I'm trying to make my MVC4-website check to see if people should be alerted with an email because they haven't done something.
I'm having a hard time figuring out how to approach this. I checked if the shared hosting platform would allow me to activate some sort of cronjob, but this is not available.
So now my idea is to perform this check on each page-request, which already seems suboptimal (because of the overhead). But I thought that with using an async it would not be in the way of people just visiting the site.
I first tried to do this in the Application_BeginRequest method in Global.asax, but then it gets called multiple times per page-request, so that didn't work.
Next I found that I can make a Global Filter which executes on OnResultExecuted, which would seemed promising, but still it's no go.
The problem I get there is that I'm using MVCMailer to send the mails, and when I execute it I get the error: {"Value cannot be null.\r\nParameter name: httpContext"}
This probably means that mailer needs the context.
The code I now have in my global filter is the following:
public override void OnResultExecuted(ResultExecutedContext filterContext)
{
base.OnResultExecuted(filterContext);
HandleEmptyProfileAlerts();
}
private void HandleEmptyProfileAlerts()
{
new Thread(() =>
{
bool active = false;
new UserMailer().AlertFirst("bla#bla.com").Send();
DB db = new DB();
DateTime CutoffDate = DateTime.Now.AddDays(-5);
var ProfilesToAlert = db.UserProfiles.Where(x => x.CreatedOn < CutoffDate && !x.ProfileActive && x.AlertsSent.Where(y => y.AlertType == "First").Count() == 0).ToList();
foreach (UserProfile up in ProfilesToAlert)
{
if (active)
{
new UserMailer().AlertFirst(up.UserName).Send();
up.AlertsSent.Add(new UserAlert { AlertType = "First", DateSent = DateTime.Now, UserProfileID = up.UserId });
}
else
System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine(up.UserName);
}
db.SaveChanges();
}).Start();
}
So my question is, am I going about this the right way, and if so, how can I make sure that MVCMailer gets the right context?
The usual way to do this kind of thing is to have a single background thread that periodically does the checks you're interested in.
You would start the thread from Application_Start(). It's common to use a database to queue and store work items, although it can also be done in memory if it's better for your app.
Related
Here's my problem : I'm doing a background work, where I parse some JSON and write some Objects into my Realm, and in the main thread I try to update the UI (reloading the TableView, it's linked to an array of Object). But when I reload the UI, my tableView doesn't update, like my Realm wasn't updated. I have the reload my View to see the updates. Here's my code :
if (Realm().objects(Objects).filter("...").count > 0)
{
var results = Realm().objects(Objects) // I get the existing objects but it's empty
tableView.reloadData()
}
request(.GET, url).responseJSON() {
(request, response, data, error) in
let priority = DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(priority, 0)) {
// Parsing my JSON
Realm().write {
Realm().add(object)
}
dispatch_sync(dispatch_get_main_queue()) {
// Updating the UI
if (Realm().objects(Objects).filter("...").count > 0)
{
results = Realm().objects(Objects) // I get the existing objects but it's empty
tableView.reloadData()
}
}
}
}
I have to do something bad with my threads, but I couldn't find what. Can someone know what's wrong?
Thank you for your answer!
such workflow makes more sense to me for your case:
let priority = DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(priority, 0)) {
// Parsing my JSON
Realm().write {
Realm().add(object)
dispatch_sync(dispatch_get_main_queue()) {
// Updating the UI
if (Realm().objects(Objects).filter("...").count > 0)
{
results = Realm().objects(Objects) // I get the existing objects but it's empty
tableView.reloadData()
}
}
}
}
NOTE: you have a problem with timing in your original workflow: the UI might be updated before the write's block executed, that is why your UI looks abandoned; this idea above would be a more synchronised way between tasks, according their performance's schedule.
You are getting some new objects and storing them into "results".
How is tableView.reloadData () supposed to access that variable? You must change something that your tableView delegate will access.
PS. Every dispatch_sync () is a potential deadlock. You are using one that is absolutely pointless. Avoid dispatch_sync unless you have a very, very good reason to use it.
I have got a question related to CQRS in data centric processes. Let me explain it better.
Consider we have a SOAP/JSON/whatever service, which transfers some data to our system during an integration process. It is said that in CQRS every state change must be achieved by the means of commands (or events if Event Sourcing is used).
When it comes to our integrating process we have got a great deal of structured DATA instead of a set of commands/events and I am wondering how to actually process those data.
// Some Façade service
class SomeService
{
$_someService;
public function __construct(SomeService $someService)
{
$this->_someService = $someService;
}
// Magic function to make it all good and
public function process($dto)
{
// if I get it correctly here I need somehow
// convert incoming dto (xml/json/array/etc)
// to a set of commands, i. e
$this->someService->doSomeStuff($dto->someStuffData);
// SomeStuffChangedEvent raised here
$this->someService->doSomeMoreStuff($dtom->someMoreStuffData);
// SomeMoreStuffChangedEvent raised here
}
}
My question is whether my suggestion is suitable in the given case or there may be some better methods to do what I need. Thank you in advance.
Agreed, a service may have a different interface. If you create a rest-api to update employees, you may want to provide an UpdateEmployeeMessage which contains everything that can change. In a CRUD-kind of service, this message would probably mirror the database.
Inside of the service, you can split the message into commands:
public void Update(UpdateEmployeeMessage message)
{
bus.Send(new UpdateName
{
EmployeeId = message.EmployeeId,
First = message.FirstName,
Last = message.LastName,
});
bus.Send(new UpdateAddress
{
EmployeeId = message.EmployeeId,
Street = message.Street,
ZipCode = message.ZipCode,
City = message.City
});
bus.Send(new UpdateContactInfo
{
EmployeeId = message.EmployeeId,
Phone = message.Phone,
Email = message.Email
});
}
Or you could call the aggregate directly:
public void Update(UpdateEmployeeMessage message)
{
var employee = repository.Get<Employee>(message.EmployeeId);
employee.UpdateName(message.FirstName, message.LastName);
employee.UpdateAddress(message.Street, message.ZipCode, message.City);
employee.UpdatePhone(message.Phone);
employee.UpdateEmail(message.Email);
repository.Save(employee);
}
I have a simple IBackgroundTask implementation that performs a query and then either performs an insert or one or more updates depending on whether a specific item exists or not. However, the updates are not persisted, and I don't understand why. New items are created just as expected.
The content item I'm updating has a CommonPart and I've tried authenticating as a valid user. I've also tried flushing the content manager at the end of the Sweep method. What am I missing?
This is my Sweep, slightly edited for brevity:
public void Sweep()
{
// Authenticate as the site's super user
var superUser = _membershipService.GetUser(_orchardServices.WorkContext.CurrentSite.SuperUser);
_authenticationService.SetAuthenticatedUserForRequest(superUser);
// Create a dummy "Person" content item
var item = _contentManager.New("Person");
var person = item.As<PersonPart>();
if (person == null)
{
return;
}
person.ExternalId = Random.Next(1, 10).ToString();
person.FirstName = GenerateFirstName();
person.LastName = GenerateLastName();
// Check if the person already exists
var matchingPersons = _contentManager
.Query<PersonPart, PersonRecord>(VersionOptions.AllVersions)
.Where(record => record.ExternalId == person.ExternalId)
.List().ToArray();
if (!matchingPersons.Any())
{
// Insert new person and quit
_contentManager.Create(item, VersionOptions.Draft);
return;
}
// There are at least one matching person, update it
foreach (var updatedPerson in matchingPersons)
{
updatedPerson.FirstName = person.FirstName;
updatedPerson.LastName = person.LastName;
}
_contentManager.Flush();
}
Try to add _contentManager.Publish(updatedPerson). If you do not want to publish, but just to save, you don't need to do anything more, as changes in Orchard as saved automatically unless the ambient transaction is aborted. The call to Flush is not necessary at all. This is the case both during a regular request and on a background task.
Ok, I'm working on my final dilemna for my project. The project is an IPv4 endpoint updater for TunnelBroker's IPv6 tunnel. I have everything working, except for the timer. It works, however if the user disables the "automatic update" and reenables it, the application crashes. I need the timer to be on an thread outside of the EDT (in such a way that it can be destroyed and recreated when the user unchecks/checks the automatic update feature or changes the amount of time between updates).
What I'm pasting here is the code for the checkbox that handles automatic updates, and the timer class. Hopefully this will be enough to get an answer on how to do this (I'm thinking either it needs to be a worker, or use multi-threading--even though only one timer will be active).
private void jCheckBox1ItemStateChanged(java.awt.event.ItemEvent evt) {
// TODO add your handling code here:
// if selected, then run timer for auto update
// set time textbox to setEditable(true) and get the time from it.
// else cancel timer. Try doing this on different
// class to prevent errors from happening on reselect.
int updateAutoTime = 0;
if (jCheckBox1.isSelected())
{
updateAutoTime = Integer.parseInt(jTextField4.getText())*60*1000;
if (updateAutoTime < 3600000)
{
updateAutoTime = 3600000;
jTextField4.setText(new Integer(updateAutoTime/60/1000).toString());
}
updateTimer.scheduleAtFixedRate(new TimerTask() {
public void run()
{
// Task here ...
if (jRadioButton1.isSelected())
{
newIPAddress = GetIP.getIPAddress();
}
else
{
newIPAddress = jTextField3.getText();
}
strUsername = jTextField1.getText();
jPasswordField1.selectAll();
strPassword = jPasswordField1.getSelectedText().toString();
strTunnelID = jTextField2.getText();
strIPAddress = newIPAddress;
if (!newIPAddress.equals(oldIPAddress))
{
//fire the tunnelbroker updater class
updateIP.setIPAddress(strUsername, strPassword, strTunnelID, strIPAddress);
oldIPAddress = newIPAddress;
jLabel8.setText(newIPAddress);
serverStatus = updateIP.getStatus().toString();
jLabel6.setText(serverStatus);
}
else
{
serverStatus = "No IP Update was needed.";
jLabel6.setText(serverStatus);
}
}
}, 0, updateAutoTime);
}
else
{
updateTimer.cancel();
System.out.println("Timer cancelled");
System.out.println("Purged {updateTimer.purge()} tasks.");
}
}
As I mentioned, this works once. But if the user deselects the checkbox, it won't work again. And the user can't change the value in jTextField4 after they select the checkbox.
So, what I'm looking for is this:
How to make this so that user can select and deselect the checkbox as they want (even if it's multiple times in a row).
How to make this so the user can change the value in jTextField4, and have it automatically cancel the current timer, and start a new one with the new value (I haven't done anything with the jTextField4 at all, so I'll have to create an event to cover it later).
Thanks, and have a great day:)
Patrick.
Perhaps this task would be better suited to a javax.swing.Timer. See Timer.restart() for details.
Note that Timer is relatively inaccurate over long time periods. One way to account for that is to have it repeat frequently but perform it's assigned task only one a certain time has been reached or passed.
Would I be able to wrap everything in the "task" portion of the call to Swing Timer, or do I have to create another class that handles the task?
You might want to wrap the grunt work in a SwingWorker to ensure the EDT is not blocked.
..I'm assuming that I would have to create the timer as a class-level declaration .. correct?
Yes, that is what I was thinking.
In my controller, I have a before() function that calls parent::before() and then does some additional processing once the parent returns. based on a specific condition, I want to "save" the original request and pass execution to a specific action. Here is my before() function.
public function before() {
parent::before();
$this->uri = Request::Instance()->uri;
$match = ORM::factory('survey_tester')
->where('eid','=',$this->template->user->samaccountname)
->find();
if (!$match->loaded()) {
self::action_tester("add",$this->template->user);
}
}
And the action that is being called..
public function action_tester($op=null,$user=null) {
$testers = ORM::factory('survey_tester')->find_all();
$tester = array();
$this->template->title = 'Some new title';
$this->template->styles = array('assets/css/survey/survey.css' => 'screen');
$this->template->scripts = array('assets/js/survey/tester.js');
$tester['title'] = $this->template->title;
$tester['user'] = $this->template->user;
switch ($op) {
case "add":
$tester = ORM::factory('survey_tester');
$tester->name = $user->displayname;
$tester->email = $user->mail;
$tester->division = $user->division;
$tester->eid = $user->samaccountname;
if ($tester->save()) {
$this->template->content = new View('pages/survey/tester_add', $admin);
} else {
$this->template->content = new View('pages/survey/tester_error', $admin);
}
break;
default:
break;
}
}
This all seems to work fine. This is designed to prompt the user for a specific piece of information that is not provided by $user (populated by LDAP) if this is the first time they are hitting the controller for any reason.
The problem is the views are not rendering. Instead control passes back to whatever action was originally requested. This controller is called survey. If i browse to http://my.site.com/survey and login with new user info, the record gets written and i get the action_index views instead of my action_tester views.
I cannot figure out what I am doing wrong here. Any ideas will be appreciated. Thank you.
EDIT: I managed to get this working (sort-of) by using $this->request->action = 'tester'; but I'm not sure how to add/set new params for the request yet.
The issue is that you are calling your method (action_tester), but then Kohana is still going to call the original action after the before method is called, which is going to change the response content overwriting the changed made in action_tester().
You can change the action being called (after before is called) inside your before() method:
$this->request->action('action_tester');
After the before method is called, it should then call the new Action (action_tester) rather than the old one, but then you need to do something about the way you are passing your parameters then.
Or you could just redirect the request upon some condition:
if($something) {
$this->request->redirect('controller/tester');
}
This doesn't seem like a nice way to do it anyway.