I'm building a activity stream feature in my app, all activities are created via controller methods.
When the controller method is successful the activity is recorder to activity table. Since my controller action is invoked via ajax, I tried posting directly from my rspec test.
I tried this :
Net::HTTP.post_form(URI.parse("http://localhost:5000#{inquiry_path}"), { :id=> #user.id, :type => 'Inquiry' })
This is what I see gets posted in my firebug, when making ajax call:
id:55
type:Inquiry
url:/user_inquiry
So I'm asserting whether the activity count has changed :
it "activity count should be changed" do
PublicActivity::Activity.count.should == 1
end
After I'm done with testing that count has changed, I wanted to see the user home page actually displaying the new notification.
But this test fails :
Failure/Error: PublicActivity::Activity.count.should == 1
expected: 1
got: 0 (using ==)
Just in case I put the puts statement in my controller, to check if the call actually reaches the controller :
puts "Hereeee"
I don't see the message getting printed so I guess the request never reaches the controller, why is that?
Am I doing something wrong here, how can I test this?
My test idea was ok except the part where the request didn't arrive to the controller, here is how I solved it (before and it):
page.driver.post("#{inquiry_path}?id=" + #user.id)
it "post request should return the right response code" do
page.driver.status_code.should eql 200
end
Now my requests are arriving to the controller.
Related
I am currently working on stripe webhooks for my rails application and am encountering a problem. All events except for checkout.session.completed are working.
My main goal is to change the payment status booking.paid to true when the event checkout.session.completed happens. The stripe webhooks logs give me a 500 internal server error for the event checkout.session.completed. I think the problem is in my Webhook controller but I just can't figure out what's wrong. Any help would be amazing!
This is my Webhooks_controller:
class WebhooksController < ApplicationController
skip_before_action :authenticate_user!
skip_before_action :verify_authenticity_token
def create
payload = request.body.read
sig_header = request.env['HTTP_STRIPE_SIGNATURE']
event = nil
begin
event = Stripe::Webhook.construct_event(
payload, sig_header, Rails.application.credentials[:stripe][:webhook]
)
rescue JSON::ParserError => e
status 400
return
rescue Stripe::SignatureVerificationError => e
# Invalid signature
puts "Signature error"
p e
return
end
# Handle the event
case event.type
when 'checkout.session.completed'
# session = event.data.object
# #booking.session.client_reference_id.paid = true
booking = Booking.find_by(checkout_session_id: event.data.object.id)
booking.update(paid: true)
end
render json: { message: 'success' }
end
end
I just happen to be writing the exact same feature as you so I'm glad this popped up in my queue.
From taking a quick look at the code nothing stands out much. If we know that the only event that doesn't work is checkout.session.completed, and that's the only one we're even processing, that narrows the problem down a bit... so here's what I did:
I copied your implementation into a controller in my Rails API project, then used the Stripe CLI to listen for, and forward Stripe events to the new endpoint:
$ stripe listen --forward-to http://localhost:3000/webhook_events
I commented out the actual handling of the event so it was only processing the event.
I then used the Stripe CLI in a new terminal to trigger a checkout.session.completed event:
$ stripe trigger checkout.session.completed
Once I did this, my API responded with a 201 and Stripe was happy.
So after all of that, as the previous answer suggests, I think the issue lies with your updating the Booking model, so I have a few suggestions to make working with webhooks in general easier:
Ideally, your controller should respond with a 2xx to Stripe as soon as you've verified the authenticity of the event with the Stripe gem.
Once you've completed that, I would immediately move the processing of the event to a background job using ActiveJob.
In the background job, you know that your event is valid and that the session completed successfully, so now you can start to update your Booking model. The arguments to the job could be as simple as just the Stripe checkout session ID.
Finally, splitting the responsibilities like this will make writing tests much easier (and will catch what the actual problem is!).
I hope this helps, good luck!
I think the issue might lie in the Booking.find_by method. Try adding a line to inspect the value of booking prior to updating its status.
when 'checkout.session.completed'
under this use print(session)
it will show error in the console that is affecting or showing 500 error in checkout session
I am working with the slack API. My script does a bunch of external processing and in some cases it can take around 3-6 seconds. What is happening is the Slack API expects a 200 response within 3 seconds and because my function is not finished within 3 seconds, it retries again and then it ends up posting the same automated responses 2-3 times.
I confirmed this by commenting out all the functions and I had no issue, it posted the responses to slack fine. I then added sleep 10 and it done the same responses 3 times so the ohly thing different was it took longer.
From what I read, I need to have threaded responses. I then need to first respond to the slack API in thread 1 and then go about processing my functions.
Here is what I tried:
def events
Thread.new do
json = {
"text": "Here is your 200 response immediately slack",
}
render(json: json)
end
puts "--------------------------------Json response started----------------------"
sleep 30
puts "--------------------------------Json response completed----------------------"
puts "this is a successful response"
end
When I tested it the same issue happened so I tried using an online API tester and it hits the page, waits 30 seconds and then returns the 200 response but I need it to respond immediately with the 200, THEN process the rest otherwise I will get duplicates.
Am I using threads properly or is there another way to get around this Slack API 3 second response limit? I am new to both rails and slack API so a bit lost here.
Appreciate the eyes :)
I would recommend using ActionJob to run the code in the background if you don't need to use the result of the code in the response. First, create an ActiveJob job by running:
bin/rails generate job do_stuff
And then open up the file created in app/jobs/do_stuff_job.rb and edit the #perform function to include your code (so the puts statements and sleep 30 in your example). Finally, from the controller action you can call DoStuff.perform_later and your job will run in the background! Your final controller action will look something like this:
def events
DoStuff.perform_later # this schedules DoStuff to be done later, in
# the background, so it will return immediately
# and continue to the next line.
json = {
"text": "Here is your 200 response immediately slack",
}
render(json: json)
end
As an aside, I'd highly recommend never using Thread.new in rails. It can create some really confusing behavior especially in test scripts for a number of reasons, but usually because of how it interacts with open connections and specifically ActiveRecord.
I have a ruby on Rails 4 app.
A user loads a page (called deal_page) then he clicks on a button which loads a Rails UJS modal message.
If he is online WHEN he clicks the button, I show a message using javascript offline status recognition (inside the Rails UJS ajax event).
on('ajax:error',function(event,xhr, status, error){
var isOnLine = navigator.onLine;
event.preventDefault();
if (isOnLine) {
//do stuff }
else {
// for disconnected users WHEN triggering call to server, invite to reconnect
var msg;
msg = Messenger().post({
message: "You lost internet,You need to be connected"
});
}
});
I want to test in rspec/capybara (I use webkit driver) that the right content ("You need to be connected. Please connect and try again") is displayed in that case in my feature test.
context "As signed-in visitor who is OFFLINE line when he clicks on the area triggering the modal" do
it "displays the right message " do
visit deal_page_path(deal)
# HOW TO ASSERT THAT THE USER LOSES HIS INTERNET CONNECTION
# USER GOES OFFLINE
first("a#button").click
within('ul.messenger') do
expect(page).to have_content('You lost internet,You need to be connected')
end
end
end
The complexity is that I can't disconnect him from the beginning of the test as he needs to be connected to load the page visit deal_page_path(deal) but then I want to simulate that he loses the internet connection.
How to achieve this ?
Assuming you're just checking window.naviagtor.onLine to determine whether or not it is on/offline (not depending on any events or anything) and because you're using capybara-webkit (won't work in selenium since FF won't let you overwrite navigator, not sure about poltergeist) you can just overwrite window.navigator with the result you want to get. You'll also need to generate an error response for your ajax request, which you can do with puffing-billy
page.execute_script "window.navigator = { onLine: false }"
Following another question (Rails controller - execute action only if the two methods inside succeed (mutually dependent methods)), I would like to ensure that inside one of my controller's action, if the user does not see the message displayed by a Rails UJS method, then the first methods of the controller action are not implemented either.
CONTEXT
I have a Controller with a method called 'actions'. When the app goes inside the method 'example_action', it implements a first method (1) update_user_table and then (2) another update_userdeal_table. (both will read and write database) and then (3) a third method which is related to a Rails UJS(ajax) call.
My issue is the following: in case of timeout in the middle of the controller, I want to avoid the case where the User table (via method 1) is updated, the UserDeal table is updated (via method 2) but NOT the thrid method i.e the ajax request that displays a message FAILS (error, timeout,...status like 500 or 404 or canceled or timeout...).
In my app, for mobile users if they're in a subway with internet connection, they launch the request that goes through 'example_action' controller, performs successfully the first method (1) and second method (2) but then they enter a tunnel for 60 seconds with very very low (<5b/sec) or NO internet connection, so for UX reasons, I timeout the request and display to the user 'sorry it took too long, try again'. The problem is that if I could not show to them the result (3), I need to be able to not execute (1) and(2).
I need the two methods (1) and(2) and(3) to be "mutually dependent": if one does not succeed, the other one should not be performed. It's the best way I can describe it.
Today Here is my code. It's not working as I am manually testing by clicking and then after just 2 seconds I disconnect the internet connection. I see in my database that (1) and(2) were performed and the databases were updated but I saw the message 'sorry it took too long, try again'.
Is that the right approach ? if yes how to do this?
If not, should I try a different angle like: if (1) and(2) were successful but not(3) should I store the fact the rails UJS xhr status was an error or timeout, that consequently the modal wxas not effectively displayed to the user and then show to them the result/message once they get back online?
Here is the code
html page for the user
the user click on a button that triggers a Rails UJS aajax request that will display ultimately the modal message
<div id=zone">
<%= link_to image_tag(smallest_src_request),
deal_modal_path,
remote: true %>
</div>
This send to a route that points to this controller action
Deal controller
class DealsController < ApplicationController
def deal_modal
Deal.transaction do
update_user_table # that's the (1)
update_userdeal_table # that's the (2)
# show_modal_message
respond_to do |format|
format.js
end
end
private
def update_user_table
# update the table User so it needs to connect to internet and acces the distant User table
end
def update_userdeal_table
# update the table UserDeal table so it needs to connect to internet and access the distant UserDeal table
end
end
This points to a js.erb view file
deal_modal.js.erb
showModalMessage("Here is your result <variable and all>);
To manage the ajax, error, timeouts... (if necessary to the resolution of the question), I use Rails UJS settings.
IMPORTANT: It is here that in case of error or timeout, I send the error / timeout modal message that comes in place of the one you normally get (see just above "Here is your result..")
$(document).on('page:change', function () {
$("#zone").
on('ajax:error',function(event,xhr, status, error){
console.log(' ajax call failed:', error);
var msg;
msg = Messenger().post({
hideAfter: 4,
message: "sorry it took too long, try again."
});
});
$(document).on('page:change', function () {
//set timeout Rails UJS ajax option that will display message for ajax:error cases defined above
$.rails.ajax = function(options) {
if (!options.timeout) {
options.timeout = 5000;
}
return $.ajax(options);
};
});
So the transaction will only rollback if an error is thrown. If an unhandled error is thrown, your application will crash and it will show a 500 error in some way.
In order to display the response to the user, on success or error, you will need to render something. So you don't want to prevent the respond_to block from executing. One way to handle this would be to set a flag via an instance variable.
def deal_modal
begin
Deal.transaction do
update_user_table
update_userdeal_table
end
#success = true
rescue
#success = false
end
# show_modal_message
respond_to do |format|
format.js
end
end
Then in deal_modal.js.erb
<% if #success %>
showModalMessage("Here is your result <variable and all>");
<% else %>
showModalMessage("There was a problem");
<% end %>
EDIT:
Dealing with connection issues is definitely tricky and there isn't really one ideal solution. I would generally let the database continue uninterrupted and let it return either a success or failure on it's own time. For lengthy transactions, you can use a gem like delayed_job or sidekiq to process the action in the background and let the rails controller return a response saying "...pending..." or something. Unless you're using websockets on the frontend, this means continually polling the server with ajax requests to see if the background process is complete.
Using Mvc.Facebook.Realtime the FacebookRealtimeUpdateController provides a process for handling user events (HandleUpdateAsync) , but not for page events.
Microsoft.AspNet.Mvc.Facebook.Realtime Namespace
I have managed to process page events by overriding the 'POST'
Public Overrides Function Post() As Task(Of Net.Http.HttpResponseMessage)
Dim content = Request.Content
Dim jsonContent As String = content.ReadAsStringAsync().Result
Dim ConvertedJson As RealTimeEvent = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject(Of RealTimeEvent)(jsonContent)
' Do something with the page events
Return MyBase.Post
End Function
However Facebook resends all events immediately , which I believe is because I am not returning a '200 OK' back to Facebook. (See quote)
First you'll need to prepare the page that will act as your callback URL. This URL will need to be accessible by Facebook servers, and be able to receive both the POST data that is sent when an update happens, but also accept GET requests in order to verify subscriptions.
This URL should always return a 200 OK HTTP response when invoked by Facebook.
I wiresharked my server and I do not see a 200 OK HTTP response, so I believe this something to do with the way I am overloading the post.
Can I somehow return an OK response from my overridden function or maybe it would be better to drop the whole Microsoft.AspNet.Mvc.Facebook.Realtime solution and just handle the Subscription GETs and Posts from facebook myself?
Update: I turned off "only my own code' and I can see an exception occurring in the AspNet.MVC.Facebook.dll.
So new question, How do I isolate this exception?
For others looking.
The issue was actually the HandleUpdateAsync function which must be overridden. This is fired after the 'Post'
If you don't return a valid task the exception is thrown inside AspNet.MVC.Facebook.dll and Facebook is never given a 200 OK.
I was using This blog on how to use the FacebookRealtimeUpdateController but in that version the 'HandleUpdateAsync' does not return a task and the processing is done in the function.
So by creating a task that does nothing , everything appears to be working fine.
Public Overrides Function HandleUpdateAsync(notification As ChangeNotification) As Task
Dim newtask As New Task(New System.Action(Sub()
Dim x As String = ""
End Sub))
Return newtask
End Function
Edit: But it creates a massive memory leak which cannot be cleared even with recycling..
So the real solution is to just create your own controller and forget the FacebookRealtimeUpdateController completely.
Very easy to do and saves allot of hassle!