What is the best way to deal with document locking in xPages? Currently we use the standard soft locking and it seems to work fairly well in the Notes client.
In xPages I considered using the "Allow Document Locking" feature but I am worried that people would close the browser without using a close or save button then the lock would never be cleared.
Is there a way to clear the locks when the user has closed his session? I am seeing no such event.
Or is there an easier way to have document locking?
I realize I can clear the locks using an agent but when to run it? I would think sometime a night then I am fairly certain the lock should no longer really be active.
Here is code I'm using:
/* DOCUMENT LOCKING */
/*
use the global object "documentLocking" with:
.lock(doc) -> locks a document
.unlock(doc) -> unlocks a document
.isLocked(doc) -> returns true/false
.lockedBy(doc) -> returns name of lock holder
.lockedDT(doc) -> returns datetime stamp of lock
*/
function ynDocumentLocking() {
/*
a lock is an entry in the application scope
with key = "$ynlock_"+UNID
containing an array with
(0) = username of lock holder
(1) = timestamp of lock
*/
var lockMaxAge = 60 * 120; // in seconds, default 120 min
this.getUNID = function(v) {
if (!v) return null;
if (typeof v == "NotesXspDocument") return v.getDocument().getUniversalID();
if (typeof v == "string") return v;
return v.getUniversalID();
}
/* puts a lock into application scope */
this.lock = function(doc:NotesDocument) {
var a = new Array(1);
a[0] = #UserName();
a[1] = #Now();
applicationScope.put("$ynlock_"+this.getUNID(doc), a);
// print("SET LOCK "+"$ynlock_"+doc.getUniversalID()+" / "+a[0]+" / "+a[1]);
}
/* removes a lock from the application scope */
this.unlock = function(doc:NotesDocument) {
applicationScope.put("$ynlock_"+this.getUNID(doc), null);
//print("REMOVED LOCK for "+"$ynlock_"+doc.getUniversalID());
}
this.isLocked = function(doc:NotesDocument) {
try {
//print("ISLOCKED for "+"$ynlock_"+doc.getUniversalID());
// check how old the lock is
var v = applicationScope.get("$ynlock_"+this.getUNID(doc));
if (!v) {
//print("no lock found -> return false");
return false;
}
// if lock holder is the current user, treat as not locked
if (v[0] == #UserName()) {
//print("lock holder = user -> not locked");
return false;
}
var dLock:NotesDateTime = session.createDateTime(v[1]);
var dNow:NotesDateTime = session.createDateTime(#Now());
// diff is in seconds
//print("time diff="+dNow.timeDifference(dLock)+" dLock="+v[1]+" now="+#Now());
// if diff > x seconds then remove lock, it not locked
if (dNow.timeDifference(dLock) > lockMaxAge) {
// print("LOCK is older than maxAge "+lockMaxAge+" -> returning false");
return false;
}
//print("return true");
return true;
// TODO: check how old the lock is
} catch (e) {
print("ynDocumentLocking.isLocked: "+e);
}
}
this.lockedBy = function(doc:NotesDocument) {
try {
var v = applicationScope.get("$ynlock_"+this.getUNID(doc));
if (!v) return "";
//print("ISLOCKEDBY "+"$ynlock_"+doc.getUniversalID()+" = "+v[0]);
return v[0];
} catch (e) {
print("ynDocumentLocking.isLockedBy: "+e);
}
}
this.lockedDT = function(doc:NotesDocument) {
try {
var v = applicationScope.get("$ynlock_"+this.getUNID(doc));
if (!v) return "";
return v[1];
} catch (e) {
print("ynDocumentLocking.isLockedBy: "+e);
}
}
}
var documentLocking = new ynDocumentLocking();
You could take a page from the way webDAV works. There a servlet manages a "lock-list" of locked documents. The locks automatically expire after 10 minutes. Locks can be renewed or terminated trough calls. So when you edit a document you would request a lock, then kick off a CSJS timer that calls the relocking function every 8 minutes (so you have some margin for error) and the postSave calls the unlock (unless you stay in edit mode).
If a user closes the browser after 10 minutes the document is automatically unlocked. Since you are free how to implement the locking function, you can capture user/location and use that information in the "lock failed" display (you event could push that further and let the original author know about it or do some "retry" option.
It isn't simple to implement, but once implemented simple to use
ApplicationScope may be a good place to capture "locked" documents. After all, for applicationScope to expire, all users' sessions have to have expired, so anyone with the page open will not be able to save anyway.
Maybe capture UNID, user and time when someone edits a doc. Clear the value when the document is saved. Bear in mind that the user might close the browser etc. I've been discussing this approach internally and if we end up building this I would look to add it to OpenNTF. But we're unlikely to get onto it within the next month.
I Prefer to use a solution similar to Mr. Withers' answer. The main issue is how to deal with the unwanted and dreaded back button. It is easy to lock a document when it is opened, but there are many ways to close the XPage, and the user is not limited to just the navigation you provide but also can, as he stated, close the browser completely, use the back button, etc. So, the best way that I can think of is to create a few java objects which we will use in the application and session scopes.
The first step is to create a "LockedDocument" class. As we know, the documents are not serializable and we do not want to save the document itself in this object, we want to save the UNID and the time it was saved. We want to do it this way so that we can manage to clear the object after a given time (like thirty minutes to an hour). This class should also implement the comparable interface in order to sort the collection by this time so that the oldest documents are first and the newest documents are last.
Next we create another class that holds a list or a map with these LockedDocuments. This class must also have a thread (implement Runnable) that will check all documents every five minutes or so, I did not test this yet, but it should work). Any document that was locked thirty to sixty minutes ago (predefined) will be unlocked (deleted from the list). It is important that the list be sorted as described above and that the loop is "broken" when a time less than the locktime is reached in order to prevent unwanted processing.
The next step would be to include the user specific list in the sessionScope. This list is the LockedDocuments that this current user has. It is set when the user changes the document's status to editable, and is checked before the document is set to editable to prevent one document from being opened in multiple tabs by the same user. The lock is once again checked onquerysave(). Once a main page is opened, the lock is automatically released. The onquerysave() must also check to make sure the documents UNID is in the sessionScope list, or if the document is new before allowing a save.
quick recap
Any UNID saved in the applicationScope LockedDocumentList would not be editable by anyone unless it exists in their own sessionScope list.
It is possible to warn a user that their lockedTime is approaching and reset the timer.
The class containing a list with the locked documents must be a singleton
There are probably ways to improve this answer, and I am sure I am missing something. It is just a thought.
There might be a better way to handle this, but it is the best I found.
You can remove the Domino lock in window.onunload event:
window.onunload = function(){
dojo.xhrGet(...
}
No need to reinvent the wheel.
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.
This may be a vary bad idea, or a possible solution that we have to a database concurrency problem.
We have a method that is called to do an update of a mongo record. We are seeing some concurrency problems - process A reads the record, process B reads the record, process A makes mods and saves the record, process makes B mods and saves the record. Because B reads after A, before A writes, it doesn't know about the changes A made, and we lose the data from A.
I'm wondering if we could not use a database semaphore, basically a field on the collection, that is a boolean. If we read the record at the start of the method, and the field is true, it's being edited. At that point, re-call the method using process.nexttick(), with the same data. Otherwise, set the semaphore, and carry on.
There would still be a bit of time between the read and the save, but it should be/could be faster than what we are doing now.
Be something like this. Any thoughts, anyone done anything like this? Will it even work?
function remove_source(service_id,session, next)
{
var User = Mongoose.model("User");
/* get the user, based on the session user id */
User.findById(session.me,function(err,user_info)
{
if (user_info.semaphore === true)
{
process.nextTick(remove_source(service_id,session,next));
}
else
{
user_info.semaphore = true;
user_info.save(function(err,user_new)
{
if (err) next(err,user_new);
else continue_on(null,user_new);
});
}
function continue_on(user_new)
{
etc.......
}
Edit: New Code:
The function now looks as follows. I'm doing individual updates to the arrays. This of course means that I now have the possibility, if the transaction fails between the first and second transactions, of having data out of sync. I'm thinking that I could simply resave the user object that I retrieved on entry into the function, overwriting my changes. I don't know if Mongoose/Mongo will not do the save if I have not changed that object, will have to try and see. Any more thoughts?
var User = Mongoose.model("User");
/* get the user, based on the session user id */
User.findById(session.me,function(err,user_info)
{
if (err)
{
next(err,user_info,null);
return;
}
if (!user_info || user_info.length === 0)
{
next(_e("ACCOUNT_NOT_FOUND"),"user_id: " + session.me);
return;
}
var source_service_info = _.where(user_info.credentials, {"source_service_id": service_id});
var source_service = source_service_info.source_service;
User.findByIdAndUpdate(session.me,{$pull: {"credentials": {"source_service_id": service_id}}},{},function(err,user_credential_removed)
{
if (err)
{
next(err,user_info,null);
return;
}
User.findByIdAndUpdate(session.me,{$pull: {"criteria": {"source_service": source_service}}},{},function(err,user_criteria_removed)
{
if (err)
{
next(err,user_info,null);
return;
}
else
{
next(null,user_criteria_removed);
}
});
});
});
};
The problem with your approach is that it just shortens the time during which the data could be read by a second process, it doesn't eliminate the problem.
The solution to this would be to set your semaphore in the same action as the read. I haven't used Mongoose, but in MongoDB you can use findAndModify to only return a User record if the semaphore is false, and if it is false, in one atomic operation, set the semaphore to true.
If you don't want to use findAndModify, you could first do an update that sets the semaphore true (or to some specific ID value so you know that it is YOUR semaphore) only if the semaphore is not set. Then, if that process succeeds, you could do the find (perhaps passing your semaphore ID as a criterion in the find). However, findAndModify, if it is available in Mongoose, would do that in one step.
A variation of that is described here: http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/tutorial/isolate-sequence-of-operations/ where you do a form of optimistic locking that checks that the old values are unchanged before changing them to the new values.
There is a variation on this that uses a separate table to simulate a two-phase commit: http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/tutorial/perform-two-phase-commits/
Edited: Upon interchange below, this seems to be a schema and updating issue. Question may become something like: I have some entries in an array, and the ordinal index to those entries relates to some other arrays as well. How do I perform deletes without having mismatches?
Three off the top possibilities occur, depending on frequency in the real world vs QA test scenarios.
Consider adding a deleted flag but keeping the records in the same order. If someone toggles, reuse the same record, but fix however you want.
Use an associative array (JS object) for each element (not a feature from relational world.) If you need an order, add an array that lists the keys in order. Both have syntax to update without touching anything other that what has changed, and will not overwrite changes to different fields.
Use an associative array where the keys are numbers. Actual deletion won't hurt retrieval.
stuff = {}
stuff[1] = {some:'details'}
stuff[2] = {some:'details2'}
Was
1) Are you making changes to the same field? Make that into an array, and push changes, and pop the latest to read the current value.
2) Are you changing different fields, but data is getting trounced? Then there is better syntax to use for the updating. you can update field by field.
$set: { 'fielda': 'valuea' }
won't lose edits on previous fields
3) change your schema
4) change the timing on the processes so they don't overlap. Or so they do so in smaller subsets, that you can manage to prevent from overlapping.
I'd like to know, just out of interest, what multiple processes are needed to make updates on the same record? I don't work with anything that looks like that.
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.
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.