As a preface, I'm still new to React, so I'm still fumbling my way through things.
What I have is a component that fetches data to render an HTML table. So I call my Actions' fetchData() (which uses the browser's fetch() API) from within componentWillMount(), which also has a listener for a Store change. This all works well and good, and I'm able to retrieve and render data.
Now the next step. I want to be able to fetch new data when the component's props is updated. But I'm not exactly sure what the proper way to do so is. So I have a three part question
Would the proper place to do my fetchData() on new props be in componentWillReceiveProps(), after validating that the props did change, of course?
My API is rather slow, so it's entirely possible a new prop comes in while a fetch is still running. Is it possible to cancel the old fetch and start a new one, or at least implement logic to ignore the original result and wait for the results from the newer fetch?
Related to the above question, is there a way to ensure only one fetch is running at any time besides having something like an isLoading boolean in my Action's state (or elsewhere)?
Yes, componentWillReceiveProps is the proper place to do that.
Regarding point 2 and 3:
The idea of cancelling the task and maintaining 'one fetch running' seems to be inadequate. I don't think this kind of solution should be used in any system because implementation would limit an efficiency of your app by design.
Is it possible to cancel the old fetch and start a new one, or at least implement logic to ignore the original result and wait for the results from the newer fetch?
Why don't you let a 'newer fetch' response override an 'old fetch' response?
If you really want to avoid displaying the old response you can implement it simply using a counter of all fetchData calls. You can implement it in this way:
var ApiClient = {
processing: 0,
fetchData: function(){
processing++
return yourLibForHTTPCall.get('http://endpoint').then(function (response)){
processing--
return response
}
},
isIdle: function(){
return processing == 0
}
}
and the place where you actually make a call:
apiClient.fetchData(function(response){
if(apiClient.isIdle()){
this.setState({
})
}
}
I hope yourLibForHTTPCall.get returns a Promise in your case.
Related
I am new to both React-JS and Oboe.js. I am trying to speed up loading of some JSON data by using Oboe to stream the results. Unfortunately I am unable to do an update state in the function block. So I try to call another function that does the stateSet. Below is a method I have tried but doesn't work. It errors out a mapping function that uses search-results to render it in a table.
var that = this;
oboe({
url: //url,
method: 'POST', // optional
body: //POST-DATA, // optional
})
.on('node', '*', function(things){
that.updateState(things);
// This callback will be called everytime a new object is
// found in the foods array.
console.log( 'Go eat some', things.id);
});
updateState = (props) => {
this.setState({search-result: props});
}
What I am not sure about is the right way of updating a state with oboe.js and React?
Is there a better library to use for streaming JSON data into React?
Recommended approach
If you have the ability to change things server-side, then I would not recommend using Oboe for this. Oboe is useful if your only alternative is to load a large JSON object and you would like to access that data before the whole thing can be parsed.
The best way to optimize loading a lot of data on a client is to send less data at a time and to make multiple requests. A web-socket is the best approach, and Socket.io is a good tool for doing that.
If you need to use Oboe
I'm working to put together an example of oboe.js + react for you to look at, though it's tricky as much of the activity of Oboe happens outside the React lifecyle. I'll update this answer with that example 👍
I have a problem and I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who ever had it... Although I tried to find a solution, I didin't really find something that fits my purpose.
I won't post much code, since its not really a code problem, but more a logic problem.
Imagine I have the following hook:
useEffect(() => {
fetchFromApi(props.match.params.id);
}, [props.match.params.id]);
Imagine the result of fetchFromApi is displayed in a simple table in the UI.
Now lets say the user clicks on an entity in the navigation, so the ID prop in the browser URL changes and the effect triggers, leading to an API call. Lets say the call with this specific ID takes 5 seconds.
During this 5 seconds, the user again clicks on an element in the navigation, so the hook triggers again. This time, the API call only takes 0,1 seconds. The result is immediatly displayed.
But the first call is still running. Once its finished, it overwrites the current result, what leads to wrong data being displayed in the wrong navigation section.
Is there a easy way to solve this? I know I can't cancel promises by default, but I also know that there are ways to achieve it...
Also, it could be possible that fetchFromApi is not a single API call, but instead multiple calls to multiple endpoints, so the whole thing could become really tricky...
Thanks for any help.
The solution to this is extremely simple, you just have to determine whether the response that you got was from the latest API call or not and only then except it. You can do it by storing a triggerTime in ref. If the API call has been triggered another time, the ref will store a different value, however the closure variable will hold the same previously set value and it mean that another API call has been triggered after this and so we don't need to accept the current result.
const timer = useRef(null);
useEffect(() => {
fetchFromApi(props.match.params.id, timer);
}, [props.match.params.id]);
function fetchFromApi(id, timer) {
timer.current = Date.now();
const triggerTime = timer.current;
fetch('path').then(() => {
if(timer.current == triggerTime) {
// process result here
// accept response and update state
}
})
}
Other ways to handle such scenarios to the cancel the previously pending API requests. IF you use Axios it provides you with cancelToken that you can use, and similarly you can cancel XMLHttpRequests too.
I know Redux solves this but I came up with an idea.
Imagine I have an app that gets some JSON on start. Based on this JSON I'm setting up the environment, so let's assume the app starts and it downloads an array of list items.
Of course as I'm not using Redux (the app itself is quite simple and Redux feels like a huge overkill here) if I want to use these list items outside of my component I have to pass them down as props and then pass them as props again as deep as I want to use them.
Why can't I do something like this:
fetch(listItems)
.then(response => response.json())
.then(json => {
window.consts = json.list;
This way I can access my list anywhere in my app and even outside of React. Is it considered an anti-pattern? Of course the list items WON'T be changed EVER, so there is no interaction or change of state.
What I usually do when I have some static (but requested via API) data is a little service that acts kind like a global but is under a regular import:
// get-timezones.js
import { get } from '../services/request'
let fetching = false
let timez = null
export default () => {
// if we already got timezones, return it
if (timez) {
return new Promise((resolve) => resolve(timez))
}
// if we already fired a request, return its promise
if (fetching) {
return fetching
}
// first run, return request promise
// and populate timezones for caching
fetching = get('timezones').then((data) => {
timez = data
return timez
})
return fetching
}
And then in the view react component:
// some-view.js
getTimezones().then((timezones) => {
this.setState({ timezones })
})
This works in a way it will always return a promise but the first time it is called it will do the request to the API and get the data. Subsequent requests will use a cached variable (kinda like a global).
Your approach may have a few issues:
If react renders before this window.consts is populated you won't
be able to access it, react won't know it should re-render.
You seem to be doing this request even when the data won't be used.
The only downside of my approach is setting state asynchronously, it may lead to errors if the component is not mounted anymore.
From the React point of view:
You can pass the list from top level via Context and you can see docs here.
Sample of using it is simple and exists in many libraries, such as Material UI components using it to inject theme across all components.
From engineering concept of everything is a trade of:
If you feel that it's gonna take so much time, and you are not going to change it ever, so keep it simple, set it to window and document it. (For your self to not forget it and letting other people know why you did this.)
If you're absolutely certain they won't ever change, I think it's quite ok to store them in a global, especially if you need to access the data outside of React. You may want to use a different name, maybe something like "appNameConfig"..
Otherwise, React has a feature called Context, which can also be used for "deep provision" - Reference
So here's my situation. I have a component that loads some data from the database, like so:
const task= fetch(`http://example.com`)
.then(result => result.json())
.then(result => {
this.setState({
items: result
})
});
addTask(task);
Now, if I add this code to the componentWillMount method, it does work however, every time I load the component, this method will fire and I don't want it calling the database every time. I want it called once on first load and then stored in the state and never called again.
And because I am rendering a list of items, I have to manually set this items variable in the constructor to avoid null errors:
constructor() {
super();
this.state = {
items: [],
}
}
My question is, how can I load this data only once and then set it to the items state variable. I have tried adding all this code to the reducer of the component (I am using redux), but it doesn't work.
There are several ways of achieving what you are trying to do, but every each of them brings up more questions to answer I think.
First question is, lets say you stored your data locally after your first fetch, whats gonna happen if the data on the server changes? You can somehow notify the client side that data is change and then fetch the data again to sync local data. Or maybe you can periodically check for the new data. There are lots of ways to go.
This situation is exists if you load the data on a parent component and pass the data to the component that is gonna use it or use persistent redux or similar solution.
You can go with a 3 library solution like Realm, Firebase or similar. These systems have persistent or local storage options that will reduce the download when you make call to data. But these solutions bring up the need for changing your back-end logic.
Like I said before there is no single way to handle these situations and it really depends on your project and preference.
In my app, I make two ajax calls to for one piece of data. First I make a call to get a list of ecommerceIntegrations. Once I have those, I can then grab each of their respective orders.
My current code looks something like this:
componentDidMount: function() {
EcommerceIntegrationStore.addChangeListener(this._onIntegrationStoreChange);
OrderStore.addChangeListener(this._onOrderStoreChange);
WebshipEcommerceIntegrationActionCreators.getEcommerceIntegrations();
},
_onIntegrationStoreChange: function() {
var ecommerceIntegrations = EcommerceIntegrationStore.getEcommerceIntegrations();
this.setState({ecommerceIntegrations: ecommerceIntegrations});
ecommerceIntegrations.forEach(function(integration) {
WebshipOrderActionCreators.getPendingOrdersOfIntegration(integration.id);
});
},
_onOrderStoreChange: function() {
this.setState({
pendingOrders: OrderStore.getAllPendingOrders(),
pendingOrdersByIntegration: OrderStore.getPendingOrdersByIntegration()
});
}
I'm trying to follow Facebook's Flux pattern, and I'm pretty sure this doesn't follow it. I saw some other SO posts about nesting data with Flux, but I still don't understand. Any pointers are appreciated.
Everything here looks good except this:
ecommerceIntegrations.forEach(function(integration) {
WebshipOrderActionCreators.getPendingOrdersOfIntegration(integration.id);
});
Instead of trying to fire off an action in response to another action (or worse yet, an action for every item in ecommerceIntegrations), back up and respond to the original action. If you don't yet have a complete set of data, and you need to make two calls to the server, wait to fire the action until you have all the data you need to make a complete update to the system. Fire off the second call in the XHR success handler, not in the view component. This way your XHR calls are independent of the dispatch cycle and you have moved application logic out of the view and into an area where it's more appropriately encapsulated.
If you really want to update the app after the first call, then you can dispatch an action in the XHR success handler before making the second call.
Ideally, you would handle all of this in a single call, but I understand that sometimes that's not possible if the web API is not under your control.
In a Flux app, one should not think of Actions as being things that can be chained together as a strict sequence of events. They should live independently of each other, and if you have the impulse to chain them, you probably need to back up and redesign how the app is responding to the original action.