I´m going to create a web service for learning purposes and wanted to combine it with my WoW Hobby. My goal would be to create a "simple" Addon, which tracks my battleground activity in real time.
So when queuing for AB it enters my data in an db and when I´m out of the BG it should delete the db entry. The information should be stored in an JSON/XML-File and whenever the bg-status changes it should execute the post/update on the DB on the RESTful service.
The real time communication is very important here and I would like to know which ways of communicating to a web service are available, so I could directly dive in and create a solution.I´d like to have resources instead of solutions.
Currently I´m not used to LUA, but would like to learn it to get the knowledge of creating such a service.Which sites are you suggesting for learning LUA, especially the WoW-API?
Addons only write to disk when you log out of a character (and read that saved data when you log in) so what you intend would not be possible.*
More involved ways of communicating with the rest of the computer or even the internet are prohibited to prevent the gain of certain advantages, an example would be looking up details about your Arena opponents.
* Well, there are certainly some ways, but rather complicated ones: a program monitoring sound output to check when the BG queue pop sound is played, or a screengrabber that registers when the BG score screen comes up (which can be viewed during the match though, too)
Related
Context
Greetings,
One day I randomly found RethinkDB and I was really fascinated by the whole real-time changes thing. In order to learn how to use this tool I quickly spinned up a container running RethinkDB and i started making a small project. I wanted to make something very simple therefore i thought about creating a service in which speakers can create room and the audience can ask questions. Other users can upvote questions in order to let the speaker know which one are the best. Obviously this project has a lot of realtime needs that i believe are best satisfied by using RethinkDB.
Design
I wanted to use a vary specific set of tools for this. The backend would be made in Laravel Lumen, the frontend in Vue.JS and the database of course would be RethinkDB.
The problem
RethinkDB as it seems is not designed to be exposed to the end user directly despite the fact that no security concern exists.
Assuming that the user only needs to see the questions and the upvoted in real time, no write permissions are needed and if a user changed the room ID nothing bad will happen since the rooms are all publicly accessible.
Therefore something is needed in order to await data updates and push it through a socket to the client (socket.io for example or pusher).
Given the fact that the backend is written in PHP i cannot tell Lumen to stay awake and wait for data updates. From what i have seen from the online tutorials a secondary system should be used that should listen for changes and then push them. (lets say a node.js service for example)
This is understandable however i strongly believe that this way of transferring the data to the user is inefficient and it defeats the purpose of RethinkDB.
If I have to send the action from the client's computer (user asks a question), save it to the database, have a script that listens for changes, then push the changes to socket.io and finally have the client (vue.js) act when a new event arrives, what is the point of having a real-time database in the first place?
I could avoid all this headache simply by having the Lumen app push the event directly to socket.io and user any other database system instead.
I really cant understand the point of all this. I am not experienced with no-sql databases by any means but i really want to experiment with them.
Thank you.
This is understandable however i strongly believe that this way of transferring the data to the user is inefficient and it defeats the purpose of RethinkDB.
RethinkDB has no built in mechanism to transfer data to end-users. It has no access control (in the conventional sense) as well. The common way, like you said, is to spin up one / multiple node instance(s) running socket.io. On each instance you can listen on your RethinkDB change streams and use socket.io's broadcast functionality. This would be a common way, but as RethinkDB's streams are pretty optimized, you could also open a change stream for every incoming socket.io connection.
our devices (microscopes with cameras) produce images and additional information to each image.
Now a middleware supplies wants to connect these devices to lab automation system. They have to acquire the data and we have to provide it. An astonishing thing for me was their interface suggestion - a very cryptical token separated format (ASTM E1394-97). Unfortunatelly, they even can't accomodate images in their protocol, and are aiming to get file-paths.
I thought it is not the up-to date approach. While lookink for alternatives, I saw CoachDB.
So, my idea was, our devices would import data including images in CoachDB and they could get the data. It seems even, that using mustache, we could produce the format they want (ascii-text) and placing URLs as image references instead of path's.
My question is, did someone applied CoachDB for such a use case already? It seems to be a little-bit misuse of CoachDB, as the main intention is interface not data storage. Another point disturbing me is, that the inventor of CoachDB went to other project Coachbase. Could it mean lack of support for CoachDB in the future?
Thank you very much for any insights and suggestions!
It's ok use-case and actually we're using CouchDB in such way - as proxing middleware between medical laboratory analyzers and LIS. Some of them publish images or pdf data on shared folders and we'd just loading them into related document as attachments.
More over you'd like to know, CouchDB is able to serve external processes (aka os_daemons) and take care about their lifespan: restarting if someone had terminated and starting right after you update config options through HTTP interface. This helps to setup ASTM client and server processes since this protocol is different from HTTP (which is native for CouchDB) which communicates with devices and creates documents as regular CouchDB clients. In same way you may setup daemons to monitor shared folders for specific files. And all this is just CouchDB with few "low bounded" plugins.
So i've been spending some time developing an iPhone app - it's a simple little game and is similar to "Words with friends" in that it:
1) is turn based
2) contacts a web service API to store the "game data" (turns, user info, etc).
In my case, i'm using .NET MVC and a SQL Server backend to develop the API. We're not talking an immense amount of data here - small images will be transferred back and forth and stored in the database though. A typical request would see a few records added or changed in the database.
I mostly don't have much concept of when things would start to get overloaded - my concern, of course, is that this thing takes off (obviously wishful thinking) and then my server gets so overwhelmed that it dies. That being said, I don't want to spend time and money on Windows Azure or something when my hosting needs may be totally trivial.
So, my somewhat general question is this - does anyone have any firsthand knowledge of when things start to get overloaded? Like...just a general estimate of number of requests or something for a time period, assuming each request hits the .NET app which then hits the database a reasonable number of times.
Even some anecdotal "My similar API gets hit 10,000 times a minute and is hosted on crappy shared hosting" would be awesome just so I get some concept.
Thanks in advance!
It is very hard to give a good answer to your question as it greatly depends on what precisely the backend does for each request. Even "trivial" services as you describe can easily differ greatly in performance depending on the actual implementation.
As a rough guideline based on our projects, if your API is a single HTTP request (no HTTPS), hitting a bare-bones controller, being translated into a single, simple SQL statement ("SELECT * FROM foo WHERE bar") returning less than 100 Bytes of data, you can serve about 750 requests per minute on a 32 Bit, 1 Gigahertz box with 512MB ram.
But this number will be reduced to 75 or less if any of those factors go up.
That said:
This is the poster-child case for cloud computing.
If Azure is too much hassle / cost for you (which is not an uncommon complaint from independent developers) you have three main alternatives:
1) Ditch .NET in favor of Python and host within Google App Engine
Python is quick to learn and GAE scales beautifully without you ever needing to care. Best of all, there is a huge free-tier so unless your app really takes off, you won't pay a cent. As you are developing for iOS, I assume you aren't hell bent on .NET to begin with.
2) If you need .NET, go with AWS
They also have a rather large free-tier. Either throw everything on top of a Mono stack (completely free for the 1st year) or shell out the money for a Windows EC2 instance. This takes more planning than GAE but with a little work you can make it scale to wherever your app goes.
If cost is a concern, use the same AWS cluster to host several of your Apps' APIs.
3) Go with OpenFeint's Multiplayer API
OpenFeint supports basic multiplayer games. If you can implement the needed functionality using it, then this might be the best solution. If not, look into (1) and (2).
How long is a piece of string? It all depends with the hosting and connection speeds. .Net is more than capable of handling LARGE amounts of requests. The simplest solution is to monitor the server (or if you cannot, monitor your web services performance) and get better hosting if your app starts to suffer.
I am writing an app for iOS that uses data provided by a web service. I am using core data for local storage and persistence of the data, so that some core set of the data is available to the user if the web is not reachable.
In building this app, I've been reading lots of posts about core data. While there seems to be lots out there on the mechanics of doing this, I've seen less on the general principles/patterns for this.
I am wondering if there are some good references out there for a recommended interaction model.
For example, the user will be able to create new objects on the app. Lets say the user creates a new employee object, the user will typically create it, update it and then save it. I've seen recommendations that updates each of these steps to the server --> when the user creates it, when the user makes changes to the fields. And if the user cancels at the end, a delete is sent to the server. Another different recommendation for the same operation is to keep everything locally, and only send the complete update to the server when the user saves.
This example aside, I am curious if there are some general recommendations/patterns on how to handle CRUD operations and ensure they are sync'd between the webserver and coredata.
Thanks much.
I think the best approach in the case you mention is to store data only locally until the point the user commits the adding of the new record. Sending every field edit to the server is somewhat excessive.
A general idiom of iPhone apps is that there isn't such a thing as "Save". The user generally will expect things to be committed at some sensible point, but it isn't presented to the user as saving per se.
So, for example, imagine you have a UI that lets the user edit some sort of record that will be saved to local core data and also be sent to the server. At the point the user exits the UI for creating a new record, they will perhaps hit a button called "Done" (N.B. not usually called "Save"). At the point they hit "Done", you'll want to kick off a core data write and also start a push to the remote server. The server pus h won't necessarily hog the UI or make them wait till it completes -- it's nicer to allow them to continue using the app -- but it is happening. If the update push to server failed, you might want to signal it to the user or do something appropriate.
A good question to ask yourself when planning the granularity of writes to core data and/or a remote server is: what would happen if the app crashed out, or the phone ran out of power, at any particular spots in the app? How much loss of data could possibly occur? Good apps lower the risk of data loss and can re-launch in a very similar state to what they were previously in after being exited for whatever reason.
Be prepared to tear your hair out quite a bit. I've been working on this, and the problem is that the Core Data samples are quite simple. The minute you move to a complex model and you try to use the NSFetchedResultsController and its delegate, you bump into all sorts of problems with using multiple contexts.
I use one to populate data from your webservice in a background "block", and a second for the tableview to use - you'll most likely end up using a tableview for a master list and a detail view.
Brush up on using blocks in Cocoa if you want to keep your app responsive whilst receiving or sending data to/from a server.
You might want to read about 'transactions' - which is basically the grouping of multiple actions/changes as a single atomic action/change. This helps avoid partial saves that might result in inconsistent data on server.
Ultimately, this is a very big topic - especially if server data is shared across multiple clients. At the simplest, you would want to decide on basic policies. Does last save win? Is there some notion of remotely held locks on objects in server data store? How is conflict resolved, when two clients are, say, editing the same property of the same object?
With respect to how things are done on the iPhone, I would agree with occulus that "Done" provides a natural point for persisting changes to server (in a separate thread).
I'm working on an iPhone application that should work in offline and online modes.
In it's online mode it's supposed to feed all the information the user enters to a webservice backed by GWT/GAE.
In it's offline mode it's supposed to store the information locally, and when connection is available sync it up to the web service.
Currently my plan is as follows:
Provide a connection between an app and a webservice using Protobuffers for efficient over-the-wire communication
Work with local DB using Core Data
Poll the network status, and when available sync the database and keep some sort of local-db-to-remote-db key synchronization.
The question is - am I in the right direction? Are the standard patterns for implementing this? Maybe someone can point me to an open-source application that works in a similar fashion?
I am really new to iPhone coding, and would be very glad to hear any suggestions.
Thanks
I think you've blurring the questions together.
If you've got a question about making a GWT web interface, that's one question.
Questions about how to sync an iPhone to a web service are a different question. For that, you don't want to use GWT's RPCs for syncing, as you'd have to fake out the 'browser-side' of the serialization system in your iPhone code, which GWT normally provides for you.
about system design direction:
First if there is no REAL need do not create 2 different apps one GWT and other iPhone
create one but well written GWT app. It will work off line no problem and will manage your data using HTML feature -- offline application cache
If it a must to create 2 separate apps
than at least save yourself effort and do not write server twice as if you go with standard GWT aproach you will almost sertanly fail to talk to server from stand alone app (it is zipped JSON over HTTP with some tricky headers...) or will write things twise so look in to the RestLet library it well supported by the GAE.
About the way to keep sync with offline / online switching:
There are several aproaches to consider and all of them are not perfect. So when you conseder yours think of what youser expects... Do not be Microsoft Word do not try to outsmart the user.
If there at least one scenario in the use cases that demand user intervention to merge changes (And there will be - take it to the bank) - than you will have implement UI for this - than there is a good reason to use it often - user will get used to it. it better than it will see it in a while since he started to use the app because a need fro it is rare because you implemented a super duper merging logic that asks user only in very special cases... Don't do it.
balance the effort. Because the mess that a bug in such code will introduce to user is much more painful than the benefit all together.
so the HOW:
The one way is the Do-UnDo way.
While off line - keep the log of actions user did on data in timed order user did them
as soon as you connected - send to server and execute them. Same from server to client.
Will work fine in most cases as long as you are not writing a Photoshop kind of software with huge amounts of data per operation. Also referred as Action Pattern by the GangOfFour.
Another way is a source control way. - Versions and may be even locks. very application dependent. DBMS internally some times use it for transactions implementations.
And there is always an option to be Read Only when Ofline :-)
Wonder if you have considered using a Sync Framework to manage the synchronization. If that interests you can take a look at the open source project, OpenMobster's Sync service. You can do the following sync operations
two-way
one-way client
one-way device
bootup
Besides that, all modifications are automatically tracked and synced with the Cloud. You can have your app offline when network connection is down. It will track any changes and automatically in the background synchronize it with the cloud when the connection returns. It also provides synchronization like iCloud across multiple devices
Also, modifications in the Cloud are synched using Push notifications, so the data is always current even if it is stored locally.
Here is a link to the open source project: http://openmobster.googlecode.com
Here is a link to iPhone App Sync: http://code.google.com/p/openmobster/wiki/iPhoneSyncApp