I am noticing AWS SES stats are not being updated in real-time. After sending email, it takes time for sent count to increase on SES Dashboard. Sometimes it takes few minutes and sometimes it takes long.
Has anyone also experienced this? Any thoughts?
On the assumption that the console is simply making a call to a standard API action (rather than using some kind a console-only backend service that is not documented or user-accessible -- such things are not unheard-of, but are pretty rare in AWS, so it's a reasonably safe assumption), it looks like this is not really designed to be real-time. The stats are reported in 15 minute windows.
From the SES API reference:
GetSendStatistics
Returns the user's sending statistics. The result is a list of data points, representing the last two weeks of sending activity.
Each data point in the list contains statistics for a 15-minute interval.
— http://docs.aws.amazon.com/ses/latest/APIReference/API_GetSendStatistics.html
AWS/SES dashboard stats are for pure hint performace but not to rely on them. In such case, if you want to have real time notifications of sent emails you will need to create SNS notifications. Keep in mind that Spam-Complaint notifications can take up to a couple of days as this is based on information provided by the ISP to Amazon. And complaints within the Gmail evil-system will NEVER get to you.
Related
I would like to send a push notification to users in my database in a lambda environment via SQS / messaging queue architecture, in order to do that
I would first need to query all users in my database with push notifications enabled.
loop over all of them them
send a SQS event/message for each user.
let my sqs triggered lambda handle/send the push notification
Is there a better way to implement this to avoid querying a big number of users and/or looping over all the results to send a SQS message for each?
I would take a slightly different approach here, but similar.
Query the database for the users
Loop over the users
Send one messages to SQS for a batch of records to send, and use the SendMessageBatch operation of SQS to send them. So batches of batches. Each batch of messages would have several "users" to send to, not just one. This will should increase your performance because a batch will require fewer lambda invocations.
Lambda handles SQS messages (probably more than one), and each SQS message results in sending many push notifications. In the case of Firebase I believe there is a way to send batches, which is even better. Even without that you can send several messages at once using a Promise.all type logic.
With this structure you can send a very large number of messages really quickly, and probably a lot cheaper. Imagine you need to send to 1M users. If you send batches of 100, in batches of 25 to SQS, then you have 2,500 messages per call to SQS. That would mean 400 calls to SQS, far better than even the 40K you'd have to make if you sent single messages in batches of 25.
On the receiving side, even if you throttled the SQS integration to 1 message per invocation you'd have 10,000 lambda invocations. If you assume even 1s per invocation, and 1000 concurrent invocations, it would take 10 seconds (likely less). If you send one message per user you'd have to make 1M lambda invocations. If you assume each invocation takes 100ms then you can send 10/second, so with 1000 concurrent executions it would take 100 seconds. In reality the numbers are probably even better than that for the batch version, especially if you don't limit it to 1 message at a time.
Edit
Based on the comments the question seemed to be a bit more about the first part of the process. With that in mind I'd suggest the following options.
If you find yourself needing to address the same large groups repeatedly most messaging services (Firebase and SNS for sure) support some sort of topic subscription model. Given that these are push notifications you can subscribe a device to the topic in code. What this ultimately leads to is one messages sent from your code to the messaging service. The service handles the rest. This is probably the preferred solution for anything that has mass recipients, especially if you can know the recipients up front. This even works for dynamic topics. For example, consider a situation where a person comments on a post. Any new comment on that post should send a message to everyone who has commented on that post. You can create a topic on the fly when the post is created, and add recipients to the topic as they comment. If a user wishes to stop receiving messages you can remove the user from the topic.
If you don't know the recipients up front the above solution is a solid solution. However, if you are concerned with Lambda timeouts on the first two steps I'd modify slightly. I would take advantage of AWS Step Functions and page the data in the lambda. Lambda will tell you, via the context object supplied in the invocation, how much time is remaining. You can check that periodically to determine if you should exit the lambda and pass to the step function the current paging information. The step function can pass that paging information back into the lambda, which should be coded to accept the paging information as part of the request, and continue from that point if supplied.
I would suggest an additional piece in your application architecture,
I personally prefer to avoid using the Primary database for heavy querying,
assuming you have a large user base.
I will suggest maintaining your user list in a Search Engine like ElasticSearch or CloudSearch, or a simple table with just the user list in AWS DynamoDb or create a Read Replica of your DB.
To no confuse you, use a Search Engine(first choice) or an AWS DynamoDb
This will avoid creating pressure on your database when you query the read specialty datastore and won't affect other modules in operation
And it's way fast to query this way
Step 2: loop over all of them them
Step 3: batch send messages to SQS using its SendMessageBatch method like Jason is suggesting
Step 4: Based on your SQS setting, you may process multiple messages on your Lambda function
Please help selecting a MQ app/system/approach for the following use-case:
Check for incoming messages for a specific user -> read the message if available -> delete from the queue, ideally, staying within AWS.
Context:
Social networking app, users receiving messages, i.e.
I need to identify incoming messages by recipient ID.
The app is doing long-polls for new messages every 30 seconds.
Message size is <1Kb.
As per current estimates, I'll need 100M+ message checks per months in total (however, much less messages, these are just checks).
While users acknowledge messages choosing OK or Ignore, however not sure if ACK support is required from MQ system for that.
I'm in AWS. Initially thought of SQS, but the more I read the less it looks like a good match - cannot set message recipient ID in a way to filter by recipient, etc, however maybe I'm wrong.
One of the options I also thought about is to just use DynamoDB's "messages" table, partition key being userId and sort key being a messageId, thus I'll be able to easily query by a user, however concerned with costs.
If possible, I would much more prefer to stay within AWS or at least use SAAS like SQS, as being a 1-person startup I really want to avoid headaches supporting self-hosted system.
Thank you!
D
You are right on both these counts:
SQS won't work, because of the limitation you pointed.
DynamoDB would work, but cost a lot.
I can suggest the following:
Create a Redis cluster, possibly on Amazon ElastiCache.
In it, make one List per user.
Whenever a new message comes, append it to concerned User's list.
To deliver the message, just read from the User's list. Also, flush the queue if needed.
What I am suggesting is very similar to how Twitter manages each User's news-feed and home-feed.
It should also be cheap.
So I need a second pair of eyes to correct or confirm my understand standing of Amazon SQS. From my understanding, you can add an unlimited amount of messages to one queue. A message can be 256 KB in size, and if it needs to be larger than that, you can use amazon s3 to store 2 GB. Reading around online, it appears there are many use cases for this queuing service. For example one use case of SQS can act as a database buffer.
But here's what I'm looking to do.. I'm looking to make a real time messaging system. My current functionality acts like more of a message board, so the implementation just inserts into the database then reads the data and packages it into JSON to be inserted on SQLITE mobile phone. That works great, but I'm getting a lot of requests from people to make it real-time.
So what I'm wondering is can I utilize amazon SQS to write and read messages for a chat application? So in my theoretical use case of SQS would have a message queue to write to, and pull from the that queue every second to check for messages on mobile. But here's where I'm confused. Since you cannot "Query" a particular message from the queue, would it make sense to have a queue per user then a generic queue for the app server to read from? Or am I just talking crazy and should spend cognitive resources thinking about implementing an open connection on an Ec2 instance?
Any help would be great,
Thanks!
Have you thought about using Amazon SNS to push the chat messages to your mobile devices? Each user publishes to a topic and the readers subscribe to that topic. You just have to be ok with missing messages if the app isn't running.
If you only have a few (or maybe, less than 100) users, you could have thought of having one SQS queue per user. If that is not so, the solution won't be operationally feasible.
If you were to have one generic queue, SQS won't help because it doesn't allow querying for a given field in all available messages.
I can think of following options for your use case:
Setup one Redis cluster, possibly on Amazon ElastiCache. Have one message List per user.
One Messages table in MySQL, possibly on AWS RDS. This will provide an easy way to query messages for a given user.
You can also use DynamoDB in #2.
So I have been trying to get my hands on Amazon's AWS since my company's whole infrastructure is based of it.
One component I have never been able to understand properly is the Queue Service, I have searched Google quite a bit but I haven't been able to get a satisfactory answer. I think a Cron job and Queue Service are quite similar somewhat, correct me if I am wrong.
So what exactly SQS does? As far as I understand, it stores simple messages to be used by other components in AWS to do tasks & you can send messages to do that.
In this question, Can someone explain to me what Amazon Web Services components are used in a normal web service?; the answer mentioned they used SQS to queue tasks they want performed asynchronously. Why not just give a message back to the user & do the processing later on? Why wait for SQS to do its stuff?
Also, let's just say I have a web app which allows user to schedule some daily tasks, how would SQS would fit in that?
No, cron and SQS are not similar. One (cron) schedules jobs while the other (SQS) stores messages. Queues are used to decouple message producers from message consumers. This is one way to architect for scale and reliability.
Let's say you've built a mobile voting app for a popular TV show and 5 to 25 million viewers are all voting at the same time (at the end of each performance). How are you going to handle that many votes in such a short space of time (say, 15 seconds)? You could build a significant web server tier and database back-end that could handle millions of messages per second but that would be expensive, you'd have to pre-provision for maximum expected workload, and it would not be resilient (for example to database failure or throttling). If few people voted then you're overpaying for infrastructure; if voting went crazy then votes could be lost.
A better solution would use some queuing mechanism that decoupled the voting apps from your service where the vote queue was highly scalable so it could happily absorb 10 messages/sec or 10 million messages/sec. Then you would have an application tier pulling messages from that queue as fast as possible to tally the votes.
One thing I would add to #jarmod's excellent and succinct answer is that the size of the messages does matter. For example in AWS, the maximum size is just 256 KB unless you use the Extended Client Library, which increases the max to 2 GB. But note that it uses S3 as a temporary storage.
In RabbitMQ the practical limit is around 100 KB. There is no hard-coded limit in RabbitMQ, but the system simply stalls more or less often. From personal experience, RabbitMQ can handle a steady stream of around 1 MB messages for about 1 - 2 hours non-stop, but then it will start to behave erratically, often becoming a zombie and you'll need to restart the process.
SQS is a great way to decouple services, especially when there is a lot of heavy-duty, batch-oriented processing required.
For example, let's say you have a service where people upload photos from their mobile devices. Once the photos are uploaded your service needs to do a bunch of processing of the photos, e.g. scaling them to different sizes, applying different filters, extracting metadata, etc.
One way to accomplish this would be to post a message to an SQS queue (or perhaps multiple messages to multiple queues, depending on how you architect it). The message(s) describe work that needs to be performed on the newly uploaded image file. Once the message has been written to SQS, your application can return a success to the user because you know that you have the image file and you have scheduled the processing.
In the background, you can have servers reading messages from SQS and performing the work specified in the messages. If one of those servers dies another one will pick up the message and perform the work. SQS guarantees that a message will be delivered eventually so you can be confident that the work will eventually get done.
I facing some issue related to Amazon SES Statistic ordering, actually my recent sending mail static are in middle of data record it should be at top or lower of the record so what is the reason behind it?
My Question is How i do a simple report status with how much emails returned, invalid emails and emails sent if the "GetSendStatistics" returns a unordered list?
You will need to sort the data yourself, by using the Timestamp field of SendDataPoint. Unfortunately, the list returning from GetSendStatistics is not sorted.
This happens because due to the characteristics and nature of sending e-mail over the Internet, it might take a different amount of time for a server to determine whether a message (or a set of messages) is confirmed to have bounced, or to be delivered for sure. Please refer to this thread at AWS forums for a similar question and some insight into the issue you are facing.