I'm trying to use pynag with shinken and pynag.Model.config.needs_reload always return True for there is no object_cache_file in shinken, which is an old design in nagios and no longer needed in shinken.
I don't want to call object_cache_file back. Is there any native method for shinken to check whether shinken-arbiter needs reload?
Related
I am pretty new to react and trying to use a web component in the template and there are is a thing i dont understand.
It can be seen in this example below if you run the page (may need to hit reload once). Then watch the console. You will see the log in the constructor() the outerHTML is not "ready" yet its missing all attributes in the markup and they arrive only later on (in the connectedCallback) which is the second log.
https://stackblitz.com/edit/react-ts-jcjuvs?file=App.tsx,index.tsx
Whats happening here? Is there anyway to force the attributes to be available initially? Or not taken off and then put back on?
Note that doing this in a normal page does not have the same effect.
https://stackblitz.com/edit/js-l4uh4f?file=index.js,index.html
a) whats happening?
b) can i make this not happen?
Thanks!
There no no guarantee that a web component will have access to attributes in the constructor and attribute values can change at anytime. You should use the attributeChangedCallback lifecycle callback to know when values are set.
The element's attributes and children must not be inspected, as in the non-upgrade case none will be present, and relying on upgrades makes the element less usable.
Requirements for custom element constructors and reactions
What is the difference between seeding a action and call a 'setter' method of a store in reflux data flow?
TodoActions['add'](todo)
vs
TodoStore.add(todo)
Action will trigger your store via RefluxJS lib, but Store.Add() is calling add method directly
First off, it's useful to note that Whatever.func() and Whatever['func']() are just two different syntaxes for the same thing. So the only difference here in your example is what you're calling it on.
As far as calling a method in a store directly, vs. an action which then ends up calling that method in a store, the difference is architectural, and has to do with following a pattern that is more easily scaled, works more broadly, etc. etc.
If any given event within the program (such as, in this case, adding something) emits 1 clear action that anything can listen for, then it becomes MUCH easier to build large programs, edit previously made programs, etc. The component saying that this event has happened doesn't need to keep track of everywhere that might need to know about it...it just needs to say TodoActions.add(todo), and every other part of the program that needs to know about an addition happening can manage itself to make sure it's listening for that action.
So that's why we follow the 1 way looping pattern:
component -> action -> store -> back to component
Because then the flow of events happening is much more easily managed, because each part of the program can manage its own knowledge about the program state and when it needs to be changed. The component emitting the action doesn't need to know every possible part of the program that might need that action...it just needs to emit it.
I have a WPF application that uses entity framework. I am going to be implementing a repository pattern to make interactions with EF simple and more testable. Multiple clients can use this application and connect to the same database and do CRUD operations. I am trying to think of a way to synchronize clients repositories when one makes a change to the database. Could anyone give me some direction on how one would solve this type of issue, and some possible patterns that would be beneficial for this type of problem?
I would be very open to any information/books on how to keep clients synchronized, and even be alerted of things other clients are doing(The only thing I could think of was having a server process running that passes messages around). Thank you
The easiest way by far to keep every client UI up to date is just to simply refresh the data every so often. If it's really that important, you can set a DispatcherTimer to tick every minute when you can get the latest data that is being displayed.
Clearly, I'm not suggesting that you refresh an item that is being edited, but if you get the fresh data, you can certainly compare collections with what's being displayed currently. Rather than just replacing the old collection items with the new, you can be more user friendly and just add the new ones, remove the deleted ones and update the newer ones.
You could even detect whether an item being currently edited has been saved by another user since the current user opened it and alert them to the fact. So rather than concentrating on some system to track all data changes, you should put your effort into being able to detect changes between two sets of data and then seamlessly integrating it into the current UI state.
UPDATE >>>
There is absolutely no benefit from holding a complete set of data in your application (or repository). In fact, you may well find that it adds detrimental effects, due to the extra RAM requirements. If you are polling data every few minutes, then it will always be up to date anyway.
So rather than asking for all of the data all of the time, just ask for what the user wants to see (dependant on which view they are currently in) and update it every now and then. I do this by simply fetching the same data that the view requires when it is first opened. I wrote some methods that compare every property of every item with their older counterparts in the UI and switch old for new.
Think of the Equals method... You could do something like this:
public override bool Equals(Release otherRelease)
{
return base.Equals(otherRelease) && Title == otherRelease.Title &&
Artist.Equals(otherRelease.Artist) && Artists.Equals(otherRelease.Artists);
}
(Don't actually use the Equals method though, or you'll run into problems later). And then something like this:
if (!oldRelease.Equals(newRelease)) oldRelease.UpdatePropertyValues(newRelease);
And/Or this:
if (!oldReleases.Contains(newRelease) oldReleases.Add(newRelease);
I'm guessing that you get the picture now.
Working with cakePHP this is my situation:
I have Users and Orders. Orders are created by Users. Only the user that created the Order is allowed to edit it. (admins can also, but I don't think that is important).
I am using the standard Auth component and have an isAuthorized function in my OrdersController that checks if the user is logged in and stops users from performing actions that they are not allowed to perform.
I want to make a decision on whether or not the user can perform the action based on the params passed and the data that comes out of the database. i.e. does the user own the order they are trying to edit? I am currently checking inside each action if this is the case.
Is there a way that I can trigger the same workflow that is triggered by returning false from isAuthorized? maybe throwing an Exception?
I don't want to do these finer checks inside the isAuthorized function, because it will require ugly methods of accessing the passed params, and duplication of data retrieval. How does cakePHP expect me to handle this?
(I have more complicated checks to make in other controllers)
This is what you're looking for:
http://book.cakephp.org/2.0/en/tutorials-and-examples/blog-auth-example/auth.html#authorization-who-s-allowed-to-access-what
overriding the AppController’s isAuthorized() call and internally
checking if the parent class is already authorizing the user. If he isn’t, then just allow him to access the add action, and conditionally access
edit and delete.
Hope this helps
There are a few ways to get this to work. I have a simple example outlined here:
http://nuts-and-bolts-of-cakephp.com/2009/04/22/simplistic-example-of-row-level-access-control-with-auth-security-and-app-model-in-cakephp/
It should give you an idea of how to handle this in general, and then you can build on top of that as one approach.
The +1 API documentation is here: http://code.google.com/apis/+1button/#jsapi
There is no mention of how to determine whether the viewing user has already clicked the button or not. This would be a very useful function because it would allow me to encourage people who haven't +1'd a page to do so without putting users who have already +1'd the page through a needless and possibly confusing step.
Has anyone found a way to do this? Thanks
There is callback attribute, which allows you to add custom callback function, which can react to +1 or -1. See http://www.odditysoftware.com/blog/trap-and-track-google-plus-button-click-events_45.html
But your question is old, maybe it wasn't present yet.