On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org>
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <
>>> matzew(a)apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think original idea was to show the three most busy (in number of
>>>> receives, not installations)
>>>>
>>> The total number or receives for one Variant , right ?
>>> So, if variant A "sended" a first time to 20 receivers and after
that
>>> did a selective send 5 : the number that must showned is 25
>>> And we want the top 3 of this total ?
>>>
>>
>> uhm, there was a thread in the past. Burr added something, and Hylke....
>> and we were somewhat talked into this (I guess we did not think too much
>> about it :-( )
>>
>> So... I think.....
>>
>> we perhaps could:
>> * show the most (three) recent variants (and their # of receivers)
>>
> We could do that but then we will need to change the naming
>
I don't mind renaming !
>
>> But IMO not doing a count. Perhaps that means some code needs to be
>> rewritten...
>>
>
> Well, I just managed to modify the query to really get the 3 variants
> having send to the most receivers :
>
> createQuery("select distinct vmi.variantID, SUM(vmi.receivers),
> vmi.pushApplicationID from VariantMetricInformation vmi" +
> " where vmi.variantID IN (select t.variantID from Variant
> t where t.developer = :developer)" +
> " GROUP BY vmi.variantID ORDER BY SUM(vmi.receivers) " +
> DESC)
> .setMaxResults(3)
> .setParameter("developer", loginName)
> .getResultList();
>
> And the code don't need to be rewitten (just changing the label on the
> dashboard that is now a bit confusing)
>
ah, cool; Yeah - I've zero concerns in chaning the label :-)
>
>>
>> Also... "Most active" could mean something else:
>> * TOTAL number of receivers (per variant/app) -> like a count
>>
> Yeah that is what my query above does now
>
Ok. So you don't like the "show the most (three) recent variants (and
their # of receivers) " ? :-)
Yeah why not :) , we just have to choose something that will be a real
useful information, I would like from the rest of the team.
Then, if we go for this I need some clarification :
- most recent variants, you mean most recent "active" variant, meaning the
most recent that sent out a Push Message ? Because if you meant on Variant
creation date, we don't have this info :)
- Number of receivers, sorry to ask again, I know you make the distinction
with installations, but you mean the number of active tokens (i.e : we have
20 "active" (not toggled off) tokens, or the total of receivers for all
the sent messages (i.e : Message A was sent to 10 receivers, Message B was
sent to 5 receivers, we show 15 ) ?
> * TOTAL number of messages (per vairant/app) -> like a count on the
>> actual message
>>
>>
>>
>> I think I do (now) like the first (show the most (three) recent variants
>> (and their # of receivers) ) the best :-)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Sebastien Blanc
<scm.blanc(a)gmail.com
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> BTW,
>>>>> I wonder how we had in mind the computing of the 3 busiest variants,
>>>>> what does it mean exactly ?
>>>>> Should we not sum up all the receiver for each
>>>>> VariantMetricInformation and from there get the top 3 ? Not sure
this is
>>>>> happening right now, maybe @matzew or @edewit could give more info.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Daniel Bevenius <
>>>>> daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, looking into this and I can't see any easy fix.
>>>>>> The problem as I see it is that the for the same variantId there
can
>>>>>> be multiple receivers. But we currently don't know which
ApplicationVariant
>>>>>> the receivers belong to. So we cannot match them up in
DashBoardService.
>>>>>> This my first time looking at the code so I might be missing
>>>>>> something. So I'd say your first post about the query being
wrong is
>>>>>> correct, and we have to take the match the
VariantMetricInformation and
>>>>>> match it with a pushApplicationId. Again, I could be way off here
:)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 31 July 2014 10:47, Daniel Bevenius
<daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hey Seb,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> sure let me take a closer look at this. I'm getting the
feeling
>>>>>>> that it might not be as simple as that. Let me push something
and we can
>>>>>>> discuss it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 31 July 2014 10:39, Sebastien Blanc
<scm.blanc(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Dan,
>>>>>>>> Not sure if I understand exactly what you meant, could do
a small
>>>>>>>> snippet ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Daniel Bevenius <
>>>>>>>> daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Oh I see. Then I'd say you'll need to change
the return type to
>>>>>>>>> either use a custom object for the key in the map, or
perhaps return a list
>>>>>>>>> with that came custom object. What ever makes the
most sense in this use
>>>>>>>>> case. Makes sense?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 31 July 2014 09:39, Sebastien Blanc
<scm.blanc(a)gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Well, several VariantMetricInformation instances
can have the
>>>>>>>>>> same VariantID, at each send , one is created :
>>>>>>>>>>
https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/push%...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Daniel Bevenius
<
>>>>>>>>>> daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Is this because variantFour and variantFive
have the same
>>>>>>>>>>> variantId (231543432434)? When added to the
map only one will exist later
>>>>>>>>>>> in findTopThreeBusyVariantIDs.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 31 July 2014 09:20, Sebastien Blanc
<scm.blanc(a)gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Morning Peeps,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm currently trying to fix
AGPUSH-848[1].
>>>>>>>>>>>> Basically, the number of receivers shown
in the top3 list is
>>>>>>>>>>>> not always accurate.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I suspect that something is wrong with
this query :
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/model...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I have change this test case :
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/model...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> By adding just one VariantInformation[2]
and now the test is
>>>>>>>>>>>> failing and I have no idea why, so I
would aprreciate a second eye on this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm probably missing something
obvious but I can not see it
>>>>>>>>>>>> right now :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sebi
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
[
1]https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-848
>>>>>>>>>>>> [2]
>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://gist.github.com/sebastienblanc/ea34e7f9fdafbc0785f2#file-gistfile...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog:
http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions:
http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter:
http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog:
http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions:
http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter:
http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog:
http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions:
http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter:
http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev