[aerogear-dev] Help needed on AGPUSH-848
Matthias Wessendorf
matzew at apache.org
Thu Jul 31 09:17:28 EDT 2014
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc at gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
>
> 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
>
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) " ? :-)
> * 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
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20140731/746437c5/attachment-0001.html
More information about the aerogear-dev
mailing list