I've tried to get the setUserContext function with raven-node in my nodejs app, but I cannot find how to set the user context. Has anyone made it work?
I was able to make it work in the client-side, with "Raven.setUserContext" but not in the nodejs backend :(
User context isn't implemented in raven-node: https://github.com/getsentry/raven-node/issues/134
I'm a contributor to the project, and it's my number one priority to have this done shortly – should be a matter of days.
Edit – we just published raven-node 0.10.0 which adds setUserContext.
Related
I've been using NuxtJS (v2.15.8) with Nuxt Firebase (v7.6.1), running on NodeJS engine 12 (v12.21.0 to be exact) for the web application I've been developping incrementally for the past couple of years and my web app is now quite complex.
I am trying to upgrade NodeJS to the latest LTS version (v16.13.2) and encounter one major issue after switching version of NodeJS (using nvm) and changing the package.json of my five packages from node 12 to node 16 :
package.json :
"engines": {
"node": "16",
..
},
When running exactly the wame web application after these changes, it starts correctly but Firebase Rules seem to break, with this error FirebaseError: false for 'get' # L61, false for 'get' # L268.
It is a cryptic error, but from experience and from all I could find online, it happens when a call to Firestore that gets blocked by defined Firebase Security rules). In my case, it happens on a "onSnapshot" call to listen to the changes of the currently logged in user. Some other calls to Firestore (using "get" and not "onSnapshot") seem to work fine, and the Firebase Authentication works well too.
Here is the full error stack :
loggedInUser.js?384a:65 Error listening to user changes
FirebaseError: false for 'get' # L61, false for 'get' # L268
at new n (prebuilt-306f43d8-45d6f0b9.js?23bd:188:1)
at eval (prebuilt-306f43d8-45d6f0b9.js?23bd:10426:1)
at eval (prebuilt-306f43d8-45d6f0b9.js?23bd:10427:1)
at n.onMessage (prebuilt-306f43d8-45d6f0b9.js?23bd:10449:1)
at eval (prebuilt-306f43d8-45d6f0b9.js?23bd:10366:1)
at eval (prebuilt-306f43d8-45d6f0b9.js?23bd:10397:1)
at eval (prebuilt-306f43d8-45d6f0b9.js?23bd:15160:1)
at eval (prebuilt-306f43d8-45d6f0b9.js?23bd:15218:1)
The portion of code triggerring the error is :
listenUser({ commit }, userId) {
const userRef = this.$fire.firestore.collection('users').doc(userId);
userListener = userRef.onSnapshot(function(userDoc) {
if (userDoc.exists) {
const user = userConverter.fromFirestoreData(userDoc.data());
commit('SET_LOGGED_IN_USER', user);
}
},
function(error) {
console.error("Error listening to user changes", error);
});
},
As soon as I revert back to Node 12, the same call works fine and isn't blocked by the Firebase rules, so the error doesn't appear.
I therefore have several questions :
Does anyone understand what's happening there ? Is there known changes in the behavior of Firebase rules directly related to the NodeJS engine ?
Do you think this issue can come from Nuxt or its Nuxt Firebase module are not working correctly under NodeJS 16 ?
It is required to also upgrade NuxtJS to a newer version or should it be possible to simply update the Node Engine ?
Is it required to update to a newer version of Firebase (modular implementation) despite the Nuxt Firebase module stating :
"This module does not support the new modular syntax from Firebase v9+. If you plan to use the new modular mode of Version 9, we advise you to implement Firebase manually as described in the following medium article. It is currently unclear when, and if, this module will support the new modular mode."
Source : their Github repo
Any help to understand what's going on here is welcome !!
Thanks a lot for your help !
Regarding your questions:
I'm unaware of what is causing this issue but there are no known changes in the behavior of Firebase Rules depending on the NodeJS version you are using.
It's hard to assess without having more information. However I deployed a sample NuxtJS app following this guide on NodeJS 16 and it worked. Additionally the error code, as you mentioned, is caused when a Firestore Rule blocks a query. Therefore I think the root cause might be in the NuxtJS firebase module.
I wasn't able to find any documentation suggesting that you need to upgrade NuxtJS when upgrading NodeJS. Additionally you mentioned that you are using version 2.15.8 of NuxtJS which according to this release notes is the latest version.
I'm unsure on further support for NuxtJS considering that statement, but according to this Firebase documentation it is recommended to upgrade to version 9.
If you decide to attempt to upgrade to firebase v9 make sure to also upgrade Nuxt Firebase module to version 8.0.0 or higher, this version provides support to the compat library so you can use Firebase v9 although still with the old syntax, more information can be found here.
Lastly, if you'd like to test if a Firebase rule is working as expected you can quickly test it using the Rules Playground.
Long story short : upgrading to Firebase v9 worked.
Before I did that, I got stuck with rules preventing me to access firestore documents as soon as I tried running the project under Node16 engine.
So I had to do the following changes :
updating Firebase to v9
implement the configuration through a plugin rather than the nuxt-firebase module
make all the required changes in my code to make use of v9 modular (I didn't try using the compat version)
Now that I use the latest version of Firebase, I tried again switching to NodeJS 16 and it runs fine, including the Firebase security rules.
I have been using sqlite3 for most of my fullstack applications (node/express, django/drf + svelte on the front end as the consumer of the api endpoints) and have been trying to figure out how to integrate sqlite3.
As far as I know, better-sqlite3 is a synchronous library.
I notice you're using await with better-sqlite3. Removing await might solve your problem.
index.json.ts didn't work for me for some reason. I had to change it to list.json.ts.
Also, they changed the endpoint handler to all uppercase GET in this discussion.
I’m trying to get setup using Firebase Admin on my nodejs app running on my Raspberry Pi.
when I call;
admin.database().ref().child("myPath").push({date: new Date()});
I’m not receiving any errors but no data is showing up when looking in the Firebase console at my database either.
I also tried chaining on;
set({date: new Date()});
and
push().set({date: new Date()});
Both also fail to write with no errors.
I've verified that my rtdb url and the project id in the service account file are correct for my database. And I've tried both requireing the file as in the docs and passing the credential object directly to;
admin.credential.cert()
I only mention that I'm running on Raspberry Pi because the issue I’m seeing sounds very similar to this Stack Overflow post where Firebase Admin won’t write to db. I’m wondering if it’s not coincidental.
Any ideas what I might be missing?
please can you try this code .....push().set({'date': new Date()});. Thanks. I am guessing it's takes a String as key and even the new Date().toStirng() would be good if i am not wrong.
Thanks,
The project I'm working on uses the feathers JS framework server side. Many of the services have hooks (or middleware) that make other calls and attach data before sending back to the client. If I have a new feature that needs to query a database but for a only few specific things I'm thinking I don't want to use the already built out "find" method for this database query as that "find" method has many other unneeded hooks and calls to other databases to get data I do not need for this new query on my feature.
My two solutions so far:
I could use the standard "find" query and just write if statements in all hooks that check for a specific string parameter that can be passed in on client side so these hooks are deactivated on this specific call but that seems tedious especially if I find this need for several other different services that have already been built out.
I initialize a second service below my main service so if my main service is:
app.use('/comments', new JHService(options));
right underneath I write:
app.use('/comments/allParticipants', new JHService(options));
And then attach a whole new set of hooks for that service. Basically it's a whole new service with the only relation to the origin in that the first part of it's name is 'comments' Since I'm new to feathers I'm not sure if that is a performant or optimal solution.
Is there a better solution then those options? or is option 1 or option 2 the most correct way to solve my current issue?
You can always wrap the population hooks into a conditional hook:
const hooks = require('feathers-hooks-common');
app.service('myservice').after({
create: hooks.iff(hook => hook.params.populate !== false, populateEntries)
});
Now population will only run if params.populate is not false.
I'm looking for a way to output Node variables directly into the google chrome browser console. The same way a console.log() works on the client side. Something like this for php. This would greatly speed up development.
NOTE:
Since the old answer (written in september 2014) refers to an older version of node-inspector, my instructions are not relevant anymore in 2017. Also, the documentation has gotten a lot better, so I have updated my original answer:
node-inspector is what you need.
It opens up an instance of Chrome with its developer tools for debugging.
It's also easy to use:
1. Install
$ npm install -g node-inspector
2. Start
$ node-debug app.js
Source: https://github.com/node-inspector/node-inspector
You might want to try NodeMonkey - https://github.com/jwarkentin/node-monkey
I know it's an old question but came on top of my Google search so maybe somebody will find my answer useful.
So you can use node --inspect-brk index.js
Now, all you have to do is basically just type chrome://inspect in your Chrome address bar and click Open dedicated DevTools for Node
In DevTools, now connected to Node, you’ll have all the Chrome DevTools features you’re used to:
Complete breakpoint debugging, stepping w/ blackboxing
Source maps for transpiled code
LiveEdit: JavaScript hot-swap evaluation w/ V8
Console evaluation with ES6 feature/object support and custom object formatting
Sampling JavaScript profiler w/ flamechart
Heap snapshot inspection, heap allocation timeline, allocation profiling
Asynchronous stacks for native promises
Hope that helped.
The closest thing to this I've seen is Node JS console object debug inspector
See this post for usage and potential issues: http://thomashunter.name/blog/nodejs-console-object-debug-inspector/
For users with nodejs on linux via ssh-shell (putty):
Problem with nodejs on linux-ssh-shell is, that you have no browser connected.
I tried all this solutions, but didnt get it to work.
So i worked out a solution with firebase (https://firebase.google.com), because my project uses firebase.
If you are familiar with firebase, than this is a great way. If not, firebase is worth using in combination with nodejs - and its free!
In the server-side-script (started with node) use a own function log():
// server-side:
// using new firebase v3 !
var fbRootRef = firebase.database();
var fbConsoleRef = fbRootRef.ref("/console");
var log = function(args) {
fbConsoleRef.set({'obj': args});
}
// inside your server-code:
log({'key':'value'});
On client-side you create a firebase-reference on this console-object:
// client side:
fbRootRef.child('/console').on('value', function(d) {
var v = d.val();
console.log(v);
});
Now everything logged on server-side with the log() - function is transferred in realtime to the firebase-database and from there triggering the client-console-reference and logged into the browsers console.
If anyone needs help, i will explain in more detail and could give a more extended version of this logging with types (console./log/warn/info), grouping with title-info (i.e. server says: (filename + line).
Setting up firebase for your project is done in max 30 minutes, inserting the console-function in 30 minutes. I think its worth the time!
You can use bonsole, a simple way to log something in browser. Even in Linux, you can go to the LAN's ip to check it.
The most simple way with least dependencies is using a WebSocket connection to send the messages to the browser. Any WebSocket example you can find on the internet will suffice to accomplish this. Everything else requires to be heavily integrated into the host system and wouldn't work if you want to actually run this on a remote server. You can also send commands to the server directly from the browser console this way.
Links:
https://www.npmjs.com/package/websocket
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/WebSockets_API/Writing_WebSocket_client_applications