[aerogear-dev] Help needed on AGPUSH-848

Sebastien Blanc scm.blanc at gmail.com
Thu Jul 31 09:44:59 EDT 2014 

On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>
wrote:

>
>
>
> 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) " ? :-)
>
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 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140731/4916ea44/attachment-0001.html

More information about the aerogear-dev mailing list