Nested promise with Parse.com - javascript

I've a function to update the DB rows one by one with Parse's promise
exports.update = function (items, successHandler, errorHandler) {
Parse.Cloud.useMasterKey();
var Item = Parse.Object.extend("Item");
Parse.Promise.as().then(function () {
var promises = [];
for (var i = 0; i < items.length; i++) {
(function (j) { //create new closure so i changes with each callback
var query = new Parse.Query(Item);
query.equalTo("sku", items[j]['sku'];);
promises.push(query.find({
success: function (results) {
if (results.length === 1) {
var object = results[0];
console.log('Item exists, now updating..');
return object.save(items[j]).then(function () {
console.log("Item saved"); // never called, why?
}, function (error) {
console.error("Item not saved with error: " + error.message); // never called, why?
});
}
},
error: function (error) {
console.error("Failure during querying..");
}
}));
})(i);
}
return Parse.Promise.when(promises);
}).then(function () {
return successHandler("Item updated.");
}, function (error) {
return errorHandler(error);
}
);
};
The problem is, the object.save is actually called and data is being saved in the DB, however, the following two promises are never called, not matter success or not.

I think because the Promise you return from your inner success function is not going to be necessarily fulfilled. You better promisify the query.find() function with a .then() instead
promises.push(query.find().then(function(results) {
if (results.length === 1) {
var object = results[0];
console.log('Item exists, now updating..');
return object.save(items[j]);
}
}).then(function() {
console.log("Item saved");
}, function (error) {
console.error("Item not saved with error: " + error.message);
});
}));

Related

Promises when passing a function as a parameter

I understand how promises work for the most part, but I have a lot of trouble understanding how to deal with them when I need to pass a function as a parameter:
var promise = new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
// Do async job
ec2.describeInstances(function(err, data) {
console.log("\nIn describe instances:\n");
var list = [];
if (err) reject(err); // an error occurred
else {
var i = 0 ;
//console.log(data.Reservations);
var reservations = data.Reservations;
for (var i in reservations) {
var instances = reservations[i]['Instances'];
var j = 0;
//console.log(JSON.stringify(instances, null, 2));
for (j in instances){
var tags = instances[j]
var k = 0;
var instanceId = tags['InstanceId'];
var tag = tags['Tags'];
var l;
//console.log(tag);
for (l in tag){
//console.log(instanceId);
//console.log(tag[l]['Value']);
if (String(tag[l]['Value']) == '2018-10-15T23:45' || String(tag[l]['Key']) == 'killdate') {
console.log(tag[l]['Key'] + ' ' + tag[l]['Value']);
list.push(instanceId);
console.log(list);
//return(list);
}
}
}
}
resolve(list);
}
});
});
promise.then(function (list) {
ec2.terminateInstances(list, function(err, data) {
if (err) console.log(err, err.stack); // an error occurred
else console.log("made it"); });
});
before I had the first part of the code as:
return new Promise(function(resolve, reject) { ... }
and that worked for the first part, but as soon as I changed it to a "var" and added the new promise in underneath, it stopped working. (edit) When I mean "stopped working" I mean, neither of the two functions run, i.e.: it ends the handler before either functions are finished and none of the return statements or console logs.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks!
Wondering if something like this would work:
var promise = Promise.resolve(function() {
return ec2.describeInstances...
})
promise
.then(/* handle successful promise resolution */ )
.catch(/* handle promise rejection */ )
var promise = Promise.resolve();
promise
.then(function() {
return ec2.describeInstances(function(err, data) {
var list = [];
if (err) throw err; // an error occurred
// else logic
})
})
.catch(/* if needed here */)
.then(function (list) {
return ec2.terminateInstances(list, function(err, data) {
if (err) console.log(err, err.stack); // an error occurred
else console.log("made it"); });
})
.catch(/* if needed here */)
my suggestion is to break up your logic - it will be easier to handle the result you want to achieve.
A proper way in my opinion:
promise function(a service function):
function myAsyncFunction(url) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
result = () => resolve(data);
fail = () => reject(err);
});
}
then your promise caller:
myAsyncFunction().then(dataHandler(result), // "promise worked!"
function (err) {// Error: "It broke"
console.log(err)
});
then the logic:
function dataHandler(data) { /* data logic */}
good luck
I ended up fixing it. Sorry, forgot to post back before I added in the SNS portion. I ended up learning a ton about functional programming on the way and decided to use the await function over the complicated promise syntax. Below is the code:
exports.handler = async (event, result, callback) => {
const AWS = require('aws-sdk');
const date = new Date().toISOString().substr(0, 16)
const ec2 = new AWS.EC2();
var sns = new AWS.SNS();
console.log("date is: " + date)
console.log(date.length);
const params = {
TopicArn:'arn:aws:sns:us-east-1:503782973686:test',
Message:'Success!!! ',
Subject: 'TestSNS'
}
const describeResult = await ec2.describeInstances().promise()
const terminatableInstances = await describeResult
.Reservations
.reduce((acc, reservation) => acc.concat(reservation.Instances), [])
//'2018-10-15T23:45'
.map((instance) => {
//console.log(instance)
//console.log(instance.Tags)
var date = instance.Tags
.filter(tag => tag.Key == 'killdate' && tag.Value == date) //date should be in this format on tag: 2018-10-15T23:45
.reduce((acc, curr) => curr.Value, null);
if (date != null) {
return instance.InstanceId;
}
return null;
})
.filter(id => id != null)
console.log(terminatableInstances);
const snsPush = await ec2.terminateInstances({
InstanceIds: terminatableInstances,
//DryRun: true //set this flag if you want to do a dry run without terming instances
}, (err, data) => {
if (err) {
console.log('no instances to terminate!')
}
else {
console.log('terminated instances')
}
})
console.log(snsPush)
//return(snsPush).promise()
return sns.publish(params, (err, data) => {
if (err) {
console.log(err, err.stack);
}
else {
console.log('sent');
}
}).promise();
};

service variable undefined at the time of being accessed in scope

I am trying to implement a controller which has its scope variable being set by service variable like this :
$scope.sidebar= resourceService.sidebar;
The variable sidebar is set by a function called on startup:
var cb = function (api, data) {
for (var key in data) {
var logoArray = data[key];
service.sidebar[key] = logoArray.map(function (logo) {
logo.img = api + "/" + logo.img;
return logo;
});
}
}
service.requestOnStartup = function (api) {
var defer = $q.defer();
$http.get(config.ApiEndpoint.Base + api).success(function (data) {
if (angular.isObject(data)) {
defer.resolve(cb(api, data));
} else {
$log.error("[ResourceService] Unexpected data from resource backend");
defer.reject(data);
}
}).error(function (msg) {
$log.error("Invalid request");
defer.reject(msg);
});
return defer.promise;
};
While the control reaches the scope, the service variable is still not resolved and by the time it is resolved, the control over scope is lost. How do i tackle this problem using promises ?
Your code looks fine if you are displaying $scope.sidebar directly. The variable will be filled asynchronously so it will come after a moment.
If you are doing some action on it while the controller is loading, you'll need to use $watch
$scope.$watch('sidebar', function() {
if ($scope.sidebar) {...} // check for existence here
});
By the way, you can simplify your requestOnStartup like this
service.requestOnStartup = function (api) {
return $http.get(config.ApiEndpoint.Base + api).then(function (data) {
if (angular.isObject(data)) {
return cb(api, data);
} else {
$log.error("[ResourceService] Unexpected data from resource backend");
return $q.reject(data);
}
}, function (msg) {
$log.error("Invalid request");
return $q.reject(msg);
});
};
You can also use the existing $q service of angular js:
service.requestOnStartup = function (api) {
return $q(function(resolve, reject){
$http.get(config.ApiEndpoint.Base + api).then(function (data) {
if (angular.isObject(data)) {
resolve(cb(api, data));
} else {
$log.error("[ResourceService] Unexpected data from resource backend");
reject(data);
}
}, function (msg) {
$log.error("Invalid request");
reject(msg);
});
});
};

Promise chains and anonymous promise returns

Here I have a chain of promises that works fine. All the *.destroy's are promises that return promises:
function callDBDestroy() {
var db;
DB_Categories.destroy().then(function () {
return DB_Equipment.destroy();
}).catch(function (err) {
showMsg("Error in callDBDestroy: " + err);
}).then(function () {
return DB_Certificates.destroy();
}).catch(function (err) {
showMsg("Error in callDBDestroy: " + err);
}).then(function () {
return DB_Locations.destroy();
}).catch(function (err) {
showMsg("Error in callDBDestroy: " + err);
});
}
But I want to add an if statement into each one to check to see if the PouchDB database exists (which it doesn't if the DB_* is null).
If it exists, I want to destroy it then return (and these all return promises).
If it doesn't exist, I want to return an anonymous promise which returns nothing as none of the promises have any data I am concerned with.
In the example, I added in some sample code to do the if statement and I was wondering what I would put in the null instance that would pass a promise (resolve) value.
function callDBDestroy() {
var db;
DB_Categories.destroy().then(function () {
if( DB_Equipment != null) {
return DB_Equipment.destroy();
}
else {
Anonymous empty promise - something like:
new Promise().resolve();
}
}).then(function () {
return DB_Certificates.destroy();
}).then(function () {
return DB_Locations.destroy();
}).catch(function (err) {
showMsg("Error in callDBDestroy: " + err);
});
}
Thanks,
Tom
It looks like you are just wondering how to manually resolve/reject a Promise. If that is the case you can just call Promise.resolve(optionalValue) or Promise.reject(optionalValue) if you want to go to the catch handler:
function callDBDestroy() {
var db;
DB_Categories.destroy()
.then(function () {
if( DB_Equipment != null) {
return DB_Equipment.destroy();
} else {
return Promise.resolve();
}
}).then(function () {
return DB_Certificates.destroy();
}).then(function () {
return DB_Locations.destroy();
}).catch(function (err) {
showMsg("Error in callDBDestroy: " + err);
});
}
You could wrap it:
function withDb(db, handler) {
return function onFulfilled(value) {
if(db === null) throw new Error("DB Null");
return handler(value);
});
}
Which would let you do:
function callDBDestroy() {
var db;
var w = withDb(db); // or whatever instance
DB_Categories.destroy().then(w(function () {
// do stuff
}))); // .then(w( to chain calls here.
...
}
I want to return an anonymous promise which returns nothing as none of the promises have any data I am concerned with. Something like:
new Promise().resolve();
You are looking for Promise.resolve(undefined). Though you can omit the undefined, that's implicit.
….then(function () {
if (DB_Equipment != null) {
return DB_Equipment.destroy();
} else {
return Promise.resolve(undefined);
}
}).…
And you don't even have to return a promise from a then callback, simply returning undefined (or not returning) will have the same effect.
….then(function () {
if (DB_Equipment != null) {
return DB_Equipment.destroy();
}
}).…
In your case, I'd recommend a wrapper function:
function destroyDatabase(db, name = "db") {
if (db != null)
return db.destroy().catch(err => {
showMsg(`Error in destroying ${name}: ${err}`);
});
else
return Promise.resolve();
}
function callDBDestroy() {
return destroyDatabase(DB_Categories, "categories")
.then(() => destroyDatabase(DB_Certificates, "certificates"))
.then(() => destroyDatabase(DB_Locations, "locations"))
}
// or even in parallel:
function callDBDestroy() {
return Promise.all([
destroyDatabase(DB_Categories, "categories"),
destroyDatabase(DB_Certificates, "certificates"),
destroyDatabase(DB_Locations, "locations")
]);
}
How about using an Array, since you do the very same task, and only the DB changes:
//serial
function callDBDestroy() {
var databases = [
DB_Categories,
DB_Equipment,
DB_Certificates,
DB_Locations
];
function errorMessage(err){ showMsg("Error in callDBDestroy: " + err) };
databases.reduce(
(prev, db) => db == null?
prev:
prev.then(() => db.destroy().catch(errorMessage)),
Promise.resolve()
)
}
//parallel
function callDBDestroy() {
var databases = [
DB_Categories,
DB_Equipment,
DB_Certificates,
DB_Locations
];
function errorMessage(err){ showMsg("Error in callDBDestroy: " + err) };
databases.forEach( db => db && db.destroy().catch(errorMessage) );
}
I've added a serial and a paralell version.
It seems that you can DRY this out and replace a lot of redundant code by using an array of databases and then just loop through the array:
function callDbDestroy();
var dbs = [DB_Categories, DB_Equipment, DB_Certificates, DB_Locations];
// chain all the destroys together
return dbs.reduce((p, db) => {
return p.then(() => {
if (db) {
return db.destroy().catch(err => {
showMsg("Error in callDBDestroy: " + err);
});
}
});
}, Promise.resolve());
}
You do not have to return a promise from a .then() handler. If you just have no return value, then it's just like doing return undefined which just means that no value will be passed to the next .then() handler, but the promise chain will continue just fine. Conceptually, it works the same as return Promise.resolve(), but there's no need to make an extra promise there.
Since you aren't passing a value from one .then() to the next in the chain, you have nothing to pass there so you can just not return anything if there's no db value to call destroy on.
FYI, using .reduce() to loop through an array is with the return p.then(...) structure is a common design pattern for sequencing async operations on an array.
FYI, using the Bluebird promise library (which has some useful helpers), this could be done like this:
function callDbDestroy();
var dbs = [DB_Categories, DB_Equipment, DB_Certificates, DB_Locations];
return Promise.mapSeries(dbs, db => {
if (db) {
return db.destroy().catch(err => {
showMsg("Error in callDBDestroy: " + err);
});
}
});
}
For more info on why the Bluebird (or other promise libraries) are still useful even with ES6, see Are there still reasons to use promise libraries like Q or BlueBird now that we have ES6 promises?
Since it appears that these databases might all be independent, I'm wondering why you are forcing them to be executed in sequence. If they don't have to be forced into sequence, then you could do this:
function callDbDestroy();
var dbs = [DB_Categories, DB_Equipment, DB_Certificates, DB_Locations];
return Promise.all(dbs.map(db => {
if (db) {
return db.destroy().catch(err => {
showMsg("Error in callDBDestroy: " + err);
});
}
}));
}
Since this runs the operations in parallel, it has the opportunity for faster end-to-end execution time vs. strict serialization.

Recursively calling asynchronous function that returns a promise

I'm trying to recursively call AWS's SNS listEndpointsByPlatformApplication. This returns the first 100 endpoints then a token in NextToken if there are more to return (details: AWS SNS listEndpointsByPlatformApplication).
Here's what I've tried:
var getEndpoints = function(platformARN, token) {
return new models.sequelize.Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
var params = {
PlatformApplicationArn: platformARNDev
};
if (token != null) {
params['NextToken'] = token;
}
sns.listEndpointsByPlatformApplication(params, function(err, data) {
if (err) {
return reject(err);
}
else {
endpoints = endpoints.concat(data.Endpoints); //save to global var
if ('NextToken' in data) {
//call recursively
return getEndpoints(platformARN, data.NextToken);
}
else {
console.log('trying to break out!');
return resolve(true);
}
}
});
});
}
I'm calling it with:
getEndpoints(platformARNDev, null)
.then(function(ret) {
console.log('HERE!');
}, function(err) {
console.log(err);
});
Problem is: the first call happens, then the recursive call happens, and I get the message trying to break out! but the HERE! never gets called. I've got something wrong with how my promises are returning I think.
Grateful for pointers.
The problem is that you try and resolve/reject partially completed query. Here is a complete working example with dummy service. I incapsulated the data grabbing into it's own recursive function and only do resolve/reject when i've completely fetched all the data or stumbled upon an error:
// This is the mock of the service. It yields data and token if
// it has more data to show. Otherwise data and null as a token.
var dummyData = [0, 1, 2, 3, 4];
function dummyAsyncCall(token, callback) {
token = token || 0;
setTimeout(function() {
callback({
dummyDataPart: dummyData[token],
token: (typeof (dummyData[token]) == 'undefined') ? null : (token + 1)
});
});
}
// Here is how you would recursively call it with promises:
function getAllData() {
//data accumulator is sitting within the function so it doesn't pollute the global namespace.
var dataSoFar = [];
function recursiveCall(token, resolve, reject) {
dummyAsyncCall(token, function(data) {
if (data.error) {
reject(data.error);
}
if (!data.token) {
//You don't need to return the resolve/reject result.
resolve(dataSoFar);
} else {
dataSoFar = dataSoFar.concat(data.dummyDataPart);
recursiveCall(data.token, resolve, reject);
}
});
}
return new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
// Note me passing resolve and reject into the recursive call.
// I like it this way but you can just store them within the closure for
// later use
recursiveCall(null, resolve, reject);
});
}
//Here is the call to the recursive service.
getAllData().then(function(data) {
console.log(data);
});
Fiddle with me
That's because you dont need to return resolve/reject, just call resolve/reject when the recursive call completes. A rough code would look like this
var getEndpoints = function(platformARN, token) {
return new models.sequelize.Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
var params = {
PlatformApplicationArn: platformARNDev
};
if (token != null) {
params['NextToken'] = token;
}
sns.listEndpointsByPlatformApplication(params, function(err, data) {
if (err) {
reject(err);
}
else {
endpoints = endpoints.concat(data.Endpoints); //save to global var
if ('NextToken' in data) {
//call recursively
getEndpoints(platformARN, data.NextToken).then(function () {
resolve(true);
}).catch(function (err) {
reject(err);
});
}
else {
console.log('trying to break out!');
resolve(true);
}
}
});
});
}
(caution: this is just a rough code, may work or may not, but is to give a general idea)
I've added a code snippet below, to support this concept, and it works great, check it out.
i = 0;
$('#output').empty();
function pro() {
return new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
if (i > 3) {
resolve();
return;
}
window.setTimeout(function() {
console.log(i);
$('#output').append(i).append('<br/>');
i += 1;
pro().then(function() {
resolve()
}).catch(function() {
reject()
});
}, 2000);
});
}
pro().then(function () { $('#output').append("now here"); })
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.11.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<div id="output"></div>

There is a default timeout with q.allSettled?

I'm working on a NodeJS app who is fetch lot of information from differents API.
During the biggest fetching, i have some issues with my promises.
I guess I launch too many requests and too fastly ...
var promises = [];
list_consumptions.forEach(function (item)
{
item.consumptions.forEach(function (data)
{
promises.push(getDetails(item.line, data));
});
});
In the getDetails()
function getDetails(line, item)
{
var deferred = Q.defer();
var result = [];
ovh.request('GET', '/telephony/*******/service/' + line + '/voiceConsumption/' + item, function (err, fetched_data)
{
if (!err)
{
result = {
'line': line,
'consumption_id': item,
'type': fetched_data.wayType,
'calling': fetched_data.calling,
'called': fetched_data.called,
'plan_type': fetched_data.planType,
'destination_type': fetched_data.destinationType,
'date': fetched_data.creationDatetime,
'duration': fetched_data.duration,
'price': fetched_data.priceWithoutTax
};
// console.log("RESULT: ",result);
deferred.resolve(result);
}
else
{
deferred.reject(err);
console.log(err);
}
});
return deferred.promise;
}
After the loop :
Q.allSettled(promises).done(function(final_result)
{
final_result.forEach(function (promise_fetch){
if (promise_fetch.state != 'fulfilled')
{
console.log("ERREUR Merge");
}
else
{
all_consumptions.push(promise_fetch.value);
}
deferred.resolve(all_consumptions);
});
return deferred.promise;
});
With this code, i've got exclusively log error : 400
I'd try to slow down my loop with some setTimeOut, in this case, the fetch succeed but my q.allSettled is jumped... I'm really lost...
Any ideas to improve my promises handles / loop handles ?
I'm pretty sure that you already know, but it's my first week of JS... and nodeJS.
Thanks a lot for your help...
You could use a promise-loop, like this:
function pwhile(condition, body) {
var done = Q.defer();
function loop() {
if (!condition())
return done.resolve();
Q.when(body(), loop, done.reject);
}
Q.nextTick(loop);
return done.promise;
}
And then, your code would be:
list_consumptions.forEach(function (item) {
var i = 0;
pwhile(function() { return i < item.consumptions.length; }, function() {
i++;
return getDetails(item.line, data)
.then(function(res) {
all_consumptions.push(res);
})
.catch(function(reason) {
console.log("ERREUR Merge");
});
}).then(function() {
// do something with all_consumptions here
});
});

Categories