I have an "UpdateAttribute" processor that evaluates information in a JSON file. Originally, this would just check if a client had been updated and the statement looked something like this:
${literal(${allAttributes("client_attribute1", "client_attribute2"):equals("UPDATED")}):ifElse("UPDATED","UNCHANGED")}
However, the specifics of the client's status change now needs to be tracked - such that if the client goes from OFFLINE to ONLINE, then their status is "1". If they go from ONLINE to OFFLINE, then their status is "3". This would ideally be done in a single statement. I'm not sure exactly how this would work, any suggestions?
I think it would be better to use UpdateAttribute processor Advanced usage for this case.
Add all your rules you need to check then add the attribute which satisfied your rule.
Refer to this and this links for more details regards to UpdateAttribute Advanced usage.
Related
Hoping to get some insight into the behavior I am seeing while trying to use GameLift Matchmaking.
I have my configuration setup as such that it does not require player acceptance, as such:
GameLiftMatchmakingConfiguration:
Type: AWS::GameLift::MatchmakingConfiguration
Properties:
AcceptanceRequired: false
...
When I go to the GameLift console and into the configuration I see that it was correctly set as well that it does not require acceptance.
This is where I am confused, because now I have it working where it places 2 users in PotentialMatchCreated and I get this event from GameLift. Then 30 seconds later, I get more events stating that these placements timed out and searching again.
The configuration documentation states that AcceptanceTimeoutSeconds is only required if AcceptanceRequired is true, which it is not for me.
the acceptance documentation states that you only call this When FlexMatch builds a match, all the matchmaking tickets involved in the proposed match are placed into status REQUIRES_ACCEPTANCE
Which its not, its in PotentialMatchCreated.
So my question is, what do I have to do to confirm a placement once GameLift places 2 users into a match? I am a bit surprised because I thought that the fact that it doesn't have to be accepted would mean that its automatically accepted match.
Also theres very little documentation I found regarding what to do in this situation, given the nature of this service not being as known as others I totally expected that but really hoping someone can help me on what to do next.
Any insight or help is greatly appreciated.
UPDATE1:
Additional information: I do not need to utilize GameLift fleets or builds at all. We have a browser game we are building and just want to utilize the matchmaking feature. So we dont have any game servers or anything like that, its just on our website where they would play the game and use our api's/websockets that puts the matchmaking on the server and notify the client when a match has been found with all the subsequent details.
UPDATE2:
To confirm my suspicions I decided to actually try to use the accept match endpoint and see what happens. Just as the documentation states, you can only accept a match if it requires acceptance. I get an error stating that I cannot accept a match that is not in REQUIRE_ACCEPTANCE state. Guessing this is a bug on AWS's side, I don't see any other endpoints that I can hit for being in state PotentialMatchCreated.
Figured out the issue. It has to do with the FlexModeMatch on the GameLiftMatchmakingConfiguration. For my use case, just needing matchmaking, STANDALONE is the correct implementation because we aren't having GameLift actually create game servers/sessions for us. I had mine using WITH_QUEUE which is why I believe I was having issues. Seemingly working correctly now.
Testing around with OneTrust functions on my application I used OneTrust.BlockGoogleAnalytics() and now I can not see the data layer pushs on the GTM/GA Debugger extension.
Where, how do I revert this command? I expected to be able to give false to the function, but that don't work.
Just clear your cookies and local storage.
But it shouldn't block your datalayer pushes. That's a bit too much to expect from one trust. Maybe you're mixing up DL pushes with actual events sent.
Also, one trust gives documentation on how to use that function. It seems like the function accepts two args. I'm not sure if it works with no args, but the documentation still specifies how to check the state of certain trackers to see if they're blocked or not. That part seems to be broken in their documentation, but it's easy to decipher what they meant by window['ga-disable-${gaID}'
I'm using tdlib and currently trying to create another user's profile screen like this one:
There is usually a field on this screen called "Notifications" containing information on whether or not notifications for given user are muted and if so then for how long. All other fields seem easy to retrieve, but this one is a head-scratcher for me.
All other field are stored in User entity, but what am I supposed to do with this one? Call createPrivateChat only to get one field (namely notificationSettings)? This seems like overkill to me. Isn't there easiest ways to get this? In this issue sapelkinAV states that "chatID is equals UserId". Is it correct? Even if so it might just be an internal thing that we shouldn't rely on, and I can't find neither proofs nor restrictions on abusing this "feature".
If it is fine, than I could use getNotificationSettings and pass notificationSettingsScopeChat as scope parameter. Would it be the right solution? Any thoughts and advices are appreciated!
Official answer (obtained from TDLib bot):
Your usage of createPrivateChat is absolutely correct. To get correct NotificationSettings you need to get information about the corresponding chat.
So I ended up doing exactly that.
Call createPrivateChat only to get one field (namely notificationSettings)?
I have a Symfony project, that is now being tested on live system, and I'm using the delivery_address to prevent sending email to real recipients.
I needed also some exceptions for this, so I have used a very nice delivery_whitelist option (like here).
Right now, the white-listed emails are going both to original target and to delivery_address, but I'd like them to get sent only to the original, white-listed address.
Is that possible in some way?
As #userfuser suggested, here is my slightly altered comment as an answer:
Since your requirement contradicts the semantics of the configuration options, your only option seems to be adding some logic to your mail sending component. I am sure that you will be able to extract the white list and other options programatically so you can build your edge case.
This question already has answers here:
Closed 13 years ago.
Possible Duplicates:
How should I choose between GET and POST methods in HTML forms?
When do you use POST and when do you use GET?
Obviously, you should. But apart from doing so to fulfil the HTTP protocol, are there any reasons to do so? Less overhead? Some kind of security thing?
because GET must not alter the state of the server by definition.
see RFC2616 9.1.1 Safe Methods:
9.1.1 Safe Methods
Implementors should be aware that the
software represents the user in their
interactions over the Internet, and
should be careful to allow the user to
be aware of any actions they might
take which may have an unexpected
significance to themselves or others.
In particular, the convention has been
established that the GET and HEAD
methods SHOULD NOT have the
significance of taking an action other
than retrieval. These methods ought to
be considered "safe". This allows user
agents to represent other methods,
such as POST, PUT and DELETE, in a
special way, so that the user is made
aware of the fact that a possibly
unsafe action is being requested.
If you use GET to alter the state of the server then a search engine bot or some link prefetching extension in a web browser can wreak havoc on your site and (for example) delete all user data just by following links to your site.
There is a nice paper by the W3C about this: URIs, Addressability, and the use of HTTP GET and POST.
1.3 Quick Checklist for Choosing HTTP GET or POST
Use GET if:
The interaction is more like a question (i.e., it is a safe operation such as a query, read operation, or lookup).
Use POST if:
The interaction is more like an order, or
The interaction changes the state of the resource in a way that the user would perceive (e.g., a subscription to a service), or
The user be held accountable for the results of the interaction
Because, if you use GET to alter state, Google can delete your stuff.
When do you use POST and when do you use GET?
How should I choose between GET and POST methods in HTML forms?
If you accept GETs to perform write operations then a malicious hacker could inject somewhere links to perform an unauthorized operation. Your user clicks on a link - and something is deleted from a database. Or maybe some amount of money is transferred away from the user's account if he's still logged in to their online banking.
http://superbank.com/TransferMoney?amount=1000&recipient=2342524
Send a malicious email with an embedded image referencing this link, and as soon as the document is opened, something funny has happened behind the scenes.
GET is limited by the length of URL the browser/server can handle. This used to be as short as 256 characters.
There is atleast one situation where you want a GET to change data on the server. That is when a GET returns data, and you need to record which data was given to a user and when it was given.
If you use complex data types then it must be in a POST it cannot be in a GET. For example testing a WCF web service in a browser can only be done when the contract uses simple data types.
Using GET and POST where it is expected helps to keep your program understandable.
When you use POST, you can see the information being "posted" in the address-bar of the web browser. This is [apparently] not the case when you use the GET method.
This article was somewhere on http://www.w3schools.com/ Once I've found the exact page it was on, I'll repost. :-)