[aerogear-dev] Help needed on AGPUSH-848

Sebastien Blanc scm.blanc at gmail.com
Thu Jul 31 08:52:36 EDT 2014 

On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>
wrote:

>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at 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

>
> 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)

>
>
> 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

> * 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 at 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 at 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 at 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 at 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 at 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 at 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%2Fsrc%2Fmain%2Fjava%2Forg%2Fjboss%2Faerogear%2Funifiedpush%2Fmessage%2FSenderServiceImpl.java#L133
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Daniel Bevenius <
>>>>>>>>> daniel.bevenius at 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 at 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/jpa/src/main/java/org/jboss/aerogear/unifiedpush/jpa/dao/impl/JPAPushMessageInformationDao.java#L99-L104
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have change this test case :
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/model%2Fjpa%2Fsrc%2Ftest%2Fjava%2Forg%2Fjboss%2Faerogear%2Funifiedpush%2Fjpa%2FPushMessageInformationDaoTest.java#L251
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 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-gistfile1-java-L30-L35
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>> aerogear-dev at 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 at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> aerogear-dev at 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 at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20140731/a7ab7ba9/attachment.html

More information about the aerogear-dev mailing list