CRON Job Send email to users in DB? - php

If I've got a database of users that have filled out a form, can I use a cron job to send an automated email? If so, what is the best way to "loop" it so that it sends the email once to each user?
$data = mysql_query("
SELECT *
FROM completed
WHERE
followupsent='0000-00-00 00:00:00'
AND valuesent + INTERVAL 4 DAY <= NOW()
")
or die(mysql_error());
while($info = mysql_fetch_array( $data ))
{
}
This checks to see if "followupsent" has been updated already as it updates with NOW() when it sends and also checks to see how many days since the value was sent.
I'm worried that by putting the email sending information in the while tags is going to loop for each row and end up sending a ton of emails.
Would using and if instead of a while:
if($info = mysql_fetch_array( $data ))
{
}
In order to send out to the first in the database and then let the cron job handle the rest by checking every minute which one is next?

Thats a perfectly fine way to do it. It will only send it it once per record (so assuming you have no duplicates in your completed table).
I assume you are updating the valuesent field in the loop

I suggest:
You ensure that your completed table uses a transactional storage engine, e.g. InnoDB:
ALTER TABLE completed ENGINE=InnoDB;
You define a new BOOLEAN column that indicates (to any other database connections) that a given record is in the process of being updated:
ALTER TABLE completed ADD COLUMN updating BOOLEAN NOT NULL DEFAULT FALSE;
You use a locking read to SELECT the records that are to be emailed, followed within the same transaction by an UPDATE to the newly created column. For example, using PDO:
$dbh->beginTransaction();
$select = $dbh->query('
SELECT *
FROM completed
WHERE followupsent IS NULL
AND valuesent <= CURRENT_TIMESTAMP - INTERVAL 4 DAY
AND NOT updating
FOR UPDATE
');
$dbh->exec('
UPDATE completed
SET updating = TRUE
WHERE followupsent IS NULL
AND valuesent <= CURRENT_TIMESTAMP - INTERVAL 4 DAY
AND NOT updating
');
$dbh->commit();
You can then update the database (removing the updating flag, together with whatever other status you require) as each email is sent:
$success = $dbh->prepare('
UPDATE completed
SET followupsent = CURRENT_TIMESTAMP,
updating = FALSE
WHERE id = ?
');
$failure = $dbh->prepare('
UPDATE completed
SET updating = FALSE
WHERE id = ?
');
foreach ($select as $row) {
$command = mail(...) ? $success : $failure;
$command->exec(array($row['id']));
}
Note that if the script terminates prematurely, the database may be left in an undesirable state—i.e. records may have updating=TRUE but there is no longer any script that is processing them; this could lead to some records not being emailed at all. You may want to guard against this eventuality by registering a custom shutdown function, or else by periodically inspecting the database for such "orphaned" records (however you must of course be sure that they are not currently being processed by a running script).

Related

Laravel - Notify or dispatch job queue worker laravel can cause double select with lock table?

Can two Laravel workers can use the same Transaction DB?
I have Job Process A which will call/dispatch Job Process B if there is data in table A with flag is_processed = 0. What it does is:
-- first select data with lock
SELECT *
FROM tableA
WHERE is_proccesed = 0
LIMIT 1000
FOR UPDATE OF tableA SKIP LOCKED
-- insert data to tableB
INSERT tableB VALUES SELECT values from tableA
-- update data
UPDATE tableA SET is_proccesed = 1 where id = (from any id i have select)
Then trigger job process B:
ProcessB::dispatch(from any id i have select as string)->onQueue('queueA');
I have Job Process B which will be triggered by Job Process A or cron which works every minute.
--first select data with lock
SELECT *
FROM tableB
WHERE is_proccesed = 0 AND id in (parameter get from job A if any)
LIMIT 1000
FOR UPDATE OF tableB SKIP LOCKED
-- call API with parameter value is from tableB
-- update data
If (call API is success) then:
UPDATE tableB SET is_proccesed = 1 where id = (from any id i have select)
if (call API is fail) then:
UPDATE tableB SET is_proccesed = 0 where id = (from any id i have select)
I have a cron running every minute that will call/dispatch Job Process A if any is_processed flag is 0 in table A.
I have a cron running every minute which call/dispatch Job Process B if there is_processed flag which is 0 in table B.
I use supervisor to do this in real time and use max-retry for jobs that fail 3 times.
My problem is:
I have double process call API from job process B,
I have scrolled through my logs and the SELECT key got 2 data from 2 different processes at the same time. (in some cases with 2000 or more data to process),
It doesn't always happen to process a bit of data.
My question is:
Is select data with lock not working with queue jobs?
Is it correct to create cron to notify job manually to reprocess unsuccessful data, or should I apply a failed job only to rework jobs?
I have not seen many Web languages that use database locks correctly. Without looking at the Laravel code, I would guess that it does not use database locks correctly for jobs. I know that it does not use locks for migrate. Running migrate from >2 web nodes is not safe.
If you use Redis or some other technology for jobs instead of SQL DB, a lot of concurrent problems will probably go away.
Manage your own global lock
You can manage your own lock and add synchronization between your own processes.
$results = \DB::select('SELECT GET_LOCK("process-b", 120) as obtain_lock');
if (!$results[0]->obtain_lock) { return 0; }
//120 is seconds to wait for lock or fail
//load one record
//call API
//update one record
//free lock
$results = \DB::select('SELECT RELEASE_LOCK("process-b")');
if (!$results[0]->obtain_lock) { return -1; } //couldn't release lock, stop process, free mysql connection
In Postgresql they are called "advisory locks", but you cannot use characters, you have to use numbers
$results = \DB::select('SELECT pg_advisory_lock(1337)');
if (!$results) { return 0; } // ???
//load one record
//call API
//update one record
//free lock
$results = \DB::select('SELECT pg_advisory_unlock(1337)');
if (!$results) { return -1; } //??? how to check for success?
Use "SELECT ... FOR UPDATE"
I'm not sure if you are trying to use FOR UPDATE locks and it is not working, or you are skipping the lock with intention.
You need to turn off autocommit (set autocommit=0) to use lock FOR UPDATE or to start a transaction.
\DB::transaction( function () use ($id) {
$results = \DB::table('table_b')->select('SELECT * from table_b where ID=?', $id)->lockForUpdate()->get();
\DB::table('table_b')->update('UPDATE table_b set x=y where ID=?', $id);
});
Where ProcA sends jobs to ProcB, you can make 1 ProcB job for each ID that is processed=0 - OR - you can make 1 ProcB job whenever you find any processed=0 records.
So, if ProcB will only work with 1 record ID, then global lock solution is probably not good.
You can check that your lock for update is working by putting sleep() and creating 10-20 ProcB jobs with the same record ID. If you sleep for 3 seconds, and it takes 30-60 seconds to finish all ProcB jobs, then the lock for update is working properly. If they all finish in 3 seconds, then they are not respecting the lock on the record.
Bonus
Add this to your routes/console.php to get concurrent-safe artisan lockingmigrate command
$signature = 'lockingmigrate {--database= : The database connection to use}
{--force : Force the operation to run when in production}
{--path=* : The path(s) to the migrations files to be executed}
{--realpath : Indicate any provided migration file paths are pre-resolved absolute paths}
{--pretend : Dump the SQL queries that would be run}
{--seed : Indicates if the seed task should be re-run}
{--step : Force the migrations to be run so they can be rolled back individually}';
Artisan::command($signature, function ($database=false, $seed=false, $step=false, $pretend=false, $force=false) {
$results = \DB::select('SELECT GET_LOCK("artisan-migrate", 120) as migrate');
if (!$results[0]->migrate) { return -1; }
$params = [
'--pretend' => $pretend,
'--force' => $force,
'--step' => $step,
'--seed' => $seed,
];
$retval = Artisan::call('migrate', $params);
$outputLines = explode("\n", trim(\Artisan::output()));
dump($outputLines);
\DB::select('SELECT RELEASE_LOCK("artisan-migrate")');
return $retval;
})->describe('Concurrent-safe migrate');

Deadlock in script for sending emails

I have a script for sending emails in the background. The script runs in parallel to send out multiple emails simultaneously. It works basically like this, with a mixture of MySQL and PHP:
/* TransmissionId is a PRIMARY KEY */
/* StatusId is a FOREIGN KEY */
/* Token is UNIQUE */
/* Pick a queued (StatusId=1) transmission and set it to pending (StatusId=2) */
/* This is a trick to both update a row and store its id for later retrieval in one query */
SET #Ids = 0;
UPDATE transmission
SET StatusId=IF(#Ids := TransmissionId,2,2), LatestStatusChangeDate=NOW()
WHERE StatusId = 1
ORDER BY TransmissionId ASC
LIMIT 1;
/* Fetch the id of the picked transmission */
$Id = SELECT #Ids;
try {
/* Fetch the email and try to send it */
$Email = FetchEmail($Id);
$Email->Send();
/* Set the status to sent (StatusId=3) */
$StatusId = 3;
} catch(Exception $E) {
/* The email could not be sent, set the status to failed (StatusId=4) */
$StatusId = 4;
} finally {
/* Save the new transmission status */
UPDATE transmission
SET StatusId=$StatusId, LatestStatusChangeDate=NOW(), Token='foobar'
WHERE TransmissionId = $Id;
}
The issue is that I sometimes get a deadlock: SQLSTATE[40001]: Serialization failure: 1213 Deadlock found when trying to get lock; try restarting transaction. This has happened when executing the last query. I've not seen it happen when executing the first query. Can anyone understand how a deadlock can happen in this case? Could it be that the first query and the last query lock StatusId and TransmissionId in opposite order? But I don't think the first query needs to lock TransmissionId, nor do I think the last query needs to lock StatusId. How can I find this out, and how can I fix it?
Edit
There is another query that might also play a role. Whenever someone opens the email, this query is run:
/* Selector is UNIQUE */
UPDATE transmission SET
OpenCount=OpenCount+1
WHERE Selector = 'barfoo'
InnoDB uses automatic row-level locking. You can get deadlocks even in the case of transactions that just insert or delete a single row. That is because these operations are not really “atomic”; they automatically set locks on the (possibly several) index records of the row inserted or deleted. dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/innodb-deadlocks-handling.ht‌​ml

How do you write a program to automatically modify existing SQL database every x minutes?

I am a PHP/SQL novice user....Finishing off my first PHP website. The question is similar to the initial question found at:
http://forums.phpfreaks.com/topic/266235-modifying-database-after-a-set-time-limit/
but I did not completely understand the answer. Similar to that user, I have an entire column (called status) of a database (called challenge) that can take 3 values for status - 'inactive', 'pending', or 'active'. In the normal flow of website operations, User A will typically click a button (event 1) which creates a new row (with a unique *challenge_id*) in the database and triggers a status of 'pending' in that row. User B can change the status with other clicked buttons, which can set the status to 'inactive' or 'active'.
One undesirable scenario is where USER B does nothing (i.e., no event trigger). In this case, User A is unfortunately stuck, waiting for the status to change from 'pending' to either 'active' or 'inactive' before he/she can click and trigger the next event 1. This situation could occur for example if User B gets tired of the site and does not use it anymore, leaving 'pending' requests unanswered.
Clearly, I can manually alter the SQL, changing any 'pending' status to 'inactive' after a certain time limit. This would be fine at the beginning, but if the site ever became popular, this would take more time. Is there any way to write a non-PHP program to account for this 'no event trigger' scenario where all 'pending' status SQL entries are automatically altered after a certain time limit? Or can PHP do this? I tried writing a php script that would sweep the database every time any user logged in (note: *challenge_id* is created by an event triggered on a different PHP page):
<?php session_start();
if ((($_SESSION['role']) != SHA1('user')) && (($_SESSION['status']) != SHA1('active')))
{
header( 'Location: index.php' ) ;
session_destroy();
} else
include 'connect.php';
$_SESSION['login_id'];
$universaltime = time();
$sqlt = mysql_fetch_assoc(mysql_query("SELECT challenge.challengetime,
challenge.status FROM challenge"); //Selects an array of all values for challengetime
//and status for all users I presume
while ((($universaltime - $sqlt['challengetime']) > 1000) &&
($sqlt['status'] == 'pending'))
{
$sqlt1 = mysqli_query("UPDATE challenge SET $sqlt['status'] ='inactive'");
//Also tried with if instead of while
}
?>
I'm sure my code can be improved...any help would be appreciated greatly! Or do I need to use something other than PHP?
First of all your UPDATE statement is wrong. Assuming that challengetime is of int data type holding unix time values your UPDATE statements should look something like this
UPDATE challenge
SET status = 'inactive'
WHERE status = 'pending'
AND 1000 < UNIX_TIMESTAMP() - challengetime;
It can be and should be run on its own. You don't need to select anything prior to calling it.
Therefore you can change this part
$universaltime = time();
$sqlt = mysql_fetch_assoc(mysql_query("SELECT challenge.challengetime,
challenge.status FROM challenge"); //Selects an array of all values for challengetime
//and status for all users I presume
while ((($universaltime - $sqlt['challengetime']) > 1000) &&
($sqlt['status'] == 'pending'))
{
$sqlt1 = mysqli_query("UPDATE challenge SET $sqlt['status'] ='inactive'");
//Also tried with if instead of while
}
with just
$sql = "UPDATE challenge SET status = 'inactive' WHERE status = 'pending' AND 1000 < UNIX_TIMESTAMP() - challengetime";
$result = mysql_query($sql);
if (!$result) {
die('Invalid query: ' . mysql_error()); //TODO better error handling
}
Now to make it execute periodically on it own you don't necessarily need php. You can:
First option Use MySQL event.
To execute this statement every day at 11pm
CREATE EVENT change_status
ON SCHEDULE EVERY 1 DAY
STARTS CURDATE() + INTERVAL 23 HOUR
DO
UPDATE challenge
SET status = 'inactive'
WHERE status = 'pending'
AND 1000 < UNIX_TIMESTAMP() - challengetime;
Use SHOW PROCESSLIST to check if event scheduler is enabled. If it's ON you should see a process "Daemon" by user "event_scheduler".
Use SET GLOBAL event_scheduler = ON;to enable the scheduler if it's currently not enabled.
More on configuring event scheduler here
Second option Use crontab to invoke CLI mysql
/usr/local/mysql/bin/mysql -uuser -ppassword -e " UPDATE challenge SET status = 'inactive' WHERE status = 'pending' AND 1000 < UNIX_TIMESTAMP() - challengetime"
If your web & PHP server is running on Linux (which is often the case) and if the delay x is more than a few minutes (i.e. x>=5 minutes) then you could use crontab(1) and add a crontab(5) entry. Remember to use absolute paths there. That entry would run (periodically) some script (which you could code in PHP, but also in some other scripting language like Python or OCaml) which would update the MySQL database.

query if a entry has changed since last check and continuously check for a time

The High Level Idea:
I have a micro controller that can connect to my site via a http request...I want to feed the device a response as soon as a change is noted on the database...
Due to the the end device being a client ie micro controller...Im unaware of a method to pass the data to the client without having to set up port forwarding...which is heavily undesired ...The problem arise when trying send data from an external network to an internal one...Either A. port forwarding or B have the client device initiate the request which leads me to the idea of having the device send an http request to file that polls for changes
Update:
Much Thanks to Ollie Jones. I have implimented some of his
suggestions here.
Jason McCreary suggested having a modified column which is a big
improvement as it should increase speed and reliability ...Great
suggestion! :)
if the database being overworked is in question in this example
maybe the following would work where...when the data is inserted into
the database the changes are wrote to a file...then have the loop
that continuously checks that file for an update....thoughts?
I have table1 and i want to see if a specific row(based on a UID/key) has been updated since the last time i checked as well as continuously check for 60 seconds if the record bets updated...
I'm thinking i can do this using the INFORMATION_SCHEMA database.
This database contains information about tables, views, columns, etc.
attempt at a solution:
<?php
$timer = time() + (10);//add 60 seconds
$KEY=$_POST['KEY'];
$done=0;
if(isset($KEY)){
//loign stuff
require_once('Connections/check.php');
$mysqli = mysqli_connect($hostname_check, $username_check, $password_check,$database_check);
if (mysqli_connect_errno($mysqli))
{ echo "Failed to connect to MySQL: " . mysqli_connect_error(); }
//end login
$query = "SELECT data1, data2
FROM station
WHERE client = $KEY
AND noted = 0;";
$update=" UPDATE station
SET noted=1
WHERE client = $KEY
AND noted = 0;";
while($done==0) {
$result = mysqli_query($mysqli, $query);
$update = mysqli_query($mysqli, $update);
$row_cnt = mysqli_num_rows($result);
if ($row_cnt > 0) {
$row = mysqli_fetch_array($result);
echo 'data1:'.$row['data1'].'/';
echo 'data2:'.$row['data2'].'/';
print $row[0];
$done=1;
}
else {
$current = time();
if($timer > $current){ $done=0; sleep(1); } //so if I haven't had a result update i want to loop back an check again for 60seconds
else { $done=1; echo 'done:nochange';}//60seconds pass end loop
}}
mysqli_close($mysqli);
echo 'time:'.time();
}
else {echo 'error:nokey';}
?>
Is this an adequate method and suggestions to improve the speed as well as improve the reliability
If I understand your application correctly, your client is a microcontroller. It issues an HTTP request to your php / mysql web app once in a while. The frequency of that request is up to the microcontroller, but but seems to be once a minute or so.
The request basically asks, "dude, got anything new for me?"
Your web app needs to send the answer, "not now" or "here's what I have."
Another part of your app is providing the information in question. And it's doing so asynchronously with your microcontroller (that is, whenever it wants to).
To make the microcontroller query efficient is your present objective.
(Note, if I have any of these assumptions wrong, please correct me.)
Your table will need a last_update column, a which_microcontroller column or the equivalent, and a notified column. Just for grins, let's also put in value1 and value2 columns. You haven't told us what kind of data you're keeping in the table.
Your software which updates the table needs to do this:
UPDATE theTable
SET notified=0, last_update = now(),
value1=?data,
value2?=data
WHERE which_microcontroller = ?microid
It can do this as often as it needs to. The new data values replace and overwrite the old ones.
Your software which handles the microcontroller request needs to do this sequence of queries:
START TRANSACTION;
SELECT value1, value2
FROM theTable
WHERE notified = 0
AND microcontroller_id = ?microid
FOR UPDATE;
UPDATE theTable
SET notified=1
WHERE microcontroller_id = ?microid;
COMMIT;
This will retrieve the latest value1 and value2 items (your application's data, whatever it is) from the database, if it has been updated since last queried. Your php program which handles that request from the microcontroller can respond with that data.
If the SELECT statement returns no rows, your php code responds to the microcontroller with "no changes."
This all assumes microcontroller_id is a unique key. If it isn't, you can still do this, but it's a little more complicated.
Notice we didn't use last_update in this example. We just used the notified flag.
If you want to wait until sixty seconds after the last update, it's possible to do that. That is, if you want to wait until value1 and value2 stop changing, you could do this instead.
START TRANSACTION;
SELECT value1, value2
FROM theTable
WHERE notified = 0
AND last_update <= NOW() - INTERVAL 60 SECOND
AND microcontroller_id = ?microid
FOR UPDATE;
UPDATE theTable
SET notified=1
WHERE microcontroller_id = ?microid;
COMMIT;
For these queries to be efficient, you'll need this index:
(microcontroller_id, notified, last_update)
In this design, you don't need to have your PHP code poll the database in a loop. Rather, you query the database when your microcontroller checks in for an update/
If all table1 changes are handled by PHP, then there's no reason to poll the database. Add the logic you need at the PHP level when you're updating table1.
For example (assuming OOP):
public function update() {
if ($row->modified > (time() - 60)) {
// perform code for modified in last 60 seconds
}
// run mysql queries
}

Running multiple PHP scripts at the same time (database loop issue)

I am running 10 PHP scripts at the same time and it processing at the background on Linux.
For Example:
while ($i <=10) {
exec("/usr/bin/php-cli run-process.php > /dev/null 2>&1 & echo $!");
sleep(10);
$i++;
}
In the run-process.php, I am having problem with database loop. One of the process might already updated the status field to 1, it seem other php script processes is not seeing it. For Example:
$SQL = "SELECT * FROM data WHERE status = 0";
$query = $db->prepare($SQL);
$query->execute();
while ($row = $query->fetch(PDO::FETCH_ASSOC)) {
$SQL2 = "SELECT status from data WHERE number = " . $row['number'];
$qCheckAgain = $db->prepare($SQL2);
$qCheckAgain->execute();
$tempRow = $qCheckAgain->fetch(PDO::FETCH_ASSOC);
//already updated from other processs?
if ($tempRow['status'] == 1) {
continue;
}
doCheck($row)
sleep(2)
}
How do I ensure processes is not re-doing same data again?
When you have multiple processes, you need to have each process take "ownership" of a certain set of records. Usually you do this by doing an update with a limit clause, then selecting the records that were just "owned" by the script.
For example, have a field that specifies if the record is available for processing (i.e. a value of 0 means it is available). Then your update would set the value of the field to the scripts process ID, or some other unique number to the process. Then you select on the process ID. When your done processing, you can set it to a "finished" number, like 1. Update, Select, Update, repeat.
The reason why your script executeds the same query multiple times is because of the parallelisation you are creating. Process 1 reads from the database, Process 2 reads from the database and both start to process their data.
Databases provide transactions in order to get rid of such race conditions. Have a look at what PDO provides for handling database transactions.
i am not entirely sure of how/what you are processing.
You can introduce limit clause and pass that as a parameter. So first process does first 10, the second does the next 10 and so on.
you need lock such as "SELECT ... FOR UPDATE".
innodb support row level lock.
see http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/innodb-locking-reads.html for details.

Categories