I want to implement synchronization in salesforce using apex.
My Requirement is that, i have to update a field from the future method.
I have a field in database with name Counter_c and i am calling a method that method will call 3 future method. Those future method will try to increment value of counter_c by 1. But field is not getting update.
Here is my code:
public void generateReports() {
ReportHistory__c repHst = new ReportHistory__c();
repHst.Counter__c = 0;
insert repHst;
generateReport1(repHst.Id);
generateReport2(repHst.Id);
generateReport3(repHst.Id);
}
#future
public static void generateReport1(Id id) {
List<ReportHistory__c> lstRep = [select Counter__c rom ReportHistory__c where Id = :id];
if(!lstRep.isEmpty()) {
++lstRep[0].Counter__c;
}
update lstRep;
}
#future
public static void generateReport2(Id id) {
List<ReportHistory__c> lstRep = [select Counter__c rom ReportHistory__c where Id = :id];
if(!lstRep.isEmpty()) {
++lstRep[0].Counter__c;
}
update lstRep;
}
#future
public static void generateReport3(Id id) {
List<ReportHistory__c> lstRep = [select Counter__c rom ReportHistory__c where Id = :id];
if(!lstRep.isEmpty()) {
++lstRep[0].Counter__c;
}
update lstRep;
}
After executing above code i want Counter__c should be 3. But its still 0 or sometime its 1.
Please help me, if there is any way so that i can control future call so that every future call should update value of Counter__c by 1.
Thanks,
Vivek
From your example code it appears the lstRep.isEmpty() check is missing the negation.
E.g. Add a ! in the if condition.
#future
public static void generateReport1(Id id) {
List<ReportHistory__c> lstRep = [select Counter__c rom ReportHistory__c where Id = :id];
if(!lstRep.isEmpty()) {
lstRep[0].Counter__c++;
}
update lstRep;
}
It is also possible that your future methods are being pulled off the Queue and processed by different Application Servers in parallel. If this is the case your have a concurrency issue. Have a read of Asynchronous Processing in Force.com. You could try adding the FOR UPDATE keyword to your SOQL query, but this may cause some of your future methods to timeout.
Related
I seem to be unable to store a simple object to cosmos db?
this is the database model.
public class HbModel
{
public Guid id { get; set; }
public string FormName { get; set; }
public Dictionary<string, object> Form { get; set; }
}
and this is how I store the data into the database
private static void SeedData(HbModelContext dbContext)
{
var cosmosClient = dbContext.Database.GetCosmosClient();
cosmosClient.ClientOptions.AllowBulkExecution = true;
if (dbContext.Set<HbModel>().FirstOrDefault() == null)
{
// No items could be picked hence try seeding.
var container = cosmosClient.GetContainer("hb", "hb_forms");
HbModel first = new HbModel()
{
Id = Guid.NewGuid(),//Guid.Parse(x["guid"] as string),
FormName = "asda",//x["name"] as string,
Form = new Dictionary<string, object>() //
}
string partitionKey = await GetPartitionKey(container.Database, container.Id);
var response = await container.CreateItemAsync(first, new PartitionKey(partitionKey));
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("Already have data");
}
}
private static async Task<string> GetPartitionKey(Database database, string containerName)
{
var query = new QueryDefinition("select * from c where c.id = #id")
.WithParameter("#id", containerName);
using var iterator = database.GetContainerQueryIterator<ContainerProperties>(query);
while (iterator.HasMoreResults)
{
foreach (var container in await iterator.ReadNextAsync())
{
return container.PartitionKeyPath;
}
}
return null;
}
but when creating the item I get this error message
A host error has occurred during startup operation '3b06df1f-000c-4223-a374-ca1dc48d59d1'.
[2022-07-11T15:02:12.071Z] Microsoft.Azure.Cosmos.Client: Response status code does not indicate success: BadRequest (400); Substatus: 0; ActivityId: 24bac0ba-f1f7-411f-bc57-3f91110c4528; Reason: ();.
Value cannot be null. (Parameter 'provider')
no idea why it fails?
the data should not be formatted incorreclty?
It also fails in case there is data in the dictionary.
What is going wrong?
There are several things wrong with the attached code.
You are enabling Bulk but you are not following the Bulk pattern
cosmosClient.ClientOptions.AllowBulkExecution = true is being set, but you are not parallelizing work. If you are going to use Bulk, make sure you are following the documentation and creating lists of concurrent Tasks. Reference: https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db/sql/tutorial-sql-api-dotnet-bulk-import#step-6-populate-a-list-of-concurrent-tasks. Otherwise don't use Bulk.
You are blocking threads.
The call to container.CreateItemAsync(first, new PartitionKey("/__partitionKey")).Result; is a blocking call, this can lead you to deadlocks. When using async operations (such as CreateItemAsync) please use the async/await pattern. Reference: https://github.com/davidfowl/AspNetCoreDiagnosticScenarios/blob/master/AsyncGuidance.md#avoid-using-taskresult-and-taskwait
The PartitionKey parameter should be the value not the definition.
On the call container.CreateItemAsync(first, new PartitionKey("/__partitionKey")) the Partition Key (second parameter) should be the value. Assuming your container has a Partition Key Definition of /__partitionKey then your documents should have a __partitionKey property and you should pass the Value in this parameter of such property in the current document. Reference: https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db/sql/troubleshoot-bad-request#wrong-partition-key-value
Optionally, if your documents do not contain such a value, just remove the parameter from the call:
container.CreateItemAsync(first)
Be advised though that this solution will not scale, you need to design your database with Partitioning in mind: https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db/partitioning-overview#choose-partitionkey
Missing id
The model has Id but Cosmos DB requires id, make sure the content of the document contains id when serialized.
I have a function which update a customer.
Furthermore, I have a function which creates an Activity (createActivity)
Now I want to add to the Activity Entity also the reference to my Custom Audit Table (AuditRevision). Therefore, I try to get the last object from the History Entity (= Function: findLastRevisionFromEntity).
The problem is, that I got the object before from the Custom Audit Table because it seems that the creation from the CustomAudit entry is invoked at the whole end from updateCustomer. So, I will e.g. save AuditRevision with ID = 5, but for the current operation it's ID=6.
Any idea how I can fix this?
I'm also fine if I call the listener from Envers manually instead of automatically, but how can I do this? How can I invoke the function (public void newRevision(Object revisionEntity)) from the RevisionListener?
public void updateCustomer(Customer customer){
entityManager.merge(customer);
// Create Activity
activitiesProcessServiceBean.createActivity(customer,
customer.getEmployeeCreatorOrUpdate(),
Activities.ActionType.MODIFY.toString());
}
public Activities createActivity(EntityPropertyFinder entityPropertyFinder, Employee employeeCreator,
String activityType){
LOGGER.info("START createActivity");
Activities newActivities = new Activities();
// AuditRevision
AuditRevision auditRevision = jpaAuditUtilBean.findLastRevisionFromEntity(entityPropertyFinder.getClass(),
entityPropertyFinder.getId());
newActivities.setAuditRevision(auditRevision);
activitiesService.addActivities(newActivities);
return newActivities;
}
public AuditRevision findLastRevisionFromEntity(Class<? extends EntityPropertyFinder> class1, Long entityId) {
AuditReader auditReader = AuditReaderFactory.get(entityManager);
Object[] lastRevision = (Object[]) auditReader.createQuery()
.forRevisionsOfEntity(class1, false, false)
.add(AuditEntity.property("id").eq(entityId))
.addOrder(AuditEntity.revisionNumber().desc())
.setMaxResults(1)
.getSingleResult();
if(lastRevision == null)
return null;
AuditRevision auditRevision = (AuditRevision) lastRevision[1];
return auditRevision;
}
We are using ASP.NET Zero and are running into issues with parallel processing from an AppService. We know requests must be transactional, but unfortunately we need to break out to slow running APIs for numerous calls, so we have to do parallel processing.
As expected, we are running into a DbContext contingency issue on the second database call we make:
System.InvalidOperationException: A second operation started on this context
before a previous operation completed. This is usually caused by different
threads using the same instance of DbContext, however instance members are
not guaranteed to be thread safe. This could also be caused by a nested query
being evaluated on the client, if this is the case rewrite the query avoiding
nested invocations.
We read that a new UOW is required, so we tried using both the method attribute and the explicit UowManager, but neither of the two worked.
We also tried creating instances of the referenced AppServices using the IocResolver, but we are still not able to get a unique DbContext per thread (please see below).
public List<InvoiceDto> CreateInvoices(List<InvoiceTemplateLineItemDto> templateLineItems)
{
List<InvoiceDto> invoices = new InvoiceDto[templateLineItems.Count].ToList();
ConcurrentQueue<Exception> exceptions = new ConcurrentQueue<Exception>();
Parallel.ForEach(templateLineItems, async (templateLineItem) =>
{
try
{
XAppService xAppService = _iocResolver.Resolve<XAppService>();
InvoiceDto invoice = await xAppService
.CreateInvoiceInvoiceItem();
invoices.Insert(templateLineItems.IndexOf(templateLineItem), invoice);
}
catch (Exception e)
{
exceptions.Enqueue(e);
}
});
if (exceptions.Count > 0) throw new AggregateException(exceptions);
return invoices;
}
How can we ensure that a new DbContext is availble per thread?
I was able to replicate and resolve the problem with a generic version of ABP. I'm still experiencing the problem in my original solution, which is far more complex. I'll have to do some more digging to determine why it is failing there.
For others that come across this problem, which is exactly the same issue as reference here, you can simply disable the UnitOfWork through an attribute as illustrated in the code below.
public class InvoiceAppService : ApplicationService
{
private readonly InvoiceItemAppService _invoiceItemAppService;
public InvoiceAppService(InvoiceItemAppService invoiceItemAppService)
{
_invoiceItemAppService = invoiceItemAppService;
}
// Just add this attribute
[UnitOfWork(IsDisabled = true)]
public InvoiceDto GetInvoice(List<int> invoiceItemIds)
{
_invoiceItemAppService.Initialize();
ConcurrentQueue<InvoiceItemDto> invoiceItems =
new ConcurrentQueue<InvoiceItemDto>();
ConcurrentQueue<Exception> exceptions = new ConcurrentQueue<Exception>();
Parallel.ForEach(invoiceItemIds, (invoiceItemId) =>
{
try
{
InvoiceItemDto invoiceItemDto =
_invoiceItemAppService.CreateAsync(invoiceItemId).Result;
invoiceItems.Enqueue(invoiceItemDto);
}
catch (Exception e)
{
exceptions.Enqueue(e);
}
});
if (exceptions.Count > 0) {
AggregateException ex = new AggregateException(exceptions);
Logger.Error("Unable to get invoice", ex);
throw ex;
}
return new InvoiceDto {
Date = DateTime.Now,
InvoiceItems = invoiceItems.ToArray()
};
}
}
public class InvoiceItemAppService : ApplicationService
{
private readonly IRepository<InvoiceItem> _invoiceItemRepository;
private readonly IRepository<Token> _tokenRepository;
private readonly IRepository<Credential> _credentialRepository;
private Token _token;
private Credential _credential;
public InvoiceItemAppService(IRepository<InvoiceItem> invoiceItemRepository,
IRepository<Token> tokenRepository,
IRepository<Credential> credentialRepository)
{
_invoiceItemRepository = invoiceItemRepository;
_tokenRepository = tokenRepository;
_credentialRepository = credentialRepository;
}
public void Initialize()
{
_token = _tokenRepository.FirstOrDefault(x => x.Id == 1);
_credential = _credentialRepository.FirstOrDefault(x => x.Id == 1);
}
// Create an invoice item using info from an external API and some db records
public async Task<InvoiceItemDto> CreateAsync(int id)
{
// Get db record
InvoiceItem invoiceItem = await _invoiceItemRepository.GetAsync(id);
// Get price
decimal price = await GetPriceAsync(invoiceItem.Description);
return new InvoiceItemDto {
Id = id,
Description = invoiceItem.Description,
Amount = price
};
}
private async Task<decimal> GetPriceAsync(string description)
{
// Simulate a slow API call to get price using description
// We use the token and credentials here in the real deal
await Task.Delay(5000);
return 100.00M;
}
}
There's more than 15 items in my azure database table called Events.
I've tried to run most of the commands found on
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/app-service-mobile/app-service-mobile-android-how-to-use-client-library such as :
List<Events> results = eventsTable.execute().get()
and
List<Events> results = eventsTable.select("Events").execute().get();
and
List<Events> results = eventsTable.top(20).execute().get();
to return all the row items in the table. The queries seem to run on the last row of the table only and returns the last row or nothing at all when query is executed.
Though the ToDoItem Quickstart from Azure works perfectly with all the queries - which is odd.
Here's some of the code
ArrayList<Events> events = new ArrayLists<Events>();
private void EventsFromTable() {
AsyncTask<Void, Void, Void> task = new AsyncTask<Void, Void, Void>(){
#Override
protected Void doInBackground(Void... params) {
try {
final List<Events> results = EventsTable.execute().get();
runOnUiThread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
for (Events event : results) {
Events ev = new Events(event.getName(), event.getVenue(), event.getDate());
events.add(ev);
System.out.println("size is " +events.size());
<======This returns "size is 1"======>
}
}
});
} catch (final Exception e){
createAndShowDialogFromTask(e, "Error");
}
return null;
}
};
runAsyncTask(task);
}
Might any one know what the matter is?
Thanks
According to your code, the variable events seems to be a public shared instance of ArraryList in your Android app, so I don't know whether exists the case which multiple threads access it concurrently. The implementation of ArrayList class is not synchronized, please see here.
So please use the code below instead of the code ArrayList<Events> events = new ArrayLists<Events>(); when you shared the variable between UI thread and data async task thread.
List<Events> events = Collections.synchronizedList(new ArrayLists<Events>());
And I think it's better for copying data retrieved from table via addAll method, not add method for each, as the code below.
#Override
public void run() {
events.addAll(results);
}
I'm trying to optimize my application to perform at maximum speed. I intended on having two threads each executing a batch request of sales receipts additions. I also intended on having two parallel threads each with a batch request of customer additions. I was wondering whether this is possible or would the API lock the sales receipt/customer table in QuickBooks thus only allowing one thread to perform.
From my research I know that there a three types of entities (Name list, transaction and supporting entities). So what are the causes of locks on these entities, ie what scenario's will cause a lock? Is there any documentation on this matter I couldn't seem to find any?
Thanks
Lock is applicable for Name entities(Vendor, Customer and Employee ). While creating a new name entity, service ensures that an unique name is getting inserted in cloud. So, it puts a lock across all names of these 3 entities.
You can try this scenario using a decent payload.
public static void main(String args[]) {
PropertyConfigurator
.configure("log4j.properties");
Config.setProperty(Config.SERIALIZATION_REQUEST_FORMAT, "xml");
Config.setProperty(Config.SERIALIZATION_RESPONSE_FORMAT, "xml");
final Context platformContext = getPlatformContext("QBO");
final QBOV3ProdTest qbov3ProdTest = new QBOV3ProdTest(platformContext);
Thread customerThread = new Thread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
for (int i = 0; i < 15; i++) {
qbov3ProdTest.addCustomer();
}
}
});
customerThread.start();
Thread vendorThread = new Thread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
for (int i = 0; i < 15; i++) {
qbov3ProdTest.addVendor();
}
}
});
vendorThread.start();
}
private void addCustomer() {
Customer customer = new Customer();
customer.setDisplayName("TestCustomer-" + staticCount++);
try {
this.service.add(customer);
} catch (FMSException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
private void addVendor() {
Vendor vendor = new Vendor();
vendor.setDisplayName("TestVendor-" + staticCount++);
try {
this.service.add(vendor);
} catch (FMSException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
Service doesn't return a proper response. Wherever it fails, service returns 401. Please let me know if you can reproduce this behaviour while trying this use-case in your test QBO account.
Thanks
This is not exactly a DB locking rule but because of the way we are saving data to our cache for Names lists.
We do not allow users to update these entities in a multi-threaded manner:
Account,
Department,
Item,
Class,
Customer,
Employee,
Vendor,
PaymentMethod,
Terms.
The above has been confirmed by our engineering team.