Deleting multiple intents with watson-developer-cloud nodejs sdk - node.js

I'm using watson-developer-cloud with nodejs and trying to delete more than intent with the following:
let IntentName = req.body.intentName;
var params = {
workspace_id: workspaceId,
intent: // delete more than on intent here
};
conversation.deleteIntent(params, function(err, response) {
if (err) {
console.error(err);
} else {
console.log(JSON.stringify(response, null, 2));
}
});
how can i delete more than one?

One option you can do is download the whole workspace and work on the JSON object directly. Then when completed, send the whole updated block back to your workspace in one go.
This means less calls, lowering your chances of a rate limit kicking in.

The SDK is based on the API for Watson Assistant. The API supports deletion of one intent per call. So you would need to loop over all the intents you want to delete and remove them one by one.

Related

How can I send a message from bot framework sdk after a period of inactivity? In nodejs

I am using the nodejs SDK for Bot Framework to develop a chatbot. I want to send a message to the user if they do not write in 5 minutes.
I do not find an example in bot-framework documentation and, in stackoverflow there are not solutions for a started bot (I do not need it to start the conversation). Where do I need to create the code? I have an index.js and a dialog file. How can I set the timer and restart it when the user send a message?
I'm using directline.
Thanks
There are two different ways you can approach this, one for directline only using events and one for all channels using setTimeout. The directline solution requires some code on your webchat client, but the latter requires you to save the conversation reference and start a new bot adapter. Both approaches could work.
Directline Only
You need to set up your webchat client to set up the timer and send an event to your bot if no activities are sent before the timer expires. You need to create a custom store to do this. Here is an example I used in the past:
const store = window.WebChat.createStore({}, function(dispatch) { return function(next) { return function(action) {
if (action.type === 'WEB_CHAT/SEND_MESSAGE') {
// Message sent by the user
clearTimeout(interval);
} else if (action.type === 'DIRECT_LINE/INCOMING_ACTIVITY' && action.payload.activity.name !== "inactive") {
// Message sent by the bot
clearInterval(interval);
interval = setTimeout(function() {
// Notify bot the user has been inactive
dispatch.dispatch({
type: 'WEB_CHAT/SEND_EVENT',
payload: {
name: 'inactive',
value: ''
}
});
}, 300000)
}
return next(action);
}}});
This will send an event to your bot with the name 'inactive'. Now you need to set up your bot to handle it. So in your this.onEvent handler you need to do something like this:
if (context.activity.name && context.activity.name === 'inactive') {
await context.sendActivity({
text: 'Are you still there? Is there anything else I can help you with?',
name: 'inactive'
});
}
All channels
As I'm typing this up, I'm realizing you should be able to emit the event from your bot itself and forego starting a new bot adapter instance. But I haven't tried that before, so I'm providing my existing solution. But you may wish to experiment with emitting an inactive event if the timeout is reached instead of the actions below.
That said, here is a solution you can use within your this.onMessage handler.
// Inactivity messages
// Reset the inactivity timer
clearTimeout(this.inactivityTimer);
this.inactivityTimer = setTimeout(async function(conversationReference) {
console.log('User is inactive');
try {
const adapter = new BotFrameworkAdapter({
appId: process.env.microsoftAppID,
appPassword: process.env.microsoftAppPassword
});
await adapter.continueConversation(conversationReference, async turnContext => {
await turnContext.sendActivity('Are you still there?');
});
} catch (error) {
//console.log('Bad Request. Please ensure your message contains the conversation reference and message text.');
console.log(error);
}
}, 300000, conversationData.conversationReference);
Note that you have to get and save the conversationReference if you go this route, so that you can call continueConversation if the timer expires. I typically do this in my this.onMessage handler as well just to make sure I always have a valid conversation reference. You can get it with the below code (I'm assuming you already have your conversation state and state accessor defined).
const conversationData = await this.dialogState.get(context, {});
conversationData.conversationReference = TurnContext.getConversationReference(context.activity);
Now as I mentioned in the first solution, I believe you should be able to send an inactivity event in your try block instead of initiating the bot adapter. If you try that and it works, please let me know so I can update this solution!

Am I having a local Firestore database?

I want to understand what kind of Firestore database is installed to my box.
The code is running with node.js 9.
If I remove the internet for X minutes and put it back, I can see all the cached transactions going to Firestore (add, updates, deletes).
If I add firebase.firestore().enablePersistence() line after 'firebase.initializeApp(fbconfig), I am getting this error:
Error enabling offline persistence. Falling back to persistence
disabled: FirebaseError: [code=unimplemented]: This platform is either
missing IndexedDB or is known to have an incomplete implementation.
Offline persistence has been disabled.
Now, my question is. If I don't have persistence enabled or can't have it, how come when disconnecting my device from internet, I still have internal transaction going on? Am I really seeing it the proper way?
To me, beside not seeing the console.log() that I have inside the "then()" to batch.commit or transaction.update right away (only when putting back the internet) tells me that I have some kind of internal database persistence, don't you think?
Thanks in advance for your help.
UPDATE
When sendUpdate is called, it looks like the batch.commit is executed because I can see something going on in listenMyDocs(), but the console.log "Commit successfully!" is not shown until the internet comes back
function sendUpdate(response) {
const db = firebase.firestore();
let batch = db.batch();
let ref = db.collection('my-collection')
.doc('my-doc')
.collection('my-doc-collection')
.doc('my-new-doc');
batch.update(ref, { "variable": response.state });
batch.commit().then(() => {
console.log("Commit successfully!");
}).catch((error) => {
console.error("Commit error: ", error);
});
}
function listenMyDocs() {
const firebase = connector.getFirebase()
const db = firebase.firestore()
.collection('my-collection')
.doc('my-doc')
.collection('my-doc-collection');
const query = db.where('var1', '==', "true")
.where('var2', '==', false);
query.onSnapshot(snapshot => {
snapshot.docChanges().forEach(change => {
if (change.type === 'added') {
console.log('ADDED');
}
if (change.type === 'modified') {
console.log('MODIFIED');
}
if (change.type === 'removed') {
console.log('DELETED');
}
});
});
the console.log "Commit successfully!" is not shown until the internet comes back
This is the expected behavior. Completion listeners fire once the data is committed on the server.
Local events may fire before completion, in an effort to allow your UI to update optimistically. If the server changes the behavior that the client raised events for (for example: if the server rejects a write), the client will fire reconciliatory events (so if an add was rejected, it will firebase a change.type = 'removed event once that is detected).
I am not entirely sure if this applies to batch updates though, and it might be tricky to test that from a Node.js script as those usually bypass the security rules.

slack how to know if bot recently posted

I am using botkit, i have a bot that responses to a certain word.
But i don't want the bot to response if it recently did so.
Currently i am using channels.history method to retrieve 4 recent messages then find the bot id, if its there it won't reply. This is not pretty, i've been searching for useful methods to use but i can't find any. I just want to find out if the bot recently posted or not and do actions base on it.
const targetBotID = 'GKALXJCM6'
bot.api.channels.history({
channel: message.channel,
latest: message.ts,
count: 4,
inclusive: 1,
}, function(err, response) {
if(err) { bot.reply(message, 'Something is wrong with me, check log if there is??'); }
if(response){
const recentPostFound = response.messages.filter(function (member) {
return member.user === targetBotID;
});
if(recentPostFound){
return bot.reply();
}
return bot.reply(answer) // Answer if no matching id found
}
});
I can see two solutions to your issue:
Record previous actions of your bot in some kind of app context (e.g. database). Then you can verify each time if your bot already answered.
Consider using Events API instead of loading the chat history each time. Then your bot gets exactly one event request for each new message in a channel and you can be sure that your bot will only react once.

Is there a better way with NodeJs to get updates from a Telegram bot?

I'm using simply like below:
class Bot {
constructor(token) {
let _baseApiURL = `https://api.telegram.org`;
//code here
}
getAPI(apiName) {
return axios.get(`${this.getApiURL()}/${apiName}`);
}
getApiURL() {
return `${this.getBaseApiUrl()}/bot${this.getToken()}`;
}
getUpdates(fn) {
this.getAPI('getUpdates')
.then(res => {
this.storeUpdates(res.data);
fn(res.data);
setTimeout(() => {
this.getUpdates(fn);
}, 1000);
})
.catch(err => {
console.log('::: ERROR :::', err);
});
}
}
const bot = new Bot('mytoken');
bot.start();
I'd like to know whether there is a better way to listen for Telegram's updates, instead of using a timeout and redo an Ajax call to 'getUpdates' API
Telegram supports polling or webhooks, so you can use the latter to avoid polling the getUpdates API
Getting updates
There are two mutually exclusive ways of receiving updates for your
bot — the getUpdates method on one hand and Webhooks on the other.
Incoming updates are stored on the server until the bot receives them
either way, but they will not be kept longer than 24 hours.
Regardless of which option you choose, you will receive JSON-serialized Update objects as a result.
More info on: https://core.telegram.org/bots/api#getting-updates
You can use telegraf to easily setup a webhook or to handle the polling for you with a great API

Can't publish options with RabbitMQ message?

I'm using ampq.node for my RabbitMQ access in my Node code. I'm trying to use either the publish or sendToQueue methods to include some metadata with my published message (namely timestamp and content type), using the options parameter.
But whatever I'm passing to options is completely ignored. I think I'm missing some formatting, or a field name, but I cannot find any reliable documentation (beyond the one provided here which does not seem to do the job).
Below is my publish function code:
var publish = function(queueName, message) {
let content;
let options = {
persistent: true,
noAck: false,
timestamp: Date.now(),
contentEncoding: 'utf-8'
};
if(typeof message === 'object') {
content = new Buffer(JSON.stringify(message));
options.contentType = 'application/json';
}
else if(typeof message === 'string') {
content = new Buffer(message);
options.contentType = 'text/plain';
}
else { //message is already a buffer?
content = message;
}
return Channel.sendToQueue(queueName, content, options); //Channel defined and opened elsewhere
};
What am I missing?
Update:
Turns out if you choose to use a ConfirmChannel, you must provide the callback function as the last parameter, or else, the options object is ignored. So once I changed the code to the following, I started seeing the options correctly:
Channel.sendToQueue(queueName, content, options, (err, result) => {...});
Somehow, I can't seem to get your example publish to work... though I don't see anything particularly wrong with it. I'm not sure why I wasn't able to get your example code working.
But I was able to modify a version of my own amqplib intro code, and got it working with your options just fine.
Here is the complete code for my example:
// test.js file
var amqplib = require("amqplib");
var server = "amqp://test:password#localhost/test-app";
var connection, channel;
function reportError(err){
console.log("Error happened!! OH NOES!!!!");
console.log(err.stack);
process.exit(1);
}
function createChannel(conn){
console.log("creating channel");
connection = conn;
return connection.createChannel();
}
function sendMessage(ch){
channel = ch;
console.log("sending message");
var msg = process.argv[2];
var message = new Buffer(msg);
var options = {
persistent: true,
noAck: false,
timestamp: Date.now(),
contentEncoding: "utf-8",
contentType: "text/plain"
};
channel.sendToQueue("test.q", message, options);
return channel.close();
}
console.log("connecting");
amqplib.connect(server)
.then(createChannel)
.then(sendMessage)
.then(process.exit, reportError);
to run this, open a command line and do:
node test.js "example text message"
After running that, you'll see the message show up in your "test.q" queue (assuming you have that queue created) in your "test-app" vhost.
Here's a screenshot of the resulting message from the RMQ Management plugin:
side notes:
I recommend not using sendToQueue. As I say in my RabbitMQ Patterns email course / ebook:
It took a while for me to realize this, but I now see the "send to queue" feature of RabbitMQ as an anti-pattern.
Sure, it's built in to the library and protocol. And it's convenient, right? But that doesn't mean you should use it. It's one of those features that exists to make demos simple and to handle some specific scenarios. But generally speaking, "send to queue" is an anti-pattern.
When you're a message producer, you only care about sending the message to the right exchange with the right routing key. When you're a message consumer, you care about the message destination - the queue to which you are subscribed. A message may be sent to the same exchange, with the same routing key, every day, thousands of times per day. But, that doesn't mean it will arrive in the same queue every time.
As message consumers come online and go offline, they can create new queues and bindings and remove old queues and bindings. This perspective of message producers and consumers informs the nature of queues: postal boxes that can change when they need to.
I also recommend not using amqplib directly. It's a great library, but it lacks a lot of usability. Instead, look for a good library on top of amqplib.
I prefer wascally, by LeanKit. It's a much easier abstraction on top of amqplib and provides a lot of great features and functionality.
Lastly, if you're struggling with other details in getting RMQ up and running with Node.js, designing your app to work with it, etc., check out my RabbitMQ For Devs course - it goes from zero to hero, fast. :)
this may help others, but the key name to use for content type is contentType in the javascript code. Using the web Gui for rabbitMQ, they use content_type as the key name. different key names to declare options, so make sure to use the right one in the right context.

Resources