I'm building my first node.js application on my Raspberry Pi which I am using to control an air conditioner via LIRC. The following code is called when you want to increase the temperature of the AC unit. It sends a LIRC command every 250 milliseconds depending on how many degrees you want to increase it by. This code works as expected.
var iDegrees = 5;
var i = 0;
var delay = 250 // The delay in milliseconds
function increaseTemperatureLoop(){
i++;
//lirc_node.irsend.send_once("ac", "INCREASE", function() {});
console.log(i);
// Call the fucntion/loop again after the delay if we still need to increase the temperature
if (i <= iDegrees){
timer = setTimeout(increaseTemperatureLoop, delay);
}
else {
res.json({"message": "Success"});
}
}
// Start the timer to call the recursive function for the first time
var timer = setTimeout(increaseTemperatureLoop, delay);
I'm having a hard time working with the asynchronous nature of node.js. Once my recursive function is done, I return my json to the browser as shown in the code above. By habit, I feel like I should return the json in a line of code after my initial function call like below but obviously that wouldn't wait for all of the LIRC calls to be successful - it seems silly to have it inside of the function:
var timer = setTimeout(increaseTemperatureLoop, delay);
res.json({"message": "Success"});
What if I have a bunch of other stuff to do after my LIRC sends are done but before I want to send my json back to the browser? Or what if that block of code throws an error...
My second question is, how do I properly wrap the LIRC call in a try/catch and then if there is an error, stop the recursive calls, pass the error back up, and then pass this back to the browser along with the actual error message:
res.json({"message": "Failed"});
For track end of the cycle execution task, you can use a callback.
In order to know whether completed all routine tasks, you can use the task queue.
Monitor and report bugs to the top - it is possible with the help of
three of the same callback.
In general, it is desirable to wrap everything into a single object.
Some example for reflection:
var lircTasks = function __self (){
if (typeof __self.tasks === "undefined") __self.tasks = 0;
__self.func = {
increaseTemperature: function() {
// lirc_node.irsend.send_once("ac", "INCREASE_TEMPERATURE", function() {});
},
increaseFanPower: function() {
// lirc_node.irsend.send_once("ac", "INCREASE_FANPOWER", function() {});
}
}
var fab = function () {
__self.tasks++;
this.i = 0;
this.args = arguments[0];
this.callback = arguments[1];
this.run = function __ref(taskName) {
if (taskName) this.taskName = taskName;
if (this.i<this.args.deg) {
try {
__self.func[this.taskName]();
} catch(e) {
__self.tasks--;
this.callback( {message: "error", error: e, taskName: this.taskName, task: this.args, tasks: __self.tasks} );
}
this.i++;
setTimeout( __ref.bind(this), this.args.delay );
} else {
__self.tasks--;
this.callback({message:"complete", taskName: this.taskName, task: this.args, tasks: __self.tasks});
}
}
}
if ((arguments.length === 2) && (typeof arguments[1] === "function") && arguments[0].deg>0 && arguments[0].delay>=0) {
return new fab(arguments[0], arguments[1]);
}
}
function complete(e) {
console.log(e);
if (e.tasks === 0) console.log({message: "Success"});
}
lircTasks( {deg: 10, delay:100, device: "d1" }, complete ).run("increaseTemperature");
lircTasks( {deg: 20, delay:150, device: "d2" }, complete ).run("increaseTemperature");
lircTasks( {deg: 5, delay:100, device: "d3" }, complete ).run("increaseFanPower");
Related
I'm developing an app with the following node.js stack: Express/Socket.IO + React. In React I have DataTables, wherein you can search and with every keystroke the data gets dynamically updated! :)
I use Socket.IO for data-fetching, so on every keystroke the client socket emits some parameters and the server calls then the callback to return data. This works like a charm, but it is not garanteed that the returned data comes back in the same order as the client sent it.
To simulate: So when I type in 'a', the server responds with this same 'a' and so for every character.
I found the async module for node.js and tried to use the queue to return tasks in the same order it received it. For simplicity I delayed the second incoming task with setTimeout to simulate a slow performing database-query:
Declaration:
const async = require('async');
var queue = async.queue(function(task, callback) {
if(task.count == 1) {
setTimeout(function() {
callback();
}, 3000);
} else {
callback();
}
}, 10);
Usage:
socket.on('result', function(data, fn) {
var filter = data.filter;
if(filter.length === 1) { // TEST SYNCHRONOUSLY
queue.push({name: filter, count: 1}, function(err) {
fn(filter);
// console.log('finished processing slow');
});
} else {
// add some items to the queue
queue.push({name: filter, count: filter.length}, function(err) {
fn(data.filter);
// console.log('finished processing fast');
});
}
});
But the way I receive it in the client console, when I search for abc is as follows:
ab -> abc -> a(after 3 sec)
I want it to return it like this: a(after 3sec) -> ab -> abc
My thought is that the queue runs the setTimeout and then goes further and eventually the setTimeout gets fired somewhere on the event loop later on. This resulting in returning later search filters earlier then the slow performing one.
How can i solve this problem?
First a few comments, which might help clear up your understanding of async calls:
Using "timeout" to try and align async calls is a bad idea, that is not the idea about async calls. You will never know how long an async call will take, so you can never set the appropriate timeout.
I believe you are misunderstanding the usage of queue from async library you described. The documentation for the queue can be found here.
Copy pasting the documentation in here, in-case things are changed or down:
Creates a queue object with the specified concurrency. Tasks added to the queue are processed in parallel (up to the concurrency limit). If all workers are in progress, the task is queued until one becomes available. Once a worker completes a task, that task's callback is called.
The above means that the queue can simply be used to priorities the async task a given worker can perform. The different async tasks can still be finished at different times.
Potential solutions
There are a few solutions to your problem, depending on your requirements.
You can only send one async call at a time and wait for the first one to finish before sending the next one
You store the results and only display the results to the user when all calls have finished
You disregard all calls except for the latest async call
In your case I would pick solution 3 as your are searching for something. Why would you use care about the results for "a" if they are already searching for "abc" before they get the response for "a"?
This can be done by giving each request a timestamp and then sort based on the timestamp taking the latest.
SOLUTION:
Server:
exports = module.exports = function(io){
io.sockets.on('connection', function (socket) {
socket.on('result', function(data, fn) {
var filter = data.filter;
var counter = data.counter;
if(filter.length === 1 || filter.length === 5) { // TEST SYNCHRONOUSLY
setTimeout(function() {
fn({ filter: filter, counter: counter}); // return to client
}, 3000);
} else {
fn({ filter: filter, counter: counter}); // return to client
}
});
});
}
Client:
export class FilterableDataTable extends Component {
constructor(props) {
super();
this.state = {
endpoint: "http://localhost:3001",
filters: {},
counter: 0
};
this.onLazyLoad = this.onLazyLoad.bind(this);
}
onLazyLoad(event) {
var offset = event.first;
if(offset === null) {
offset = 0;
}
var filter = ''; // filter is the search character
if(event.filters.result2 != undefined) {
filter = event.filters.result2.value;
}
var returnedData = null;
this.state.counter++;
this.socket.emit('result', {
offset: offset,
limit: 20,
filter: filter,
counter: this.state.counter
}, function(data) {
returnedData = data;
console.log(returnedData);
if(returnedData.counter === this.state.counter) {
console.log('DATA: ' + JSON.stringify(returnedData));
}
}
This however does send unneeded data to the client, which in return ignores it. Somebody any idea's for further optimizing this kind of communication? For example a method to keep old data at the server and only send the latest?
Is there a way to make Node.js stream as coroutine.
Example
a Fibonacci numbers stream.
fibonacci.on('data', cb);
//The callback (cb) is like
function cb(data)
{
//something done with data here ...
}
Expectation
function* fibonacciGenerator()
{
fibonacci.on('data', cb);
//Don't know what has to be done further...
};
var fibGen = fibonacciGenerator();
fibGen.next().value(cb);
fibGen.next().value(cb);
fibGen.next().value(cb);
.
.
.
Take desired numbers from the generator. Here Fibonacci number series is just an example, in reality the stream could be of anything a file, mongodb query result, etc.
Maybe something like this
Make the 'stream.on' function as a generator.
Place yield inside the callback function.
Obtain generator object.
Call next and take the next value in stream.
Is it at-least possible if yes how and if not why? Maybe a dumb question :)
If you don't want to use a transpiler (e.g. Babel) or wait until async/await make it to Node.js, you can implement it yourself using generators and promises.
The downside is that your code must live inside a generator.
First, you can make a helper that receives a stream and returns a function that, when called, returns a promise for the next "event" of the stream (e.g. data).
function streamToPromises(stream) {
return function() {
if (stream.isPaused()) {
stream.resume();
}
return new Promise(function(resolve) {
stream.once('data', function() {
resolve.apply(stream, arguments);
stream.pause();
});
});
}
}
It pauses the stream when you're not using it, and resumes it when you ask it the next value.
Next, you have a helper that receives a generator as an argument, and every time it yields a promise, it resolves it and passes its result back to the generator.
function run(fn) {
var gen = fn();
var promise = gen.next().value;
var tick = function() {
promise.then(function() {
promise = gen.next.apply(gen, arguments).value;
}).catch(function(err) {
// TODO: Handle error.
}).then(function() {
tick();
});
}
tick();
}
Finally, you would do your own logic inside a generator, and run it with the run helper, like this:
run(function*() {
var nextFib = streamToPromises(fibonacci);
var n;
n = yield nextFib();
console.log(n);
n = yield nextFib();
console.log(n);
});
Your own generator will yield promises, pausing its execution and passing the control to the run function.
The run function will resolve the promise and pass its value back to your own generator.
That's the gist of it. You'd need to modify streamToPromises to check for other events as well (e.g. end or error).
class FibonacciGeneratorReader extends Readable {
_isDone = false;
_fibCount = null;
_gen = function *() {
let prev = 0, curr = 1, count = 1;
while (this._fibCount === -1 || count++ < this._fibCount) {
yield curr;
[prev, curr] = [curr, prev + curr];
}
return curr;
}.bind(this)();
constructor(fibCount) {
super({
objectMode: true,
read: size => {
if (this._isDone) {
this.push(null);
} else {
let fib = this._gen.next();
this._isDone = fib.done;
this.push(fib.value.toString() + '\n');
}
}
});
this._fibCount = fibCount || -1;
}
}
new FibonacciGeneratorReader(10).pipe(process.stdout);
Output should be:
1
1
2
3
5
8
13
21
34
55
I'm sorry if this is a basic question, but I am trying to implement a program in node.js that should wait for the value of a variable available trough a request to a cloud api (photon.variable()) to be 1. This variable should not be requested more than once per second. My first attempt is included in the sample code below. Despite knowing it does not work at all, I think it could be useful to show the functionality I would like to implement.
var photondata = 0;
while (photondata < 1)
{
setTimeout(function () {
photon.variable("witok", function(err, data) {
if (!err) {
console.log("data: ", data.result);
photondata = data.result;
}
else console.log(err);
})}, 1000);
}
Since you couldn't do async stuff in loops before, the traditional approach would be to create a function that adds itself to setTimeout for as long as needed, then calls some other function when it's done. You still need to do this in the browser if not using Babel.
These days, you can stop execution and wait for things to happen when using a generator function (which latest versions of Node now support). There are many libraries that will let you do this and I will advertise ours :)
CL.run(function* () {
var photondata = 0;
while (true) {
yield CL.try(function* () {
var data = yield photon.variable("witok", CL.cb());
console.log("data: ", data.result);
photondata = data.result;
}, function* (err) {
console.log(err.message);
});
if (photondata >= 1) break;
yield CL.sleep(1000);
}
// do whatever you need here
});
I want to fill each object of the result of a query, with other querys, and I want to do all in asynchronously way
Here is an example of the way how I do actually
var q = knex.select().from('sector');
q.then(function (sectores) {
var i = -1;
(function getDetalles(sectores) {
i++;
if(i < sectores.length){
knex.select().from('sector_detalle')
.where('sector_id', sectores[i].id)
.then(function (detalles) {
// this what i want to do asynchronously
sectores[i].sector_detalles = detalles;
console.log(sectores[i]);
getDetalles(sectores);
});
} else {
res.send({sucess: true, rows: sectores});
}
})(sectores);
});
I do some reserch and found this wait for all promises to finish in nodejs with bluebird
is close to what I want but don't know how to implement
I think you're looking for the map method that works on a promise for an array, and will invoke an asynchronous (promise-returning) callback for each of the items in it:
knex.select().from('sector').map(function(sector) {
return knex.select().from('sector_detalle')
.where('sector_id', sector.id)
.then(function(detalles) {
sector.sector_detalles = detalles;
// console.log(sector);
return sector;
});
}).then(function(sectores) {
res.send({sucess: true, rows: sectores});
});
I want to stop of executing of my async.queue after first task error was occurred. I need to perform several similar actions in parallel with the concurrency restriction, but stop all the actions after first error. How can I do that or what should I use instead?
Assuming you fired 5 parallel functions, each will take 5 seconds. While in 3rd second, function 1 failed. Then how you can stop the execution of the rest?
It depends of what those functions do, you may poll using setInterval. However if your question is how to stop further tasks to be pushed to the queue. You may do this:
q.push(tasks, function (err) {
if (err && !called) {
//Will prevent async to push more tasks to the queue, however please note that
//whatever pushed to the queue, it will be processed anyway.
q.kill();
//This will not allow double calling for the final callback
called = true;
//This the main process callback, the final callback
main(err, results);
}
});
Here a full working example:
var async = require('async');
/*
This function is the actual work you are trying to do.
Please note for example if you are running child processes
here, by doing q.kill you will not stop the execution
of those processes, so you need actually to keep track the
spawned processed and then kill them when you call q.kill
in 'pushCb' function. In-case of just long running function,
you may poll using setInterval
*/
function worker(task, wcb) {
setTimeout(function workerTimeout() {
if (task === 11 || task === 12 || task === 3) {
return wcb('error in processing ' + task);
}
wcb(null, task + ' got processed');
}, Math.floor(Math.random() * 100));
}
/*
This function that will push the tasks to async.queue,
and then hand them to your worker function
*/
function process(tasks, concurrency, pcb) {
var results = [], called = false;
var q = async.queue(function qWorker(task, qcb) {
worker(task, function wcb(err, data) {
if (err) {
return qcb(err); //Here how we propagate error to qcb
}
results.push(data);
qcb();
});
}, concurrency);
/*
The trick is in this function, note that checking q.tasks.length
does not work q.kill introduced in async 0.7.0, it is just setting
the drain function to null and the tasks length to zero
*/
q.push(tasks, function qcb(err) {
if (err && !called) {
q.kill();
called = true;
pcb(err, results);
}
});
q.drain = function drainCb() {
pcb(null, results);
}
}
var tasks = [];
var concurrency = 10;
for (var i = 1; i <= 20; i += 1) {
tasks.push(i);
}
process(tasks, concurrency, function pcb(err, results) {
console.log(results);
if (err) {
return console.log(err);
}
console.log('done');
});
async documentation on github page is either outdated or incorrect, while inspecting the queue object returned by async.queue() method I do not see the method kill().
Nevertheless there is a way around it. Queue object has property tasks which is an array, simply assigning a reference to an empty array did the trick for me.
queue.push( someTasks, function ( err ) {
if ( err ) queue.tasks = [];
});