I'm trying to programmatically remove something from my S3 bucket, and I'm using Minio to facilitate it.
When I run minioClient.removeObject() like so:
minioClient.removeObject(RemoveObjectArgs.builder().bucket(minioBucketName).object(key).build());
the function returns void. So I'm unsure how to validate that my object was deleted without sending an additional request off to see if it exists (i feel like this is one step too many).
If the deletion is successful, the object is gone. If the deletion is unsuccessful (maybe provided the wrong key) I'm not really told it was unsuccessful. It just attempts to do it and that's the last I hear about the operation.
Anyone have any ideas?
The removeObjects return Iterable<Result<DeleteError>> - Lazy iterator contains object removal status. You can refer this code and check for error if present .
List<DeleteObject> objects = new LinkedList<>();
objects.add(new DeleteObject("my-objectname1"));
objects.add(new DeleteObject("my-objectname2"));
objects.add(new DeleteObject("my-objectname3"));
Iterable<Result<DeleteError>> results =
minioClient.removeObjects(
RemoveObjectsArgs.builder().bucket("my-bucketname").objects(objects).build());
for (Result<DeleteError> result : results) {
DeleteError error = result.get();
System.out.println(
"Error in deleting object " + error.objectName() + "; " + error.message());
}
Related
I'm trying to use the following Lua script using C# StackExchange library:
private const string LuaScriptToExecute = #"
local current
current = redis.call(""incr"", KEYS[1])
if current == 1 then
redis.call(""expire"", KEYS[1], KEYS[2])
return 1
else
return current
end
Whenever i'm evaluating the script "as a string", it works properly:
var incrementValue = await Database.ScriptEvaluateAsync(LuaScriptToExecute,
new RedisKey[] { key, ttlInSeconds });
If I understand correctly, each time I invoke the ScriptEvaluateAsync method, the script is transmitted to the redis server which is not very effective.
To overcome this, I tried using the "prepared script" approach, by running:
_setCounterWithExpiryScript = LuaScript.Prepare(LuaScriptToExecute);
...
...
var incrementValue = await Database.ScriptEvaluateAsync(_setCounterWithExpiryScript,
new[] { key, ttlInSeconds });
Whenever I try to use this approach, I receive the following error:
ERR Error running script (call to f_7c891a96328dfc3aca83aa6fb9340674b54c4442): #user_script:3: #user_script: 3: Lua redis() command arguments must be strings or integers
What am I doing wrong?
What is the right approach in using "prepared" LuaScripts that receive dynamic parameters?
If I look in the documentation: no idea.
If I look in the unit test on github it looks really easy.
(by the way, is your ttlInSeconds really RedisKey and not RedisValue? You are accessing it thru KEYS[2] - shouldnt that be ARGV[1]? Anyway...)
It looks like you should rewrite your script to use named parameters and not arguments:
private const string LuaScriptToExecute = #"
local current
current = redis.call(""incr"", #myKey)
if current == 1 then
redis.call(""expire"", #myKey, #ttl)
return 1
else
return current
end";
// We should load scripts to whole redis cluster. Even when we dont have any.
// In that case, there will be only one EndPoint, one iteration etc...
_myScripts = _redisMultiplexer.GetEndPoints()
.Select(endpoint => _redisMultiplexer.GetServer(endpoint))
.Where(server => server != null)
.Select(server => lua.Load(server))
.ToArray();
Then just execute it with anonymous class as parameter:
for(var setCounterWithExpiryScript in _myScripts)
{
var incrementValue = await Database.ScriptEvaluateAsync(
setCounterWithExpiryScript,
new {
myKey: (RedisKey)key, // or new RedisKey(key) or idk
ttl: (RedisKey)ttlInSeconds
}
)// .ConfigureAwait(false); // ? ;-)
// when ttlInSeconds is value and not key, just dont cast it to RedisKey
/*
var incrementValue = await
Database.ScriptEvaluateAsync(
setCounterWithExpiryScript,
new {
myKey: (RedisKey)key,
ttl: ttlInSeconds
}
).ConfigureAwait(false);*/
}
Warning:
Please note that Redis is in full-stop mode when executing scripts. Your script looks super-easy (you sometimes save one trip to redis (when current != 1) so i have a feeling that this script will be counter productive in greater-then-trivial scale. Just do one or two calls from c# and dont bother with this script.
First of all, Jan's comment above is correct.
The script line that updated the key's TTL should be redis.call(""expire"", KEYS[1], ARGV[1]).
Regarding the issue itself, after searching for similar issues in RedisStackExchange's Github, I found that Lua scripts do not work really well in cluster mode.
Fortunately, it seems that "loading the scripts" isn't really necessary.
The ScriptEvaluateAsync method works properly in cluster mode and is sufficient (caching-wise).
More details can be found in the following Github issue.
So at the end, using ScriptEvaluateAsync without "preparing the script" did the job.
As a side note about Jan's comment above that this script isn't needed and can be replaced with two C# calls, it is actually quite important since this operation should be atomic as it is a "Rate limiter" pattern.
//LoginResult loginResult = context.Login("user","pass");
//if (loginResult.Code != ErrorCode.OK)
//Get Schema
//Insert
//Add fields values
//....
O301000.Actions.CopyOrder,
O301000.Actions.Save,
O301000.OrderSummary.OrderNbr
Submitresult = O301000.context.Submit(cmds);
How do I know if there was an error when inserting/saving the Order (or any other file)?
I just can find a value 'Submitresult.ErrorCode' like in the Login Result.
Mean while a have solve the issue, when inserting, by looking for the 'O301000.OrderSummary.OrderNbr' not null value.
But that does not works when updating a record.
You should always use a
try{Submitresult = O301000.context.Submit(cmds);}
catch(Exception ex){Console.WriteLine(ex.Message);}
when making these calls. If the SOAP calls returns an error, than the message is passed to the Exception object.
I’m trying to programmatically delete once-conflicted documents that are no longer conflicted, but still showing as duplicates in Raven.
E.g. if I query an index on an entity’s property I know to be unique I get two documents back
Document A with URL entities/12345
Document B with URL entities/12345/conflicts/54321
My goal is to delete Document B.
Loading document A into a session does not throw a ConflictException, as it is not flagged as being conflicted any more. I can delete document B via the web UI, but can’t do it via code as yet, as I can only see it in transient context via a stream.
Here’s some sample code which explains what I am getting back from various client calls when trying to resolve this…
using (var enumerator = session.Advanced.Stream(query))
{
while (enumerator.MoveNext()))
{
var entity = enumerator.Current.Document;
// This attempt to get the id returns null
var id = session.Advanced.GetDocumentId(entity);
// Throws InvalidOperationException
var url = session.Advanced.GetDocumentUrl(entity);
// Returns null, so can’t use session to delete
session.Load<TEntity>(entity);
// Does nothing, with string ID of entity
session.Advanced.Defer(new DeleteCommandData { Key = entity.Id.ToString() });
// Does nothing
session.Advanced.DocumentStore.DatabaseCommands.Delete(entity.Id.ToString(), null);
}
session.SaveChanges();
}
Any help would be gratefully received!
I found that using enumerator.Current.Key in the example above gave me the key to the document I was after.
I have a db that stores exception messages.
I would like to create a query that gets these exceptions but instead of dumping huge amounts of text i would prefer it to be "on demand".
I figured putting the exception into an anchor tag like so and then reading the message when needed by mousing over it would work... apparently not.
var logsForErrors = (from error in Logs
select new {
error = LINQPad.Util.RawHtml("<a title='"+ error.Exception+"'></a>"),
errorDate = error.Date,
errorMessage = error.Message
}).Take(10);
logsForErrors.Dump();
This is throwing an exception (lol) - "Cannot parse custom HTML: "
Encoding the exception message
...RawHtml("<a title='"+ Uri.EscapeDataString(error.Exception)+"'></a>")
Message Could not translate expression 'RawHtml((("h__TransparentIdentifier0.error.Exception)) +
"'>"))' into SQL and could not treat it as a local expression.
will generate a new error
Any ideas? - I am open to alternative solutions to this also.
I just want a container for the message instead of it just dumping right into the output as it it so huge!.
Thanks,
Kohan
Have you tried using the "Results to DataGrids" mode in the recent betas? It might do just what you need without having to write anything else.
Edit: your error was probably due to emitting HTML without escaping the text. The easiest solution is to call Util.RawHtml with an XElement instead of a string. You could write an extension method that does what you want like this:
public static class Extensions
{
public static object Tooltipize (this string data)
{
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty (data) || data.Length < 20) return data;
return Util.RawHtml (new XElement ("span", new XAttribute ("title", data), data.Substring (0, 20)));
}
}
Put this into My Extensions and you can use it from any query.
We're using NHibernate in a project that gets data out of the database and writes reports to a separate system. In my scenario, a patient will usually, but not always, have a next appointment scheduled when the report gets written. The query below gets the next appointment data, to include in the report.
private NextFollowup GetNextFollowup(int EncounterID)
{
try
{
NextFollowup myNextF = new NextFollowup();
IQuery myNextQ = this.Session.GetNamedQuery("GetNextFollowup").SetInt32("EncounterID", EncounterID);
myNextF = myNextQ.UniqueResult<NextFollowup>();
return myNextF;
}
catch (Exception e)
{
throw e;
}
}
Here's the question:
Usually this works fine, as there is a single result when an appointment is scheduled. However, in the cases where there is no next followup, I get the error that there is no unique result. I don't really want to throw an exception in this case, I want to return the empty object. If I were to get a list instead of a UniqueResult, I'd get an empty list in the situations where there is no next followup. Is there a better way to handle the situation of "when there is a value, there will be only one" than using a list in the HQL query?
This may work:
private NextFollowup GetNextFollowup(int encounterID)
{
IQuery query = this.Session.GetNamedQuery("GetNextFollowup").SetInt32("EncounterID", encounterID);
// nextFollowup will be either the next instance, or null if none exist in the db.
var nextFollowup = query.Enumerable<NextFollowup>().SingleOrDefault();
return nextFollowup;
}
Note: updated naming to follow Microsoft best practices
The try catch is not serving any purpose here except to loose the stack trace if there is an exception so I've removed it.
If you want to return a new NextFollowup if none exist, you can update the query line to:
var nextFollowup = query.Enumerable<NextFollowup>().SingleOrDefault() ?? new NextFollowup();