I have several HTTP callouts that are in a schedulable and set to run ever hour or so. After I deployed the app on the app exchange and had a salesforce user download it to test, it seems the jobs are not executing.
I can see the jobs are being scheduled to run accordingly however the database never seems to change. Is there any reason this could be happening or is there a good chance the flaw lies in my code?
I was thinking that it could be permissions however I am not sure (its the first app I am deploying).
Check if the organisation of your end user has added your endpoint to "remote site settings" in the setup. By endpoint I mean an address that's being called (or just the domain).
If the class is scheduled properly (which I believe would be a manual action, not just something that magically happens after installation... unless you've used a post-install script?) you could also examine Setup -> Apex Jobs and check if there are any errors. If I'm right, there will be an error about callout not allowed due to remote site settings. If not - there's still a chance you'll see something that will make you think. For example batch job has executed successfully but there were 0 iterations -> problem?
Last but not least - you can always try the debug logs :) Enable them in Setup (or open the developer console), fire the scheduled class's execute() manually and observe the results? How to fire it manually? Sth like this pasted to "execute anonymous":
MySchedulableClass sched = new MySchedubulableClass();
sched.execute(null);
Or - since you know what's inside the scheduled class - simply experiment.
Please note that if the updates you might be performing somehow violate for example validation rules your client has - yes, the database will be unchanged. But in such case you should still be able to see failures in Setup -> Apex Jobs.
Related
We have a project in Octopus that has been configured to release to an environment on a schedule.
In the process definition we use a step template for Slack to send the team a notification when a release takes place. We would like to avoid sending this Slack message if the release was fired by the schedule - rather than user initiated.
I was hoping there would be a system variable that we could check before running the Slack step - but I can't seem to find anything documented as such, and google didn't turn anything up.
TIA
If you are using Octopus 2019.5.0 or later, there are two variables that will be populated if the deployment was created by a trigger.
Octopus.Deployment.Trigger.Id
Octopus.Deployment.Trigger.Name
You can see the details at https://github.com/OctopusDeploy/Issues/issues/5462
For your Slack step, you can use this run condition to skip it if the trigger ID is populated.
#{unless Octopus.Deployment.Trigger.Id}True#{/unless}
I hope that helps!
I'm wondering is there a way to recognize the OfflineComamd is being executed or internal flag or something to represent this command has been passed or mark it has been executed successfully. I have issue in recognizing the command is passed or not with unstable internet. I keep retrieve the records from database and comparing each and every time to see this has been passed or not. But due to the flow of my application, I'm finding it very difficult to avoid duplicates.IS there any automatic process to make sure commands executed automatically or something else?
2nd question, I can use UITimer to check isOffline() to make sure internet is connected or not on the forms. Is there something equivalent on server page or where queries is written to see internet is disconnected or not. When the control moved to queries and internet is disconnected I see the dialog open from form page being frozen for unlimited time and will not end. I have to close and re-open the app to continue the synchronization process.At the same time I cannot set a timeout for dialog because I'm not sure how long it will take the complete the Synchronization process. Please advise.
Extending on the same topic but I have created a new issue just to give more clarity on my questions.
executeOfflineCommand skips a command while executing from storage on Android
There is no way to know if a connection will stay stable as it requires knowledge of the future. You can work like transaction services do where the server side processes an offline command as a transaction using the approach of 2-phase commit.
In this approach you have an algorithm similar to this:
Client sends command to server
Server returns a special unique ID for the command
Client asks server to perform the unique id
Server acknowledges that the command was performed
If the first 2 stages didn't complete you just do that again. The worst thing that could happen is some orphan commands on the server.
If the 3rd option didn't complete you just do it again. The server knows whether it processed the command and will just acknowledge it if it was already processed.
following on from this question:
GWT detect GAE version changes and reload
I would like to further clarify some things.
I have an enterprise app (GWT 2.4 & GAEJ 1.6.4 - using GWT-RPC) that my users typically run all day in their browsers, indeed some don't bother refreshing the browser from day to day. I make new releases on a pretty regular basis, so am trying to streamline the process for minimal impact to my users. - Not all releases concern all users, so I'd like to minimize the number of restarts.
I was hoping it might be possible to do the following. Categorize my releases as follows:
1) releases that will cause an IncompatibleRemoteServiceException to be thrown
and 2) those that don't : i.e. only affect the server, or client but not the RPC interface.
Then I could make lots of changes to the client and server without affecting the interface between the two. As long as I don't make a modification to the RPC interface, presumably I can change server code and or client code and the exception won't be thrown? Right? or will any redeployment of GAE cause an old client to get an IncompatibleRemoteServiceException ?
If I was able to do that I could batch up interface busting changes into fairly infrequent releases and notify my users a restart will be required.
many thanks for any help.
I needed an answer pretty quick so I thought I'd just do some good old fashioned testing to see what's possible. Hopefully this will be useful for others with production systems using GWT-RPC.
Goal is to be able to release updates / fixes without requiring all connected browsers to refresh. Turns out there is quite a lot you can do.
So, after my testing, here's what you can and can't do:
no problem
add a new call to a RemoteService
just update some code on the server e.g. simple bug fix, redeploy
just update some client (GWT) code and redeploy (of course anyone wanting new client functionality will have to refresh browser, but others are unaffected)
limited problems
add a parameter to an existing RemoteService method - this one is interesting, that particular call will throw "IncompatibleRemoteServiceException" (of course) but all others calls to the same Remote Service or other Remote Services (Impl's) are unaffected.
Add a new type (as a parameter) to any method within a RemoteService - this is the most interesting one, and is what led me to do this testing. It will render that whole RemoteService out of date for existing clients with IncompatibleRemoteServiceException. However you can still use other RemoteServices. - I need to do some more testing here to fully understand or perhaps someone else knows more?
so if you know what you're doing you can do quite a lot without having to bother your users with refreshes or release announcements.
Anybody here has actually implemented any logging strategy when application is running as XBAP ? Any suggestion (as code) as to how to implement a simple strategy base on your experience.
My app in desktop mode actually logs to a log file (rolling log) using integrated asop log4net implementation but in xbap I can't log cause it stores the file in cache (app2.0 or something folder) so I check if browser hosted and dont log since i dont even know if it ever logs...(why same codebase)....if there was a way to push this log to a service like a web service or post error to some endpoint...
My xbap is full trust intranet mode.
I would log to isolated storage and provide a way for users to submit the log back to the server using either a simple PUT/POST with HttpWebRequest or, if you're feeling frisky, via a WCF service.
Keep in mind an XBAP only gets 512k of isolated storage so you may actually want to push those event logs back to the server automatically. Also remember that the XBAP can only speak back to it's origin server, so the service that accepts the log files must run under the same domain.
Here's some quick sample code that shows how to setup a TextWriterTraceListener on top of an IsolatedStorageFileStream at which point you can can just use the standard Trace.Write[XXX] methods to do your logging.
IsolatedStorageFileStream traceFileStream = new IsolatedStorageFileStream("Trace.log", FileMode.OpenOrCreate, FileAccess.Write);
TraceListener traceListener = new TextWriterTraceListener(traceFileStream);
Trace.Listeners.Add(traceListener);
UPDATE
Here is a revised answer due to the revision you've made to your question with more details.
Since you mention you're using log4net in your desktop app we can build upon that dependency you are already comfortable working with as it is entirely possible to continue to use log4net in the XBAP version as well. Log4net does not come with an implementation that will solve this problem out of the box, but it is possible to write an implementation of a log4net IAppender which communicates with WCF.
I took a look at the implementation the other answerer linked to by Joachim Kerschbaumer (all credit due) and it looks like a solid implementation. My first concern was that, in a sample, someone might be logging back to the service on every event and perhaps synchronously, but the implementation actually has support for queuing up a certain number of events and sending them back to the server in batch form. Also, when it does send to the service, it does so using an async invocation of an Action delegate which means it will execute on a thread pool thread and not block the UI. Therefore I would say that implementation is quite solid.
Here's the steps I would take from here:
Download Joachim's WCF appender implementation
Add his project's to your solution.
Reference the WCFAppender project from your XBAP
Configure log4net to use the WCF appender. Now, there are several settings for this logger so I suggest checking out his sample app's config. The most important ones however are QueueSize and FlushLevel. You should set QueueSize high enough so that, based on how much you actually are logging, you won't be chattering with the WCF service too much. If you're just configuring warnings/errors then you can probably set this to something low. If you're configuring with informational then you want to set this a little higher. As far as FlushLevel you should probably just set this to ERROR as this will just guarantee that no matter how big the queue is at the time an error occurs everything will be flushed at the moment an error is logged.
The sample appears to use LINQ2SQL to log to a custom DB inside of the WCF service. You will need to replace this implementation to log to whatever data source best suits your needs.
Now, Joachim's sample is written in a way that's intended to be very easy for someone to download, run and understand very quickly. I would definitely change a couple things about it if I were putting it into a production solution:
Separate the WCF contracts into a separate library which you can share between the client and the server. This would allow you to stop using a Visual Studio service reference in the WCFAppender library and just reference the same contract library for the data types. Likewise, since the contracts would no longer be in the service itself, you would reference the contract library from the service.
I don't know that wsHttpBinding is really necessary here. It comes with a couple more knobs and switches than one probably needs for something as simple as this. I would probably go with the simpler basicHttpBinding and if you wanted to make sure the log data was encrypted over the wire I would just make sure to use HTTPS.
My approach has been to log to a remote service, keyed by a unique user ID or GUID. The overhead isn't very high with the usual async calls.
You can cache messages locally, too, either in RAM or in isolated storage -- perhaps as a backup in case the network isn't accessible.
Be sure to watch for duplicate events within a certain time window. You don't want to log 1,000 copies of the same Exception over a period of a few seconds.
Also, I like to log more than just errors. You can also log performance data, such as how long certain functions take to execute (particularly out-of-process calls), or more detailed data in response to the user explicitly entering into a "debug and report" mode. Checking for calls that take longer than a certain threshold is also useful to help catch regressions and preempt user complaints.
If you are running your XBAP under partial trust, you are only allowed to write to the IsolatedStorage on the client machine. And it's just 512 KB, which you would probably want to use in a more valuable way (than for logging), like for storing user's preferences.
You are not allowed to do any Remoting stuff as well under partial trust, so you can't use log4net RemotingAppender.
Finally, under partial trust XBAP you have WebPermission to talk to the server of your app origin only. I would recommend using a WCF service, like described in this article. We use similar configuration in my current project and it works fine.
Then, basically, on the WCF server side you can do logging to any place appropriate: file, database, etc. You may also want to keep your log4net logging code and try to use one of the wcf log appenders available on the internets (this or this).
Anyone use the timer feature of RichCopy? I have a job that works fine when I manually start the job. However, when I schedule the job and click run, the app appears to be waiting for the scheduled time to elapse yet never fires. Interesting enough when I stop the job the copy starts.
Anyone have any experience with using RichCopy timer?
IanB
Try created a batch file with command line options. Then use windows scheduler to launch the batch.
OMBG (Bill Gates) You need to read and get security policy and the respect it has to place on a hierarchy of upstream objects and credentials. Well that's the MS answer and attitude...
The reality is if you are working with server OSs you need to understand their security & policy frameworks, and how to debug them :). If your process loses the necessary file permissions or rights (2 different things) you should ask: "Hot damn, why didn't I fix that in the config/setup". People that blast the vendor/project (or even ####&$! MS) are just blinding themselves to the solution/s.
In most cases this kind of issue is due to Windows' AD removing the rights of a Local administrator User to run a scheduled task. It is a common security setting in corporate networks (implemented with glee by Domain Admins to upset developers) though it is really a default setting these days. It happens because the machine updates against an upstream policy (after you've scheduled a task) and decides that all of a sudden it won't trust you to run it (even though previously it let you set it up). In a perfect world it wouldn't let you set it up in the first place, but that isn't the way policy applies in Windows... (####&$! MS). LOL
Wow it only took 5 months to get an answer! (but here they are for the next person at least!)