We Keep Coding

Twitch TV JSON API Issue

So,I am trying to use the twitch API:
https://codepen.io/sterg/pen/yJmzrN
If you check my codepen page you'll see that each time I refresh the page the status order changes and I can't figure out why is this happening.
Here is my javascript:
$(document).ready(function(){
var ur="";
var tw=["freecodecamp","nightblue3","imaqtpie","bunnyfufuu","mushisgosu","tsm_dyrus","esl_sc2"];
var j=0;
for(var i=0;i<tw.length;i++){
ur="https://api.twitch.tv/kraken/streams/"+tw[i];
$.getJSON(ur,function(json) {
$(".tst").append(JSON.stringify(json));
$(".name").append("<li> "+tw[j]+"<p>"+""+"</p></li>");
if(json.stream==null){
$(".stat").append("<li>"+"Offline"+"</li>");
}
else{
$(".stat").append("<li>"+json.stream.game+"</li>");
}
j++;
})
}
});

$.getJSON() works asynchronously. The JSON won't be returned until the results come back. The API can return in different orders than the requests were made, so you have to handle this.
One way to do this is use the promise API, along with $.when() to bundle up all requests as one big promise, which will succeed or fail as one whole block. This also ensures that the response data is returned to your code in the expected order.
Try this:
var channelIds = ['freecodecamp', 'nightblue3', 'imaqtpie', 'bunnyfufuu', 'mushisgosu', 'tsm_dyrus', 'esl_sc2'];
$(function () {
$.when.apply(
$,
$.map(channelIds, function (channelId) {
return $.getJSON(
'https://api.twitch.tv/kraken/streams/' + encodeURIComponent(channelId)
).then(function (res) {
return {
channelId: channelId,
stream: res.stream
}
});
})
).then(function () {
console.log(arguments);
var $playersBody = $('table.players tbody');
$.each(arguments, function (index, data) {
$playersBody.append(
$('<tr>').append([
$('<td>'),
$('<td>').append(
$('<a>')
.text(data.channelId)
.attr('href', 'https://www.twitch.tv/' + encodeURIComponent(data.channelId))
),
$('<td>').text(data.stream ? data.stream.game : 'Offline')
])
)
})
})
});
https://codepen.io/anon/pen/KrOxwo
Here, I'm using $.when.apply() to use $.when with an array, rather than list of parameters. Next, I'm using $.map() to convert the array of channel IDs into an array of promises for each ID. After that, I have a simple helper function with handles the normal response (res), pulls out the relevant stream data, while attaching the channelId for use later on. (Without this, we would have to go back to the original array to get the ID. You can do this, but in my opinion, that isn't the best practice. I'd much prefer to keep the data with the response so that later refactoring is less likely to break something. This is a matter of preference.)
Next, I have a .then() handler which takes all of the data and loops through them. This data is returned as arguments to the function, so I simply use $.each() to iterate over each argument rather than having to name them out.
I made some changes in how I'm handling the HTML as well. You'll note that I'm using $.text() and $.attr() to set the dynamic values. This ensures that your HTML is valid (as you're not really using HTML for the dynamic bit at all). Otherwise, someone might have the username of <script src="somethingEvil.js"></script> and it'd run on your page. This avoids that problem entirely.

It looks like you're appending the "Display Name" in the same order every time you refresh, by using the j counter variable.
However, you're appending the "Status" as each request returns. Since these HTTP requests are asynchronous, the order in which they are appended to the document will vary each time you reload the page.
If you want the statuses to remain in the same order (matching the order of the Display Names), you'll need to store the response data from each API call as they return, and order it yourself before appending it to the body.

At first, I changed the last else condition (the one that prints out the streamed game) as $(".stat").append("<li>"+jtw[j]+": "+json.stream.game+"</li>"); - it was identical in meaning to what you tried to achieve, yet produced the same error.
There's a discrepancy in the list you've created and the data you receive. They are not directly associated.
It is a preferred way to use $(".stat").append("<li>"+json.stream._links.self+": "+json.stream.game+"</li>");, you may even get the name of the user with regex or substr in the worst case.
As long as you don't run separate loops for uploading the columns "DisplayName" and "Status", you might even be able to separate them, in case you do not desire to write them into the same line, as my example does.
Whatever way you're choosing, in the end, the problem is that the "Status" column's order of uploading is not identical to the one you're doing in "Status Name".

This code will not preserve the order, but will preserve which array entry is being processed
$(document).ready(function() {
var ur = "";
var tw = ["freecodecamp", "nightblue3", "imaqtpie", "bunnyfufuu", "mushisgosu", "tsm_dyrus", "esl_sc2"];
for (var i = 0; i < tw.length; i++) {
ur = "https://api.twitch.tv/kraken/streams/" + tw[i];
(function(j) {
$.getJSON(ur, function(json) {
$(".tst").append(JSON.stringify(json));
$(".name").append("<li> " + tw[j] + "<p>" + "" + "</p></li>");
if (json.stream == null) {
$(".stat").append("<li>" + "Offline" + "</li>");
} else {
$(".stat").append("<li>" + json.stream.game + "</li>");
}
})
}(i));
}
});
This code will preserve the order fully - the layout needs tweaking though
$(document).ready(function() {
var ur = "";
var tw = ["freecodecamp", "nightblue3", "imaqtpie", "bunnyfufuu", "mushisgosu", "tsm_dyrus", "esl_sc2"];
for (var i = 0; i < tw.length; i++) {
ur = "https://api.twitch.tv/kraken/streams/" + tw[i];
(function(j) {
var name = $(".name").append("<li> " + tw[j] + "<p>" + "" + "</p></li>");
var stat = $(".stat").append("<li></li>")[0].lastElementChild;
console.log(stat);
$.getJSON(ur, function(json) {
$(".tst").append(JSON.stringify(json));
if (json.stream == null) {
$(stat).text("Offline");
} else {
$(stat).text(json.stream.game);
}
}).then(function(e) {
console.log(e);
}, function(e) {
console.error(e);
});
}(i));
}
});

Do I ever need to synchronize node.js code like in Java?

I have only recently started developing for node.js, so forgive me if this is a stupid question - I come from Javaland, where objects still live happily sequentially and synchronous. ;)
I have a key generator object that issues keys for database inserts using a variant of the high-low algorithm. Here's my code:
function KeyGenerator() {
var nextKey;
var upperBound;
this.generateKey = function(table, done) {
if (nextKey > upperBound) {
require("../sync/key-series-request").requestKeys(function(err,nextKey,upperBound) {
if (err) { return done(err); }
this.nextKey = nextKey;
this.upperBound = upperBound;
done(nextKey++);
});
} else {
done(nextKey++);
}
}
}
Obviously, when I ask it for a key, I must ensure that it never, ever issues the same key twice. In Java, if I wanted to enable concurrent access, I would make make this synchronized.
In node.js, is there any similar concept, or is it unnecessary? I intend to ask the generator for a bunch of keys for a bulk insert using async.parallel. My expectation is that since node is single-threaded, I need not worry about the same key ever being issued more than once, can someone please confirm this is correct?
Obtaining a new series involves an asynchronous database operation, so if I do 20 simultaneous key requests, but the series has only two keys left, won't I end up with 18 requests for a new series? What can I do to avoid that?
UPDATE
This is the code for requestKeys:
exports.requestKeys = function (done) {
var db = require("../storage/db");
db.query("select next_key, upper_bound from key_generation where type='issue'", function(err,results) {
if (err) { done(err); } else {
if (results.length === 0) {
// Somehow we lost the "issue" row - this should never have happened
done (new Error("Could not find 'issue' row in key generation table"));
} else {
var nextKey = results[0].next_key;
var upperBound = results[0].upper_bound;
db.query("update key_generation set next_key=?, upper_bound=? where type='issue'",
[ nextKey + KEY_SERIES_WIDTH, upperBound + KEY_SERIES_WIDTH],
function (err,results) {
if (err) { done(err); } else {
done(null, nextKey, upperBound);
}
});
}
}
});
}
UPDATE 2
I should probably mention that consuming a key requires db access even if a new series doesn't have to be requested, because the consumed key will have to be marked as used in the database. The code doesn't reflect this because I ran into trouble before I got around to implementing that part.
UPDATE 3
I think I got it using event emitting:
function KeyGenerator() {
var nextKey;
var upperBound;
var emitter = new events.EventEmitter();
var requesting = true;
// Initialize the generator with the stored values
db.query("select * from key_generation where type='use'", function(err, results)
if (err) { throw err; }
if (results.length === 0) {
throw new Error("Could not get key generation parameters: Row is missing");
}
nextKey = results[0].next_key;
upperBound = results[0].upper_bound;
console.log("Setting requesting = false, emitting event");
requesting = false;
emitter.emit("KeysAvailable");
});
this.generateKey = function(table, done) {
console.log("generateKey, state is:\n nextKey: " + nextKey + "\n upperBound:" + upperBound + "\n requesting:" + requesting + " ");
if (nextKey > upperBound) {
if (!requesting) {
requesting = true;
console.log("Requesting new series");
require("../sync/key-series-request").requestSeries(function(err,newNextKey,newUpperBound) {
if (err) { return done(err); }
console.log("New series available:\n nextKey: " + newNextKey + "\n upperBound: " + newUpperBound);
nextKey = newNextKey;
upperBound = newUpperBound;
requesting = false;
emitter.emit("KeysAvailable");
done(null,nextKey++);
});
} else {
console.log("Key request is already underway, deferring");
var that = this;
emitter.once("KeysAvailable", function() { console.log("Executing deferred call"); that.generateKey(table,done); });
}
} else {
done(null,nextKey++);
}
}
}
I've peppered it with logging outputs, and it does do what I want it to.

As another answer mentions, you will potentially end up with results different from what you want. Taking things in order:
function KeyGenerator() {
// at first I was thinking you wanted these as 'class' properties
// and thus would want to proceed them with this. rather than as vars
// but I think you want them as 'private' members variables of the
// class instance. That's dandy, you'll just want to do things differently
// down below
var nextKey;
var upperBound;
this.generateKey = function (table, done) {
if (nextKey > upperBound) {
// truncated the require path below for readability.
// more importantly, renamed parameters to function
require("key-series-request").requestKeys(function(err,nKey,uBound) {
if (err) { return done(err); }
// note that thanks to the miracle of closures, you have access to
// the nextKey and upperBound variables from the enclosing scope
// but I needed to rename the parameters or else they would shadow/
// obscure the variables with the same name.
nextKey = nKey;
upperBound = uBound;
done(nextKey++);
});
} else {
done(nextKey++);
}
}
}
Regarding the .requestKeys function, you will need to somehow introduce some kind of synchronization. This isn't actually terrible in one way because with only one thread of execution, you don't need to sweat the challenge of setting your semaphore in a single operation, but it is challenging to deal with the multiple callers because you will want other callers to effectively (but not really) block waiting for the first call to requestKeys() which is going to the DB to return.
I need to think about this part a bit more. I had a basic solution in mind which involved setting a simple semaphore and queuing the callbacks, but when I was typing it up I realized I was actually introducing a more subtle potential synchronization bug when processing the queued callbacks.
UPDATE:
I was just finishing up one approach as you were writing about your EventEmitter approach, which seems reasonable. See this gist which illustrates the approach. I took. Just run it and you'll see the behavior. It has some console logging to see which calls are getting deferred for a new key block or which can be handled immediately. The primary moving part of the solution is (note that the keyManager provides the stubbed out implementation of your require('key-series-request'):
function KeyGenerator(km) {
this.nextKey = undefined;
this.upperBound = undefined;
this.imWorkingOnIt = false;
this.queuedCallbacks = [];
this.keyManager = km;
this.generateKey = function(table, done) {
if (this.imWorkingOnIt){
this.queuedCallbacks.push(done);
console.log('KG deferred call. Pending CBs: '+this.queuedCallbacks.length);
return;
};
var self=this;
if ((typeof(this.nextKey) ==='undefined') || (this.nextKey > this.upperBound) ){
// set a semaphore & add the callback to the queued callback list
this.imWorkingOnIt = true;
this.queuedCallbacks.push(done);
this.keyManager.requestKeys(function(err,nKey,uBound) {
if (err) { return done(err); }
self.nextKey = nKey;
self.upperBound = uBound;
var theCallbackList = self.queuedCallbacks;
self.queuedCallbacks = [];
self.imWorkingOnIt = false;
theCallbackList.forEach(function(f){
// rather than making the final callback directly,
// call KeyGenerator.generateKey() with the original
// callback
setImmediate(function(){self.generateKey(table,f);});
});
});
} else {
console.log('KG immediate call',self.nextKey);
var z= self.nextKey++;
setImmediate(function(){done(z);});
}
}
};

If your Node.js code to calculate the next key didn't need to execute an async operation then you wouldn't run into synchronization issues because there is only one JavaScript thread executing code. Access to the nextKey/upperBound variables will be done in sequence by only one thread (i.e. request 1 will access first, then request 2, then request 3 et cetera.) In the Java-world you will always need synchronization because multiple threads will be executing even if you didn't make a DB call.
However, in your Node.js code since you are making an async call to get the nextKey you could get strange results. There is still only one JavaScript thread executing your code, but it would be possible for request 1 to make the call to the DB, then Node.js might accept request 2 (while request 1 is getting data from the DB) and this second request will also make a request to the DB to get keys. Let's say that request 2 gets data from the DB quicker than request 1 and update nextKey/upperBound variables with values 100/150. Once request 1 gets its data (say values 50/100) then it will update nextKey/upperBound. This scenario wouldn't result in duplicate keys, but you might see gaps in your keys (for example, not all keys 100 to 150 will be used because request 1 eventually reset the values to 50/100)
This makes me think that you will need a way to sync access, but I am not exactly sure what will be the best way to achieve this.

Best method to string together variety of DB calls in Node js

I basically need to make about 3 calls to get the data for a json object.. It basically JSON array of JSON object which have some attributes, one of which is an array of other values selected using a second query, then that one also has an array inside which is selected with another db call.
I tried using asyn.concatSeries so that I can dig down into the bottom call and put together all the information I collected for one root json object but that's creating a lot of unexpected behaviour..
Example of JSON
[
{
"item" : "firstDbCall"
"children" : [ {
"name" : "itemDiscoveredWithSecondDBCall"
"children" : [ itemsDiscoveredwith3rdDBCall]
},
]
}
]
This is really difficult using node.js. I really need to figure out how to do this properly since I have to do many of these for different purposes.
EDIT
This is the code i have. There's some strange behaviour with async.concatSeries. The results get called multiple times after each one of the functions finish for each array. So i had to put a check in place. I know it's very messy code but i've been just putting band-aids all over it for the past 2 hours to make it work..
console.log("GET USERS HAREDQARE INFO _--__--_-_-_-_-_____");
var query = "select driveGroupId from tasks, driveInformation where agentId = '"
+ req.params.agentId + "' and driveInformation.taskId = tasks.id order by driveInformation.taskId desc;";
connection.query(query, function(err, rows) {
if (rows === undefined) {
res.json([]);
return;
}
if(rows.length<1) { res.send("[]"); return;}
var driveGroupId = rows[0].driveGroupId;
var physicalQuery = "select * from drives where driveGroupId = " + driveGroupId + ";";
connection.query(physicalQuery, function(err, rows) {
console.log("ROWSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS");
console.log(rows);
async.concatSeries(rows, function(row, cb) {
console.log("-------------------------------SINGLE ROW-------------------------------------");
console.log(row);
if(row.hasLogicalDrives != 0) {
console.log("HAS LOGICAL DRIVES");
console.log(row.id);
var query = "select id, name from logicalDrives where driveId = " + row.id;
connection.query(query, function(error, drives) {
console.log("QUERY RETURNED");
console.log(drives);
parseDriveInfo(row.name, row.searchable, drives, cb);
});
}
else
var driveInfo = { "driveName" : row.name, "searchable" : row.searchable};
console.log("NO SUB ITEMS");
cb(null, driveInfo);
}, function(err, results) {
console.log("GEETTTTINGHERE");
console.log(results);
if(results.length == rows.length) {
console.log("RESULTS FOR THE DRIVE SEARCH");
console.log(results);
var response = {"id": req.params.agentId};
response.driveList = results;
console.log("RESPONSE");
console.log(response);
res.json(response);
}
});
});
});
};
parseDriveInfo = function(driveName, searchable, drives, cb) {
async.concatSeries(drives, function(drive,callback) {
console.log("SERIES 2");
console.log(drive);
console.log("END OF DRIVE INFO");
var query = "select name from supportedSearchTypes where logicalDriveId = " + drive.id;
connection.query(query, function(error, searchTypes) {
drive.searchTypes = searchTypes;
var driveInfo = { "driveName" :driveName,
"searchable" : searchable,
"logicalDrives" : drive
};
callback(null, driveInfo);
});
}, function (err, results) {
console.log("THIS IS ISISIS ISISISSISISISISISISISISISIS");
console.log(results);
if(results.length === drives.length) {
console.log("GOTHERE");
cb(null, results);
}
});
}

Getting good enough with async to use exactly the right combination of methods under the right circumstances takes a fair amount of experience. Most likely your case in particular can be handled with async.waterfall if its query1 then query2(dataFoundByQuery1) then query3(dataFoundByQuery2). But depending on the circumstances you need to mix and match async methods appropriately and sometimes have 2 levels - for example a "big picture" async.waterfall where some of the steps in the waterfall do async.parallel or async.series as needed. I've never used async.concat and given your needs I think you have chosen the wrong method. The workhorses are async.each, async.eachSeries, async.waterfall, and async.map, at least for the web app & DB query use cases I mostly encounter, so make sure you really have those understood before exploring the more specific convenience methods.

EDIT: This is a more in depth example based on use of the connection library you seem to be using. Please note, some of this is javascript psuedo code. Things like adding objects to the resultsArray are clearly not complete, the only thing I took time to make sure was correct is the "flow of logic" as it pertains to callbacks. Everything else is for you to implement. In order to support multiple calls to the same callback function and maintain state from call to call, the best way is to wrap the set of callbacks in a closure. This allows the callbacks to share some state with the main event loop. This allows you to pass arguments to the callbacks, without actually having to pass them as arguments, much like class variables in c++, or even globals in javascript, but we haven't poluted the global scope :)
function queryDataBase(query) {
//wrap the whole query in a function so the callbacks can share some
//variables with similar scope. This is called a closure
int rowCounter = 0;
var dataRowsFromStep2;
var resultsArray = {};
connection.query(query, dataBaseQueryStep2);
function dataBaseQueryStep2(err, rows) {
//do something with err and rows
dataRowsFromStep2 = rows;
var query = getQueryFromRow(dataRowsFromStep2[rowCounter++]);//Always zero the first time. Might need to double check rows isn't empty!
connection.query(query, dataBaseQueryStep3);
}
function dataBaseQueryStep3(err, rows) {
//do something with err and rows
if(rowCounter < dataRowsFromStep2.size) {
resultsArray.add(rows);//Probably needs to be more interesting, but you get the idea
//since this is within the same closure, rowCounter maintains it's state
var query = getQueryFromRow(dataRowsFromStep2[rowCounter++]);
//recursive call query using dataBaseQueryStep3 as it's callback repeatedly until
//we run out of rows to call it on.
connection.query(query, dataBaseQueryStep3)
} else {
//when the if statement fails we have no more rows to run queries on so return to main program flow
returnToMainProgramLogic(resultsArray);
}
}
}
function returnToMainProgramLogic(results) {
//continue running your program here
}
I personally like the above logic better than the syntax async produces... I believe the heart of your problem rests in your nested calls to async, and the fact that ASYN itself, runs the series of functions asynchronously, but in order(confusing I know). If you write your program like this, you won't have to worry about it!

I would strongly suggest using sequelize.js It provides a really powerful orm that allows you to chain queries together. It also allows you to directly load your data into js objects, write dynamic sql, and connect to many different databases. Picture ActiveRecord from the Ruby world for Node.

Re-write Async JS process (Possibly to use JQuery Promise)

I am having trouble with two functions because they rely on chaining Async Tasks. The clearAll is a click event which should empty the database then reload the page. Clear is a function from the database module (database.clear).
I would like to use JQuery Promises/Deffered if they are appropriate but I cant quite grasp them for this use case.
I have re-written the code following #Larry K's answer
clearAll: function()
{
var refresh = function()
{
localStorage.clear();
sessionStorage.clear();
window.location.href = window.location.pathname;
console.log("feeling refreshed");
};
database.open();
//This is what I'd like to be able to do
//With Jquery or callbacks
$.when(database.clear()).then(refresh);
},
clear: function (callback, errorCallback)
{
var sql = "SELECT name FROM sqlite_master WHERE type='table' AND name != ?",
args = ["__WebKitDatabaseInfoTable__"];
var dbTableNamesResult = function (tx, result)
{
var dropSql = "";
for (var i = 0; i < result.rows.length; i++)
{
dropSql = "DROP TABLE IF EXISTS " + result.rows.item(i).name + "; ";
execute(dropSql);
}
};
execute(sql, args, dbTableNamesResult);
},

The big issue is that you have two layers of callbacks including a loop for the second layer.
You're using the db to queue multiple drop table calls since you're immediately calling many database.dropTable methods (without waiting for the prior one to complete.)
That's fine but an easier way to solve the problem is to drop all of the tables at once. The SQLite manual says that multiple table drop sql statements are supported. But you'd probably want to test it.
It appears that you're using a wrapper library around the sql calls, yes? Use the appropriate call for the execSQL method shown in my code.
Also, your refresh function is being called both for success and failure of the drop table statement. AFAIK, you're never going to call your errorCallback. I'd try:
var clearDatabase = function (successCallback, errorCallback) {
var dbTableNamesResult = function (tx, result) {
var sql1 = '',
rows = result.rows;
for (var i = 0; i < rows.length; i++) {
sql1 = sql1 + " DROP TABLE " + rows.item(i).name + ";";
}
//now make one call to drop multiple tables...
database.execSQL(sql1, successCallback, errorCallback);
// pseudo function, update as appropriate
}
database.open();
database.query(
"SELECT name FROM sqlite_master WHERE type='table' AND name != ?",
['__WebKitDatabaseInfoTable__'], dbTableNamesResult);
};
added
The function which calls clearDatabase should provide both the successCallback and errorCallback. In case of error, either try again or just log it...
updated
I see that that the successCallback and errorCallback functions can be called directly by the db. Updated the code.
Resources used in this answer
HTML5 Rocks: Client-Side Storage
Getting Started with HTML5 Local Databases
SQLite SQL As Understood By SQLite

Having attempted to implement jQuery deferred myself the answer I was looking for was provided by zerkms's answer to How can I write this as a jQuery deffered function

New to asynchronous programming in JavaScript. Any advice?

Asynchronous callbacks are great but when one callback depends on the result of another I have callbacks with api calls that have callbacks, and so on.
apiCall(function () { apiCall(function () { apiCall(function () ...
I can name the callback functions instead of including them inline. That looks prettier and has less nesting but I do not find it any easier to read.
Here is an example. I need to query the local sqlite database, use the result to query a server, then use the response to update the local database.
function sync() {
db.transaction(
function (transaction) {
execute(transaction, 'SELECT max(server_time) AS server_time FROM syncs;', [],
function (transaction, results) { // Query results callback
var t = results.rows.item(0).server_time;
$.post('sync.json', { last_sync_time: (t || '1980-01-01') },
function (data) { // Ajax callback
db.transaction(
function(transaction) {
$(data.thing).each(function () {
var thing = new Thing(this.thing);
thing.insert(transaction);
});
});
});
});
});
}
Is there a way to untagle this (other than naming the callbacks)?

I think you're too quick to discard un-nesting things by naming your functions rather than writing them inline. This is pretty much the only way to clean up that mess.
Instead of:
do_a(
function () {
// more nesting...
}
);
Use names to provide a bit of clarity and purpose to each function:
function on_a_complete() {
}
do_a(on_a_complete);

I think you answered your own question. Naming your callbacks is really the only way to clean this up anymore. Something like:
execute(transaction, 'SELECT max(server_time) AS server_time FROM syncs;', [],handleLocalResults, errorHandler);
handleLocalResults = function (transaction, results)...
handleServerResults = func...

Naming the callbacks is one thing you can do, but the other thing that you need to do is to have non-overlapping SQL transactions. (1)
Your first transaction should be like this:
// The whole thing starts here
db.transaction(selectTimeCB, null, ajaxPost);
The transaction starts with the callback to select the time, and when the transaction is complete, make a call to the ajaxPost operation.
// Initial transaction to get server_time
var selectTimeCB = function(t) {
var query = 'SELECT max(server_time) AS server_time FROM syncs';
t.executeSql(query, [], postLastSyncCB);
};
// This saves the results from the above select, and nothing else.
var server_time;
var postLastSyncCB = function(t, results) {
server_time = results.rows.item(0).server_time;
};
var ajaxPost = function() {
$.post('sync.json', { last_sync_time: (server_time || '1980-01-01') }, nextDbTransaction);
};
If you have overlapped SQL transactions, that can really kill the performance of the database. I recently did a test of 200 mixed transactions on a database with a bit over 500 rows, and found that keeping the transactions separate reduced a run time of over 90 seconds to 3-5 seconds.