where can I get info about phone status changes? I see in documentation this enum: enum {PENDING, DELETED, MIGRATED, BANNED, RESTRICTED, RATE_LIMITED, FLAGGED, CONNECTED, DISCONNECTED, UNKNOWN, UNVERIFIED} I want to understand, if now it is PENDING (for example), what next might be possible? for every status.
And one more question, how webhook phone_number_quality_update event type (ONBOARDING / FLAGGED / UNFLAGGED / UPGRADE / DOWNGRADE) is connected to phone status?
Related
I have a question regarding the effect of eventually consistent (EC) microservice systems.
Imagine we have a booking system - a user-service A and booking-service B. Each service has its own database. Imagine the system does a concurrent booking of the same resource for distinct users at the same time. Lets assume we have a Runtime Verification System checking the concurrent booking.
Would it be possible that the monitor does not realize the concurrent booking at B, because the update in the database is done delayed because of the EC mechanism?
In your example, the Booking Service is the source of truth (presumably) for whether or not the resource is available to book. So, that service should be pretty clear on allowing the first booking request to happen and rejecting the second.
In a case like this, where "first come first served" is the requirement, you'd want an intermediate state that would wait for a response from the Booking Service and update the User Service only when a response has been received.
If your architecture is set up right, User Service shouldn't be calling Booking Service directly anyway - it should be communicating through a messaging plane. As such, when the User clicks "Book Now," you could generate a resourceBookingRequested message and submit it to the queue. You'd acknowledge this request has been queued to the user and update their UI to "Awaiting Booking Confirmation..." or something similar.
Once the booking is accepted, or rejected, the User Service subscribes to the resulting message and updates the UI (and/or takes other actions like sending an email) to let the user know their request succeeded or didn't.
Having OTRS queues to run escalations are fine. The thing is, that the tickets stay escalated if the solution time is exceeded.
The thing is sometimes it is a client responsibility to deliver something to close the ticket.
In this case the client gets a response.
How can I reset the escalation time to the time the ticket is replied and the pending is set to a specific date?
So the escalation time will occur e.g. 1 day after the pending date.
Just check https://www.znuny.com/add-ons/znuny4otrs-repository and follow the instructions. After this the package is available the package manager
try the free add-on Znuny4OTRS-EscalationSuspend. Then you can configure states where escalations are suspended. E.g. a state like 'pending customer feedback'
I am working on building a page to check whether is there any confirmed transaction for all the address in my wallet that i created.
$webHook->setUrl("https://requestb.in/r0dspfr0");
$webHook->setEvent('confirmed-tx');
$webHook->setToken('my_token');
$webHook->setWalletName('andy');
The problem here is i only want it to callback to that url whenever a transction had six confirmations.
I had tried to set the event to tx-confirmation or others, it cant work as what i want, it will always callback when there is only one confirmation, after that it stop.
Are u using the Java sdk?
You can try "tx-confirmation" and only process the transactions with 6 confirmations
confirmed-tx Triggered for every new transaction making it into a new block; in other words, for every first transaction confirmation. This is equivalent to listening to the new-block event and fetching each transaction in the new Block. The payload is a confirmed TX.
tx-confirmation Simplifies listening to confirmations on all transactions for a given address up to a provided threshold. Sends first the unconfirmed transaction and then the transaction for each confirmation. Use the confirmations property within the Event to manually specify the number of confirmations desired (maximum 10, defaults to 6). The payload is a TX.
I'm creating a web app for handling various surveys. An admin can create his own survey and ask users to fill it up. Users are defined by target groups assigned to the survey (so only user in survey's target group can fill the survey).
One of methods to define a target group is a "Token target group". An admin can decide to generate e.g. 25 tokens. After that, the survey can be accessed by anyone who uses a special link (containing the token of course).
So now to the main question:
Every token might have an e-mail address associated with itself. How can I safely send e-mails containing the access link for the survey? I might need to send a few thousand e-mails (max. 10 000 I believe). This is an extreme example and such huge mailings would be needed only occasionally.
But I also would like to be able to keep track of the e-mail message status (was it send or was there any error?). I would also like to make sure that the SMTP server doesn't block this mailing. It would also be nice if the application remained responsive :) (The task should run in background).
What is the best way to handle that problem?
As far as I'm concerned, the standard Django mailing feature won't be much help here. People report that setting up a connection and looping through messages calling send() on them takes forever. It wouldn't run "in background", so I believe that this could have negative impact on the application responsiveness, right?
I read about django-mailer, but as far as I understood the docs - it doesn't allow to keep track of the message status. Or does it?
What are my other options?
Not sure about the rest, but regardless for backgrounding the task (no matter how you eventually do it) you'll want to look for Celery
The key here is to reuse connection and to not open it again for each email. Here is a documentation on the subject.
Imagine 3 system components:
1. External ecommerce web service to process credit card transactions
2. Local Database to store processing results
3. Local UI (or win service) to perform payment processing of the customer order document
The external web service is obviously not transactional, so how to guarantee:
1. results to be eventually persisted to database when received from web service even in case the database is not accessible at that moment(network issue, db timeout)
2. prevent clients from processing the customer order while payment initiated by other client but results not successfully persisted to database yet(and waiting in some kind of recovery queue)
The aim is to do processing having non transactional system components and guarantee the transaction won't be repeated by other process in case of failure.
(please look at it in the context of post sell payment processing, where multiple operators might attempt manual payment processing; not web checkout application)
Ask the payment processor whether they can detect duplicate transactions based on an order ID you supply. Then if you are unable to store the response due to a database failure, you can safely resubmit the request without fear of double-charging (at least one PSP I've used returned the same response/auth code in this scenario, along with a flag to say that this was a duplicate).
Alternatively, just set a flag on your order immediately before attempting payment, and don't attempt payment if the flag was already set. If an error then occurs during payment, you can investigate and fix the data at your leisure.
I'd be reluctant to go down the route of trying to automatically cancel the order and resubmitting, as this just gets confusing (e.g. what if cancelling fails - should you retry or not?). Best to keep the logic simple so when something goes wrong you know exactly where you stand.
In any system like this, you need robust error handling and error reporting. This is doubly true when it comes to dealing with payments, where you absolutely do not want to accidentaly take someone's money and not deliver the goods.
Because you're outsourcing your payment handling to a 3rd party, you're ultimately very reliant on the gateway having robust error handling and reporting systems.
In general then, you hand off control to the payment gateway and start a task that waits for a response from the gateway, which is either 'payment accepted' or 'payment declined'. When you get that response you move onto the next step in your process and everything is good.
When you don't get a response at all (time out), or the response is invalid, then how you proceed very much depends on the payment gateway:
If the gateway supports it send a 'cancel payment' style request. If the payment cancels successfully then you probably want to send the user to a 'sorry, please try again' style page.
If the gateway doesn't support canceling, or you have no communications to the gateway then you will need to manually (in person, such as telephone) contact the 3rd party to discover what went wrong and how to proceed. To aid this you need to dump as much detail as you have to error logs, such as date/time, customer id, transaction value, product ids etc.
Once you're back on your site (and payment is accepted) then you're much more in control of errors, but in brief if you cant complete the order, then you should either dump the details to disk (such as csv file for manual handling) or contact the gateway to cancel the payment.
Its also worth having a system in place to track errors as they occur, and if an excessive number occur then consider what should happen. If its a high traffic site for example you may want to temporarily prevent further customers from placing orders whilst the issue is investigated.
Distributed messaging.
When your payment gateway returns submit a message to a durable queue that guarantees a handler will eventually get it and process it. The handler would update the database. Should failure occur at that point the handler can leave the message in the queue or repost it to the queue, or post an alternate message.
Should something occur later that invalidates the transaction, another message could be queued to "undo" the change.
There's a fair amount of buzz lately about eventual consistency and distribute messaging. NServiceBus is the new component hotness. I suggest looking into this, I know we are.