Does anyone know how "real-time" I can expect to receive notifications from the Podio Push Service? Should I reliably expect notifications on the order of seconds, or minutes?
I am wondering, because Podio Webhooks might not be real-time enough for my purposes, so I'm looking for another solution. From Podio:
Call to web hooks are put on our low priority queue, meaning that they will usually be invoked immedidately, but in peak times there can be a delay of a few seconds or even minutes. On very rare occasions a webhook call can be delayed as much as 30 minutes
From my experience you could normally expect notifications to show up immediately or within a few seconds. The delay (if any) has never been an issue for me.
Related
Hello I am trying to create a simple push-notification system similar to this common use case:
1. The user gets a chest and can either watch an ad to skip the wait time or wait one hours for the chest to open. The app sends an upstream request which sets up a downstream push notification that shall be delivered in one hour to let the user know the chest is ready.
2a. The user then waits an hour, gets a push notification (outside of the app) to open their chest and they do!
or
2b. They wait 20 minutes then decide to watch the ad. The app sends an upstream request which cancels the pending push notification which would have otherwise been delivered in 40 minutes.
Okay awesome so that is the problem and I am having a hard time understanding how to do this. I have looked over the documentation for each of these programs but they seem designed for downstream push notifications. It just seems odd there is no built-in support for this use case. It seems like such a common use case.
I so far found 3 solutions that will integrate into my cross-platform Unity setup and provide services for free or super-cheap:
Amazon Simple Notification Service (SNS)
Google Firebase Cloud Messaging (FCM)
OneSignal
Amazon seems to group clients into "Topics" so I guess I would be setting up a one-device-topic and essentially. I can subscribe and unsubscribe from them but it doesn't seem to support a topic with a 60 minute delay.
2a. Create a topic: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/sns/latest/dg/sns-tutorial-create-topic.html (it would just include the current device)
2b. Subscribe to it
2c. Send a message to it https://docs.aws.amazon.com/sns/latest/dg/sns-tutorial-publish-message-with-attributes.html
So basically I can add attributes to my message but it would seem I need to implement the server-side code to read a delay attribute then somehow queue a message for delay. Maybe I am missing something?
For Firebase I pretty much see the same thing as Amazon. There are topics https://firebase.google.com/docs/cloud-messaging/android/topic-messaging and a means to send upstream messages https://firebase.google.com/docs/cloud-messaging/android/send-with-console but with the messages I don't see anyway here to get the time delay https://firebase.google.com/docs/cloud-messaging/unity/topic-messaging I see conditions towards the bottom of that article but I don't know if it is meant for this use case.
OneSignal has the easiest to scroll-through API. I'll refer to some strings that you can CTRL-F by using the format ("Create Notif") because everything is on this one page: https://documentation.onesignal.com/reference
So basically I can ("Send to Specific Devices") which I guess would be the sending device, then I can ("Schedule notification for future delivery.") using the send_after parameter. And finally, if need be, I can ("Cancel notification"). So this appears to be everything I need. I'm currently looking at this option and trying to figure out how to actually get this working.
So there is my progress over the last few hours researching each of these options. I am hoping you can help me better understand how I may be misunderstanding the above options as this seems to me a very common use-case. Perhaps I am just not googling the question correctly. Any help appreciated.
Whenever there's a likelihood that you'll need to cancel a significant percent of the notifications you send, you should use local notifications. That way you can easily schedule and cancel them locally without making any network requests. Also, this solution works for offline devices which is great for games (played on planes, etc...)
I'm getting 406 Not Acceptable as response when I try to send a push notification, I understand the problem and I've fixed the code that was causing it but I'm not quite sure how to make the error go away, the server responds with 406 to every one of my requests for push notifications. Will this happen by itself after a period of time or? Thanks.
This isn't an error you should (or could) do something about. It just means that you sent too many notifications to the same device or too many notifications per second, and you have to wait until you can send more.
406 Not Acceptable
This error occurs when an unauthenticated cloud service has reached the per-day throttling limit for a subscription, or when a cloud service (authenticated or unauthenticated) has sent too many notifications per second. The cloud service can try to re-send the push notification every hour after receiving this error. The cloud service may need to wait up to 24 hours before normal notification flow will resume.
(Source)
Fixed itself after a while, half a day or so.
I have an app which continuously reads status updates from a server connection.
All is working well with a stream delegate to handle all the reading and writing asynchronously.
There's no part of the app that is "waiting" for a specific response from the server, it is just continuously handling status updates as they sporadically arrive from the socket. There are no requests on the client side that are waiting for responses.
I'm wondering what the best practice would be for the network activity indicator in this case.
I could turn it on in the stream event handler, and off before we leave the handler, but that would be a very short time (just enough for an non-blocking read or write to occur). Trying this, I only see the faintest flicker of the indicator; it needs to be on longer than just during the event handler.
What about turning it on in the stream delegate, and setting a timer to turn it off a short time later? (This would ensure it's on long enough to be seen, rather than the short time spent in the stream delegate.)
Note: I've tried this last idea: turning on the network activity indicator whenever there's stream activity, and note the NSDate; then in a timer (that I have fired every 1 second), if the time passsed is >.5 second, I turn off the indicator. This seems to give a reasonable indication of network activity.
Any better recommendations?
If the network activity is continuous then it sounds like it might be somewhat annoying to the user, especially if it's turning on and off all the time.
Perhaps better would be to test for lack-of-response up to a certain timeout value and then display an alert view to the user if you aren't getting any response from the server. Even that could be optional if you can provide feedback (like "Last update: 5 mins ago") to the user instead.
I have a request that takes more than 30 seconds and it breaks.
What is the solution for this? I am not sure if I add more dynos this will work.
Thanks
You should probably see the Heroku devcenter article regarding this, as the information will be more helpful, here's a small summary:
To answer the timeout question:
Cedar supports long-polling and streaming responses. Your app has an initial 30 second window to respond with a single byte back to the client. After each byte sent (either recieved from the client or sent by your application) you reset a rolling 55 second window. If no data is sent during the 55 second window your connection will be terminated.
(That is, if you had Cedar instead of Aspen or Bamboo you could send a byte every thirty seconds or so just to trick the system. It might work.)
To answer your dynos question:
Additional concurrency is of no help whatsoever if you are encountering request timeouts. You can crank your dynos to the maximum and you'll still get a request timeout, since it is a single request that is failing to serve in the correct amount of time. Extra dynos increase your concurrency, not the speed of your requests.
(That is, don't bother adding more dynos.)
On request timeouts:
Check your code for infinite loops, if you're doing something big:
If so, you should move this heavy lifting into a background job which can run asynchronously from your web request. See Queueing for details.
We have a memory intensive processing for certain functionality and we would like to limit the number of parallel requests to this processing. We are able to configure by using "Work Managers" in WebLogic and putting a limit on the number of threads for that servlet.
For example, if we put maximim thread limit as 3, then if there are 10 parallel requests; 7 requests are in queue. There could be situations where these the requests waiting in queue could take up to 30-40 minutes to be processed. We did simple testing and the received page cannot be displayed due to timeout after 15 mins and received the message after 1 hour.
Does any one know if there is a setting in WebLogic to increase/decrease timeout and avoid page cannot be displayed?
Appreciate if any one has any thoughts around this.
Does any one know if there is a setting in WebLogic to increase/decrease timeout and avoid page cannot be displayed?
There might be something but I actually didn't check as it would be a bad advice anyway. By looking for this, you are trying to solve the wrong problem here. A browser is just not made for long-running process like the one you are describing (>30mn) even if you don't mind the user waiting (not mentioning that he could refresh the page and queue more and more jobs).
So, the right answer here is in my opinion: use asynchronism, this is the perfect use case. When the user clicks on the button, send a JMS message to a queue (or create a Quartz job) and send the user a page with a request ID telling him to come back later. When the processing is done, update the status somewhere and make the status/result available to the user. Really, the user experience will be better doing this and you'll face less problems than with a browser.
1) Use some other tool (not browser) like WGET where you can control timeout parameter (--timeout).
2) Why do you use HTTP? Use message driven beans and send message JMS to that and don't care about time outs.
Perhaps quartz can do what you need? Start a job and check in on it as you need to?