid) => {
var cost;
return models.ObjectA.findOne({
where: { id: uid }
}).then((data) => {
if (data.type == "Interactive") {
cost = usage * 0.44;
} else if (data.type == "Automated") {
cost = usage * 0.11;
}
return cost;
});
}

There is nothing in your code watching the result of cost().then(...), so that bit of code is fire-and-forget. The same is true for your call to models.Billing.create and one of the thens toward the top of your code. That's why you're seeing the outcome you are. When using Promises, be on the lookout for places where you are creating promises and not returning them to a higher caller. This often suggests the creation of a promise that isn't being watched.
To fix this:
First of all, fix the then towards the top of the code so that the result of createObjects is actually being returned:
.then( (newData) => {
return createObjects(newData); // this is a async function
})
Better yet:
.then(createObjects)
After that's remedied...
Option 1 - use reduce instead of forEach
Use this approach if you want to assure that the queries are executed one at a time (in sequence), instead of all at once:
function processBillGroups(groups) {
return groups.reduce((last, group) => {
var group_id = group.id;
var usage = group.Metric.UsageAmount;
return last
.then(() => calculateCost(usage, group_id))
.then((cost) => models.Billing.create({ group_id, cost, usage }))
}, Promise.resolve());
}
function createObjects(newData) {
return newData.reduce(
(last, { Groups }) => last.then(() => processBillGroups(Groups)),
Promise.resolve(),
);
}
Option 1.1 Use async/await
This will also carry out the actions in sequence, but uses the async/await syntax instead of direct promise manipulation.
async function processBillGroups(groups) {
for (group of groups) {
let group_id = group.id;
let usage = group.Metric.UsageAmount;
let cost = await calculateCost(usage, group_id);
await models.Billing.create({ group_id, cost, usage });
}
}
async function createObjects(newData) {
for ({ Groups } of newData) {
await processBillGroups(Groups);
}
}
Option 2 - use map and Promise.all instead of forEach
Use this if you don't mind all of the actions executing at the same time (in parallel), or even prefer that they execute in parallel. createObjects will return a single promise that will resolve when all of the actions have completed:
function processBillGroups(groups) {
return Promise.all(groups.map((group) => {
var group_id = group.id;
var usage = group.Metric.UsageAmount;
return calculateCost(usage, group_id)
.then((cost) => models.Billing.create({ group_id, cost, usage }));
}));
}
function createObjects(newData) {
return Promise.all(
newData.map(({ Groups }) => processBillGroups(Groups))
);
}
Option 2.1 - Use map and Promise.all with a little bit of async/await:
Acts just like option 2, but the syntax is a little nicer.
function processBillGroups(groups) {
return Promise.all(groups.map(async (group) => {
let group_id = group.id;
let usage = group.Metric.UsageAmount;
let cost = await calculateCost(usage, group_id);
await models.Billing.create({ group_id, cost, usage });
}));
}
function createObjects(newData) {
return Promise.all(
newData.map(({ Groups }) => processBillGroups(Groups))
);
}

Related

How to use Await Inside Array.map for API's response [duplicate]

Consider the following code that reads an array of files in a serial/sequential manner. readFiles returns a promise, which is resolved only once all files have been read in sequence.
var readFile = function(file) {
... // Returns a promise.
};
var readFiles = function(files) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
var readSequential = function(index) {
if (index >= files.length) {
resolve();
} else {
readFile(files[index]).then(function() {
readSequential(index + 1);
}).catch(reject);
}
};
readSequential(0); // Start with the first file!
});
};
The above code works, but I don't like having to do recursion for things to occur sequentially. Is there a simpler way that this code can be re-written so that I don't have to use my weird readSequential function?
Originally I tried to use Promise.all, but that caused all of the readFile calls to happen concurrently, which is not what I want:
var readFiles = function(files) {
return Promise.all(files.map(function(file) {
return readFile(file);
}));
};
Update 2017: I would use an async function if the environment supports it:
async function readFiles(files) {
for(const file of files) {
await readFile(file);
}
};
If you'd like, you can defer reading the files until you need them using an async generator (if your environment supports it):
async function* readFiles(files) {
for(const file of files) {
yield await readFile(file);
}
};
Update: In second thought - I might use a for loop instead:
var readFiles = function(files) {
var p = Promise.resolve(); // Q() in q
files.forEach(file =>
p = p.then(() => readFile(file));
);
return p;
};
Or more compactly, with reduce:
var readFiles = function(files) {
return files.reduce((p, file) => {
return p.then(() => readFile(file));
}, Promise.resolve()); // initial
};
In other promise libraries (like when and Bluebird) you have utility methods for this.
For example, Bluebird would be:
var Promise = require("bluebird");
var fs = Promise.promisifyAll(require("fs"));
var readAll = Promise.resolve(files).map(fs.readFileAsync,{concurrency: 1 });
// if the order matters, you can use Promise.each instead and omit concurrency param
readAll.then(function(allFileContents){
// do stuff to read files.
});
Although there is really no reason not to use async await today.
Here is how I prefer to run tasks in series.
function runSerial() {
var that = this;
// task1 is a function that returns a promise (and immediately starts executing)
// task2 is a function that returns a promise (and immediately starts executing)
return Promise.resolve()
.then(function() {
return that.task1();
})
.then(function() {
return that.task2();
})
.then(function() {
console.log(" ---- done ----");
});
}
What about cases with more tasks? Like, 10?
function runSerial(tasks) {
var result = Promise.resolve();
tasks.forEach(task => {
result = result.then(() => task());
});
return result;
}
This question is old, but we live in a world of ES6 and functional JavaScript, so let's see how we can improve.
Because promises execute immediately, we can't just create an array of promises, they would all fire off in parallel.
Instead, we need to create an array of functions that returns a promise. Each function will then be executed sequentially, which then starts the promise inside.
We can solve this a few ways, but my favorite way is to use reduce.
It gets a little tricky using reduce in combination with promises, so I have broken down the one liner into some smaller digestible bites below.
The essence of this function is to use reduce starting with an initial value of Promise.resolve([]), or a promise containing an empty array.
This promise will then be passed into the reduce method as promise. This is the key to chaining each promise together sequentially. The next promise to execute is func and when the then fires, the results are concatenated and that promise is then returned, executing the reduce cycle with the next promise function.
Once all promises have executed, the returned promise will contain an array of all the results of each promise.
ES6 Example (one liner)
/*
* serial executes Promises sequentially.
* #param {funcs} An array of funcs that return promises.
* #example
* const urls = ['/url1', '/url2', '/url3']
* serial(urls.map(url => () => $.ajax(url)))
* .then(console.log.bind(console))
*/
const serial = funcs =>
funcs.reduce((promise, func) =>
promise.then(result => func().then(Array.prototype.concat.bind(result))), Promise.resolve([]))
ES6 Example (broken down)
// broken down to for easier understanding
const concat = list => Array.prototype.concat.bind(list)
const promiseConcat = f => x => f().then(concat(x))
const promiseReduce = (acc, x) => acc.then(promiseConcat(x))
/*
* serial executes Promises sequentially.
* #param {funcs} An array of funcs that return promises.
* #example
* const urls = ['/url1', '/url2', '/url3']
* serial(urls.map(url => () => $.ajax(url)))
* .then(console.log.bind(console))
*/
const serial = funcs => funcs.reduce(promiseReduce, Promise.resolve([]))
Usage:
// first take your work
const urls = ['/url1', '/url2', '/url3', '/url4']
// next convert each item to a function that returns a promise
const funcs = urls.map(url => () => $.ajax(url))
// execute them serially
serial(funcs)
.then(console.log.bind(console))
To do this simply in ES6:
function(files) {
// Create a new empty promise (don't do that with real people ;)
var sequence = Promise.resolve();
// Loop over each file, and add on a promise to the
// end of the 'sequence' promise.
files.forEach(file => {
// Chain one computation onto the sequence
sequence =
sequence
.then(() => performComputation(file))
.then(result => doSomething(result));
// Resolves for each file, one at a time.
})
// This will resolve after the entire chain is resolved
return sequence;
}
Addition example
const addTwo = async () => 2;
const addThree = async (inValue) => new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve(inValue + 3), 2000));
const addFour = (inValue) => new Promise((res) => setTimeout(res(inValue + 4), 1000));
const addFive = async (inValue) => inValue + 5;
// Function which handles promises from above
async function sequenceAddition() {
let sum = await [addTwo, addThree, addFour, addFive].reduce(
(promise, currPromise) => promise.then((val) => currPromise(val)),
Promise.resolve()
);
console.log('sum:', sum); // 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 = 14
}
// Run function. See console for result.
sequenceAddition();
General syntax to use reduce()
function sequence(tasks, fn) {
return tasks.reduce((promise, task) => promise.then(() => fn(task)), Promise.resolve());
}
UPDATE
items-promise is a ready to use NPM package doing the same.
I've had to run a lot of sequential tasks and used these answers to forge a function that would take care of handling any sequential task...
function one_by_one(objects_array, iterator, callback) {
var start_promise = objects_array.reduce(function (prom, object) {
return prom.then(function () {
return iterator(object);
});
}, Promise.resolve()); // initial
if(callback){
start_promise.then(callback);
}else{
return start_promise;
}
}
The function takes 2 arguments + 1 optional. First argument is the array on which we will be working. The second argument is the task itself, a function that returns a promise, the next task will be started only when this promise resolves. The third argument is a callback to run when all tasks have been done. If no callback is passed, then the function returns the promise it created so we can handle the end.
Here's an example of usage:
var filenames = ['1.jpg','2.jpg','3.jpg'];
var resize_task = function(filename){
//return promise of async resizing with filename
};
one_by_one(filenames,resize_task );
Hope it saves someone some time...
With Async/Await (if you have the support of ES7)
function downloadFile(fileUrl) { ... } // This function return a Promise
async function main()
{
var filesList = [...];
for (const file of filesList) {
await downloadFile(file);
}
}
(you must use for loop, and not forEach because async/await has problems running in forEach loop)
Without Async/Await (using Promise)
function downloadFile(fileUrl) { ... } // This function return a Promise
function downloadRecursion(filesList, index)
{
index = index || 0;
if (index < filesList.length)
{
downloadFile(filesList[index]).then(function()
{
index++;
downloadRecursion(filesList, index); // self invocation - recursion!
});
}
else
{
return Promise.resolve();
}
}
function main()
{
var filesList = [...];
downloadRecursion(filesList);
}
My preferred solution:
function processArray(arr, fn) {
return arr.reduce(
(p, v) => p.then((a) => fn(v).then(r => a.concat([r]))),
Promise.resolve([])
);
}
It's not fundamentally different from others published here but:
Applies the function to items in series
Resolves to an array of results
Doesn't require async/await (support is still quite limited, circa 2017)
Uses arrow functions; nice and concise
Example usage:
const numbers = [0, 4, 20, 100];
const multiplyBy3 = (x) => new Promise(res => res(x * 3));
// Prints [ 0, 12, 60, 300 ]
processArray(numbers, multiplyBy3).then(console.log);
Tested on reasonable current Chrome (v59) and NodeJS (v8.1.2).
First, you need to understand that a promise is executed at the time of creation.
So for example if you have a code:
["a","b","c"].map(x => returnsPromise(x))
You need to change it to:
["a","b","c"].map(x => () => returnsPromise(x))
Then we need to sequentially chain promises:
["a", "b", "c"].map(x => () => returnsPromise(x))
.reduce(
(before, after) => before.then(_ => after()),
Promise.resolve()
)
executing after(), will make sure that promise is created (and executed) only when its time comes.
Nicest solution that I was able to figure out was with bluebird promises. You can just do Promise.resolve(files).each(fs.readFileAsync); which guarantees that promises are resolved sequentially in order.
With async/await of ES2016 (and maybe some features of ES2018), this can be reduced to this form:
function readFile(file) {
... // Returns a promise.
}
async function readFiles(files) {
for (file in files) {
await readFile(file)
}
}
I haven't seen another answer express that simplicity. The OP said parallel execution of readFile was not desired. However, with IO like this it really makes sense to not be blocking on a single file read, while keeping the loop execution synchronous (you don't want to do the next step until all files have been read). Since I just learned about this and am a bit excited about it, I'll share that approach of parallel asynchronous execution of readFile with overall synchronous execution of readFiles.
async function readFiles(files) {
await Promise.all(files.map(readFile))
}
Isn't that a thing of beauty?
This is a slight variation of another answer above. Using native Promises:
function inSequence(tasks) {
return tasks.reduce((p, task) => p.then(task), Promise.resolve())
}
Explanation
If you have these tasks [t1, t2, t3], then the above is equivalent to Promise.resolve().then(t1).then(t2).then(t3). It's the behavior of reduce.
How to use
First You need to construct a list of tasks! A task is a function that accepts no argument. If you need to pass arguments to your function, then use bind or other methods to create a task. For example:
var tasks = files.map(file => processFile.bind(null, file))
inSequence(tasks).then(...)
I created this simple method on the Promise object:
Create and add a Promise.sequence method to the Promise object
Promise.sequence = function (chain) {
var results = [];
var entries = chain;
if (entries.entries) entries = entries.entries();
return new Promise(function (yes, no) {
var next = function () {
var entry = entries.next();
if(entry.done) yes(results);
else {
results.push(entry.value[1]().then(next, function() { no(results); } ));
}
};
next();
});
};
Usage:
var todo = [];
todo.push(firstPromise);
if (someCriterium) todo.push(optionalPromise);
todo.push(lastPromise);
// Invoking them
Promise.sequence(todo)
.then(function(results) {}, function(results) {});
The best thing about this extension to the Promise object, is that it is consistent with the style of promises. Promise.all and Promise.sequence is invoked the same way, but have different semantics.
Caution
Sequential running of promises is not usually a very good way to use promises. It's usually better to use Promise.all, and let the browser run the code as fast as possible. However, there are real use cases for it - for example when writing a mobile app using javascript.
My answer based on https://stackoverflow.com/a/31070150/7542429.
Promise.series = function series(arrayOfPromises) {
var results = [];
return arrayOfPromises.reduce(function(seriesPromise, promise) {
return seriesPromise.then(function() {
return promise
.then(function(result) {
results.push(result);
});
});
}, Promise.resolve())
.then(function() {
return results;
});
};
This solution returns the results as an array like Promise.all().
Usage:
Promise.series([array of promises])
.then(function(results) {
// do stuff with results here
});
Use Array.prototype.reduce, and remember to wrap your promises in a function otherwise they will already be running!
// array of Promise providers
const providers = [
function(){
return Promise.resolve(1);
},
function(){
return Promise.resolve(2);
},
function(){
return Promise.resolve(3);
}
]
const inSeries = function(providers){
const seed = Promise.resolve(null);
return providers.reduce(function(a,b){
return a.then(b);
}, seed);
};
nice and easy...
you should be able to re-use the same seed for performance, etc.
It's important to guard against empty arrays or arrays with only 1 element when using reduce, so this technique is your best bet:
const providers = [
function(v){
return Promise.resolve(v+1);
},
function(v){
return Promise.resolve(v+2);
},
function(v){
return Promise.resolve(v+3);
}
]
const inSeries = function(providers, initialVal){
if(providers.length < 1){
return Promise.resolve(null)
}
return providers.reduce((a,b) => a.then(b), providers.shift()(initialVal));
};
and then call it like:
inSeries(providers, 1).then(v => {
console.log(v); // 7
});
Using modern ES:
const series = async (tasks) => {
const results = [];
for (const task of tasks) {
const result = await task;
results.push(result);
}
return results;
};
//...
const readFiles = await series(files.map(readFile));
Most of the answers dont include the results of ALL promises individually, so in case someone is looking for this particular behaviour, this is a possible solution using recursion.
It follows the style of Promise.all:
Returns the array of results in the .then() callback.
If some promise fails, its returned immediately in the .catch() callback.
const promiseEach = (arrayOfTasks) => {
let results = []
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
const resolveNext = (arrayOfTasks) => {
// If all tasks are already resolved, return the final array of results
if (arrayOfTasks.length === 0) return resolve(results)
// Extract first promise and solve it
const first = arrayOfTasks.shift()
first().then((res) => {
results.push(res)
resolveNext(arrayOfTasks)
}).catch((err) => {
reject(err)
})
}
resolveNext(arrayOfTasks)
})
}
// Lets try it 😎
const promise = (time, shouldThrowError) => new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
const timeInMs = time * 1000
setTimeout(()=>{
console.log(`Waited ${time} secs`)
if (shouldThrowError) reject(new Error('Promise failed'))
resolve(time)
}, timeInMs)
})
const tasks = [() => promise(1), () => promise(2)]
promiseEach(tasks)
.then((res) => {
console.log(res) // [1, 2]
})
// Oops some promise failed
.catch((error) => {
console.log(error)
})
Note about the tasks array declaration:
In this case is not possible to use the following notation like Promise.all would use:
const tasks = [promise(1), promise(2)]
And we have to use:
const tasks = [() => promise(1), () => promise(2)]
The reason is that JavaScript starts executing the promise immediatelly after its declared. If we use methods like Promise.all, it just checks that the state of all of them is fulfilled or rejected, but doesnt start the exection itself. Using () => promise() we stop the execution until its called.
You can use this function that gets promiseFactories List:
function executeSequentially(promiseFactories) {
var result = Promise.resolve();
promiseFactories.forEach(function (promiseFactory) {
result = result.then(promiseFactory);
});
return result;
}
Promise Factory is just simple function that returns a Promise:
function myPromiseFactory() {
return somethingThatCreatesAPromise();
}
It works because a promise factory doesn't create the promise until it's asked to. It works the same way as a then function – in fact, it's the same thing!
You don't want to operate over an array of promises at all. Per the Promise spec, as soon as a promise is created, it begins executing. So what you really want is an array of promise factories...
If you want to learn more on Promises, you should check this link:
https://pouchdb.com/2015/05/18/we-have-a-problem-with-promises.html
If you want you can use reduce to make a sequential promise, for example:
[2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9].reduce((promises, page) => {
return promises.then((page) => {
console.log(page);
return Promise.resolve(page+1);
});
}, Promise.resolve(1));
it'll always works in sequential.
I really liked #joelnet's answer, but to me, that style of coding is a little bit tough to digest, so I spent a couple of days trying to figure out how I would express the same solution in a more readable manner and this is my take, just with a different syntax and some comments.
// first take your work
const urls = ['/url1', '/url2', '/url3', '/url4']
// next convert each item to a function that returns a promise
const functions = urls.map((url) => {
// For every url we return a new function
return () => {
return new Promise((resolve) => {
// random wait in milliseconds
const randomWait = parseInt((Math.random() * 1000),10)
console.log('waiting to resolve in ms', randomWait)
setTimeout(()=>resolve({randomWait, url}),randomWait)
})
}
})
const promiseReduce = (acc, next) => {
// we wait for the accumulator to resolve it's promise
return acc.then((accResult) => {
// and then we return a new promise that will become
// the new value for the accumulator
return next().then((nextResult) => {
// that eventually will resolve to a new array containing
// the value of the two promises
return accResult.concat(nextResult)
})
})
};
// the accumulator will always be a promise that resolves to an array
const accumulator = Promise.resolve([])
// we call reduce with the reduce function and the accumulator initial value
functions.reduce(promiseReduce, accumulator)
.then((result) => {
// let's display the final value here
console.log('=== The final result ===')
console.log(result)
})
As Bergi noticed, I think the best and clear solution is use BlueBird.each, code below:
const BlueBird = require('bluebird');
BlueBird.each(files, fs.readFileAsync);
I find myself coming back to this question many times and the answers aren't exactly giving me what I need, so putting this here for anyone that needs this too.
The code below does sequential promises execution (one after another), and each round consists of multiple callings:
async function sequence(list, cb) {
const result = [];
await list.reduce(async (promise, item) => promise
.then(() => cb(item))
.then((res) => result.push(res)
), Promise.resolve());
return result;
}
Showcase:
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/axios/0.15.3/axios.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://unpkg.com/#babel/standalone#7/babel.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/babel">
function sleep(ms) {
return new Promise(resolve => setTimeout(resolve, ms));
}
async function readFile(url, index) {
console.log('Running index: ', index);
// First action
const firstTime = await axios.get(url);
console.log('First API response: ', firstTime.data.activity);
// Second action
await sleep(1000);
// Third action
const secondTime = await axios.get(url);
console.log('Second API response: ', secondTime.data.activity);
// Fourth action
await sleep(1000);
return secondTime.data;
}
async function sequence(urls, fn) {
const result = [];
await urls.reduce(async (promise, url, index) => promise.then(() => fn(url, index)).then((res) => result.push(res)), Promise.resolve());
return result;
}
const urls = [
'https://www.boredapi.com/api/activity',
'https://www.boredapi.com/api/activity',
'https://www.boredapi.com/api/activity',
];
(async function init() {
const result = await sequence(urls, readFile);
console.log('result', result);
})()
</script>
I use the following code to extend the Promise object. It handles rejection of the promises and returns an array of results
Code
/*
Runs tasks in sequence and resolves a promise upon finish
tasks: an array of functions that return a promise upon call.
parameters: an array of arrays corresponding to the parameters to be passed on each function call.
context: Object to use as context to call each function. (The 'this' keyword that may be used inside the function definition)
*/
Promise.sequence = function(tasks, parameters = [], context = null) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject)=>{
var nextTask = tasks.splice(0,1)[0].apply(context, parameters[0]); //Dequeue and call the first task
var output = new Array(tasks.length + 1);
var errorFlag = false;
tasks.forEach((task, index) => {
nextTask = nextTask.then(r => {
output[index] = r;
return task.apply(context, parameters[index+1]);
}, e=>{
output[index] = e;
errorFlag = true;
return task.apply(context, parameters[index+1]);
});
});
// Last task
nextTask.then(r=>{
output[output.length - 1] = r;
if (errorFlag) reject(output); else resolve(output);
})
.catch(e=>{
output[output.length - 1] = e;
reject(output);
});
});
};
Example
function functionThatReturnsAPromise(n) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject)=>{
//Emulating real life delays, like a web request
setTimeout(()=>{
resolve(n);
}, 1000);
});
}
var arrayOfArguments = [['a'],['b'],['c'],['d']];
var arrayOfFunctions = (new Array(4)).fill(functionThatReturnsAPromise);
Promise.sequence(arrayOfFunctions, arrayOfArguments)
.then(console.log)
.catch(console.error);
Your approach is not bad, but it does have two issues: it swallows errors and it employs the Explicit Promise Construction Antipattern.
You can solve both of these issues, and make the code cleaner, while still employing the same general strategy:
var Q = require("q");
var readFile = function(file) {
... // Returns a promise.
};
var readFiles = function(files) {
var readSequential = function(index) {
if (index < files.length) {
return readFile(files[index]).then(function() {
return readSequential(index + 1);
});
}
};
// using Promise.resolve() here in case files.length is 0
return Promise.resolve(readSequential(0)); // Start!
};
This is my sequentially implementation that I use in various projects:
const file = [file1, file2, file3];
const fileContents = sequentially(readFile, files);
// somewhere else in the code:
export const sequentially = async <T, P>(
toPromise: (element: T) => Promise<P>,
elements: T[]
): Promise<P[]> => {
const results: P[] = [];
await elements.reduce(async (sequence, element) => {
await sequence;
results.push(await toPromise(element));
}, Promise.resolve());
return results;
};
Here is my Angular/TypeScript approach, using RxJS:
Given an array of URL strings, convert it into an Observable using the from function.
Use pipe to wrap the Ajax request, immediate response logic, any desired delay, and error handling.
Inside of the pipe, use concatMap to serialize the requests. Otherwise, using Javascript forEach or map would make the requests at the same time.
Use RxJS ajax to make the call, and also to add any desired delay after each call returns.
Working example: https://stackblitz.com/edit/rxjs-bnrkix?file=index.ts
The code looks like this (I left in some extras so you can choose what to keep or discard):
import { ajax } from 'rxjs/ajax';
import { catchError, concatMap, delay, from, of, map, Observable } from 'rxjs';
const urls = [
'https://randomuser.me/api/',
'https://randomuser.me/api/',
'https://randomuser.me/api/',
];
const delayAfterCall = 500;
from(urls)
.pipe(
concatMap((url: string) => {
return ajax.getJSON(url).pipe(
map((response) => {
console.log('Done! Received:', response);
return response;
}),
catchError((error) => {
console.error('Error: ', error);
return of(error);
}),
delay(delayAfterCall)
);
})
)
.subscribe((response) => {
console.log('received email:', response.results[0].email);
});
On the basis of the question's title, "Resolve promises one after another (i.e. in sequence)?", we might understand that the OP is more interested in the sequential handling of promises on settlement than sequential calls per se.
This answer is offered :
to demonstrate that sequential calls are not necessary for sequential handling of responses.
to expose viable alternative patterns to this page's visitors - including the OP if he is still interested over a year later.
despite the OP's assertion that he does not want to make calls concurrently, which may genuinely be the case but equally may be an assumption based on the desire for sequential handling of responses as the title implies.
If concurrent calls are genuinely not wanted then see Benjamin Gruenbaum's answer which covers sequential calls (etc) comprehensively.
If however, you are interested (for improved performance) in patterns which allow concurrent calls followed by sequential handling of responses, then please read on.
It's tempting to think you have to use Promise.all(arr.map(fn)).then(fn) (as I have done many times) or a Promise lib's fancy sugar (notably Bluebird's), however (with credit to this article) an arr.map(fn).reduce(fn) pattern will do the job, with the advantages that it :
works with any promise lib - even pre-compliant versions of jQuery - only .then() is used.
affords the flexibility to skip-over-error or stop-on-error, whichever you want with a one line mod.
Here it is, written for Q.
var readFiles = function(files) {
return files.map(readFile) //Make calls in parallel.
.reduce(function(sequence, filePromise) {
return sequence.then(function() {
return filePromise;
}).then(function(file) {
//Do stuff with file ... in the correct sequence!
}, function(error) {
console.log(error); //optional
return sequence;//skip-over-error. To stop-on-error, `return error` (jQuery), or `throw error` (Promises/A+).
});
}, Q()).then(function() {
// all done.
});
};
Note: only that one fragment, Q(), is specific to Q. For jQuery you need to ensure that readFile() returns a jQuery promise. With A+ libs, foreign promises will be assimilated.
The key here is the reduction's sequence promise, which sequences the handling of the readFile promises but not their creation.
And once you have absorbed that, it's maybe slightly mind-blowing when you realise that the .map() stage isn't actually necessary! The whole job, parallel calls plus serial handling in the correct order, can be achieved with reduce() alone, plus the added advantage of further flexibility to :
convert from parallel async calls to serial async calls by simply moving one line - potentially useful during development.
Here it is, for Q again.
var readFiles = function(files) {
return files.reduce(function(sequence, f) {
var filePromise = readFile(f);//Make calls in parallel. To call sequentially, move this line down one.
return sequence.then(function() {
return filePromise;
}).then(function(file) {
//Do stuff with file ... in the correct sequence!
}, function(error) {
console.log(error); //optional
return sequence;//Skip over any errors. To stop-on-error, `return error` (jQuery), or `throw error` (Promises/A+).
});
}, Q()).then(function() {
// all done.
});
};
That's the basic pattern. If you wanted also to deliver data (eg the files or some transform of them) to the caller, you would need a mild variant.
If someone else needs a guaranteed way of STRICTLY sequential way of resolving Promises when performing CRUD operations you also can use the following code as a basis.
As long as you add 'return' before calling each function, describing a Promise, and use this example as a basis the next .then() function call will CONSISTENTLY start after the completion of the previous one:
getRidOfOlderShoutsPromise = () => {
return readShoutsPromise('BEFORE')
.then(() => {
return deleteOlderShoutsPromise();
})
.then(() => {
return readShoutsPromise('AFTER')
})
.catch(err => console.log(err.message));
}
deleteOlderShoutsPromise = () => {
return new Promise ( (resolve, reject) => {
console.log("in deleteOlderShouts");
let d = new Date();
let TwoMinuteAgo = d - 1000 * 90 ;
All_Shouts.deleteMany({ dateTime: {$lt: TwoMinuteAgo}}, function(err) {
if (err) reject();
console.log("DELETED OLDs at "+d);
resolve();
});
});
}
readShoutsPromise = (tex) => {
return new Promise( (resolve, reject) => {
console.log("in readShoutsPromise -"+tex);
All_Shouts
.find({})
.sort([['dateTime', 'ascending']])
.exec(function (err, data){
if (err) reject();
let d = new Date();
console.log("shouts "+tex+" delete PROMISE = "+data.length +"; date ="+d);
resolve(data);
});
});
}
Array push and pop method can be used for sequence of promises. You can also push new promises when you need additional data. This is the code, I will use in React Infinite loader to load sequence of pages.
var promises = [Promise.resolve()];
function methodThatReturnsAPromise(page) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => {
console.log(`Resolve-${page}! ${new Date()} `);
resolve();
}, 1000);
});
}
function pushPromise(page) {
promises.push(promises.pop().then(function () {
return methodThatReturnsAPromise(page)
}));
}
pushPromise(1);
pushPromise(2);
pushPromise(3);
(function() {
function sleep(ms) {
return new Promise(function(resolve) {
setTimeout(function() {
return resolve();
}, ms);
});
}
function serial(arr, index, results) {
if (index == arr.length) {
return Promise.resolve(results);
}
return new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
if (!index) {
index = 0;
results = [];
}
return arr[index]()
.then(function(d) {
return resolve(d);
})
.catch(function(err) {
return reject(err);
});
})
.then(function(result) {
console.log("here");
results.push(result);
return serial(arr, index + 1, results);
})
.catch(function(err) {
throw err;
});
}
const a = [5000, 5000, 5000];
serial(a.map(x => () => sleep(x)));
})();
Here the key is how you call the sleep function. You need to pass an array of functions which itself returns a promise instead of an array of promises.

How to call a custom function synchronously in node js?

I am developing a server project which needs to call some functions synchronously. Currently I am calling it in asynchronous nature. I found some similar questions on StackOverflow and I can't understand how to apply those solutions to my code. Yet I tried using async/await and ended up with an error The 'await' operator can only be used in an 'async' function
Here is my implementation
function findSuitableRoom(_lecturer, _sessionDay, _sessionTime, _sessionDuration, _sessionType){
let assignedRoom = selectRoomByLevel(preferredRooms, lecturer.level, _sessionDuration); <------- Need to be call synchronously
if (!assignedRoom.success){
let rooms = getRooms(_sessionType); <------- Need to be call synchronously
assignedRoom = assignRoom(_lecturer.rooms, _sessionDuration, _lecturer.level);
} else {
arr_RemovedSessions.push(assignedRoom.removed)
}
return assignedRoom;
}
function getRooms(type){
switch (type){
case 'Tutorial' : type = 'Lecture hall'
break;
case 'Practical' : type = 'Lab'
break;
default : type = 'Lecture hall'
}
Rooms.find({type : type},
(err, rooms) => {
if (!err){
console.log('retrieved rooms ' + rooms)
return rooms;
}
})
}
Here I have provided only two methods because full implementation is very long and I feel if I could understand how to apply synchronous way to one method, I can manage the rest of the methods. Can someone please help me?
Well yes await is only available inside an async function so put async infront of findSuitableRoom.
Also you did a classic mistake. You use return inside of a callback function, and expect getRooms to return you some value.
async function findSuitableRoom(
_lecturer,
_sessionDay,
_sessionTime,
_sessionDuration,
_sessionType
) {
let assignedRoom = selectRoomByLevel(
preferredRooms,
lecturer.level,
_sessionDuration
);
if (!assignedRoom.success) {
try {
let rooms = await getRooms(_sessionType);
} catch (err) {
console.log("no rooms found");
}
assignedRoom = assignRoom(
_lecturer.rooms,
_sessionDuration,
_lecturer.level
);
} else {
arr_RemovedSessions.push(assignedRoom.removed);
}
return assignedRoom;
}
Also wrap it in an try / catch
Since .find() returns an promise if you dont pass an callback you can write it like this
function getRooms(type) {
switch (type) {
case "Tutorial":
type = "Lecture hall";
break;
case "Practical":
type = "Lab";
break;
default:
type = "Lecture hall";
}
return Rooms.find({ type });
}
Note here findSuitableRoom is no longer synchronouse. Its async and returns an promise. That means you will need to use the function like this:
findSuitableRoom.then(res => { console.log(res); })
The 'await' operator can only be used in an 'async' function
This means whenever you want to use the await keyword it needs to be inside a function which has an async keyword (returns promise)
read this https://javascript.info/async-await for more info
const add = (a, b) => {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => { //to make it asynchronous
if (a < 0 || b < 0) {
return reject("don't need negative");
}
resolve(a + b);
}, 2000);
});
};
const jatin = async () => {
try{
const sum = await add(10, 5);
const sum2 = await add(sum, -100);
const sum3 = await add(sum2, 1000);
return sum3;
} catch (e) {
console.log(e);
}
};
jatin()
Try this
let's understand this
add is a normal function that does some asynchronous action like
waiting for 2 seconds
normally we use await with async function so in order to use it we make as async function jatin and use await with add function call
to make it synchronous, so until first await add call() doesn't
happen it wont execute another await add call().
Example code if you will use in your app.js
router.post("/users/login", async (req, res) => {
try {
const user = await User.findByCredentials(
req.body.email,
req.body.password
);
const token = await user.generateToken();
res.status(200).send({
user,
token,
});
}
catch (error) {
console.log(error);
res.status(400).send();
}
});

Reduce array of promises instead of mapping and filtering undefined/null values

Currently in our API-server code we have the following:
async someAsyncMethod() {
// ...
let products = await Promise.all(shopStructure.map(async entry => {
try {
const serviceResponse = await this.requestService.someService(entry);
return ProductMapper.map(entry, serviceResponse);
} catch (err) {
this.logger.error('...');
return undefined;
}
}));
products = products.filter(s => s);
return products;
}
How would I use reduce here in order to get rid of the filter operation?
I tried using the following:
async someAsyncMethod() {
// ...
const products = await Promise.all(shopStructure.reduce(async (accumulator, entry) => {
try {
const serviceResponse = await this.requestService.someService(entry);
accumulator.push(ProductMapper.map(entry, serviceResponse));
} catch (err) {
this.logger.error('...');
}
return accumulator;
},[]));
return products;
}
but this results in compile errors ("No overload matches this call", "Argument of type ... is not assignable to parameter of type <never>").
Maybe there's another elegant way to do this? Note that I deliberately use Promise.all instead of for...of for performance reasons.
I don't think reduce is the right tool here. You need to wait for n Promises to resolve, where n is the length of the shopStructure; the input array and the array of Promises that Promise.all needs are one-to-one, so .map and Promise.all definitely is the right approach.
You can avoid using .filter if you want by pushing to an array instead:
async someAsyncMethod() {
const products = [];
await Promise.all(shopStructure.map(entry => (
this.requestService.someService(entry)
.then(serviceResponse => products.push(ProductMapper.map(entry, serviceResponse)))
.catch(err => { this.logger.error('...'); })
)));
return products;
}
I don't think there's a good-looking way to use reduce, since the .map is already essential.

Regarding nested Promises in NodeJS

There are many threads on this and using that i am trying to find solution for below problem.
getMethod() {
execDBQuery(sqlQuery1)
.then(productionQueryRows => {
prodResultFunc(resultSet) // Calling a function to get another set of DB values
.then (result) {
console.log(result) // Final result which will be sent to user
}
});
}
async function prodResultFunc(prodRowSet) {
const results = await Promise.all(
prodRowSet.map( async (objBatchRow) => {
execDBQuery(sqlQuery2)
.then(resultSet => {
read value-1
})
execDBQuery(sqlQuery3)
.then(resultSet => {
read value-2
})
// Create a object using Value-1 & Value-2 and return object to map
});
);
}
I tried implementing below (with one just SQL execution) and it works fine.
async function prodResultFunc(prodRowSet) {
const results = await Promise.all(
prodRowSet.map( async (objBatchRow) => {
execDBQuery(sqlQuery2)
.then(resultSet => {
read values using resultSet
Create object with resultSet values
})
return object
});
);
}
But i want use values for both SQLs (2 & 3) for creating object and this where i am struggling to find syntax for implementation. Any help/pointers to existing threads will be a great help.
Whenever you're dealing with complex Promise chains, I find that the async/await syntax is much easier to read. You end up with a lot less nested code.
The example below shows how you might combine the results of two different queries:
const prodRowSet = [1,2,3];
// Mock query function.
async function execDBQuery(sql) {
return [{ id: 1, query: sql }];
}
async function prodResultFunc(prodRowSet) {
const results = await Promise.all(
prodRowSet.map( async (objBatchRow) => {
let resultSet2 = await execDBQuery('sqlQuery2');
let resultSet3 = await execDBQuery('sqlQuery3');
// Do whatever you want to combine the result sets.
let combinedObj = { resultSet2, resultSet3}
return combinedObj;
})
);
return results;
}
(async() => {
let output = await prodResultFunc(prodRowSet);
console.log("Output:", output);
})();
You might be looking for Promise.All
async function prodResultFunc(prodRowSet) {
const results = await Promise.all(
prodRowSet.map( async (objBatchRow) => {
Promise.all([execDBQuery(sqlQuery2), execDBQuery(sqlQuery3)]).then(function(values) {
//TODO:: Impement you business logic here
console.log(values);
});
});
);
}

NodeJS execute the next process after then() [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Using async/await with a forEach loop
(33 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
I'm trying to do upsert inside forEach becase the request is an array of objects using Sequelize.upsert method. I do this:
async createInfo (req, res){
newsData = req.body.news,
newsList = [];
newsData.forEach(async values => {
var news = {};
news.inserted_id = values.inserted_id;
if(news.inserted_id == null){
do {
news.inserted_id = crypto.getRandom(5);
var check = await InstitutionNews.count({where: {inserted_id: news.inserted_id}});
} while (check > 0);
}
News.upsert({
institution_id: institution_id,
inserted_id: news.inserted_id,
news_date: values.news_date,
news_title: values.news_title,
description: values.news_description,
created_by: created_by
}).then(ResNews => {
news.news_date = values.news_date;
news.news_title = values.news_title;
news.description = values.news_description;
newsList.push(news);
})
})
console.log("TEST")
}
but the process stop at the then(). It didn't execute the next code like the console.log.
Is there any way to execute next line code after the then(). I need then() because I wanna push the news object into newsList array. Because I need newsList as the if else conditional to do the next process.
Thanks.
Since it sounds like you need to wait for forEach to complete before you do another step, so I'd suggest using something like Promise.all:
async function createInfo(req, res) {
const newsData = req.body.news
const newsList = []
try {
await Promise.all(
newsData.map(
async (values) => {
const news = {}
news.inserted_id = values.inserted_id
// ...
News.upsert({...})
.then(ResNews => {
// ...
newsList.push(news)
})
}
)
)
console.log('newsList', newList)
// do other work
} catch (error) {
// handle errors appropriately
}
}
This way, you're creating an array of promises and waiting for all of them to resolve/finish.
Your current approach with forEach won't work in this case since it won't wait for each asynchronous call to finish before executing the "next" step. Since Promise.all returns a single Promise that you can then "wait" for to resolve before continuing with your next step.
Here's a simple example that somewhat does what you're trying to do:
async function createInfo() {
const newsData = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
const newsList = []
await Promise.all(
newsData.map(
async (values) => {
const temp = await Promise.resolve('temp')
console.log('first async call inside values of', values)
Promise.resolve('resolved')
.then((result) => {
newsList.push(`resolved with ${values}`)
})
}
)
)
console.log('newsList after')
console.log(newsList)
}
createInfo()
EDIT
Here's an alternative solution as rightly pointed by #Bergi in the comments:
async function createInfo(req, res) {
const newsData = req.body.news
try {
const newList = await Promise.all(
newsData.map(
async (values) => {
const news = {}
news.inserted_id = values.inserted_id
// ...
// since it doesn't look like you're using any
// data that you'd get back from the `News.upsert` call, wait for
// it to finish and just simply return your `news` object
await News.upsert({...})
news.news_date = values.news_date
news.news_title = values.news_title
news.description = values.news_description
return news
}
)
)
console.log('newsList', newList)
// do other work
} catch (error) {
// handle errors appropriately
}
}
use await instead of then like
await News.upsert({
institution_id: institution_id,
inserted_id: news.inserted_id,
news_date: values.news_date,
news_title: values.news_title,
description: values.news_description,
created_by: created_by
});
news.news_date = values.news_date;
news.news_title = values.news_title;
news.description = values.news_description;
newsList.push(news);

Resources