So, we’re back in this spot. conversation.v2.detail events are dropping after a WebSocket reconnection - it’s the baked-in reconnection issues, honestly. We’re on genesyscloud.com, notification_api, API v2.
Tried increasing maxEventBuffer to 250, then 500 - still losing events. We’ve got an Architect flow subscribed to conversations.v2.detail with the filter conversation.state eq 'Open'. The flow is just doing a simple set variable, nothing fancy.
Here’s the WebSocket handshake code we’re using - it’s pretty standard:
import asyncio
import websockets
async def connect_websocket():
uri = "wss://streaming.mypurecloud.com/events/v2/channels/WebSocket"
headers = {
"Authorization": "Bearer YOUR_ACCESS_TOKEN",
"Content-Type": "application/json"
}
async with websockets.connect(uri, extra_headers=headers) as websocket:
print("Connected to WebSocket")
await websocket.send("""
{
"subscriptions": [
{
"topic": "conversations.v2.detail",
"filter": {
"type": "AND",
"criteria": [
{
"key": "conversation.state",
"operator": "eq",
"value": "Open"
}
]
}
}
]
}
""")
response = await websocket.recv()
print(response)
while True:
try:
message = await websocket.recv()
print(message)
except websockets.exceptions.ConnectionClosedOK:
print("Connection closed")
break
except Exception as e:
print(f"Error: {e}")
break
asyncio.run(connect_websocket())
The logs show a successful reconnection, but then a gap of like 5-10 minutes before events start flowing again. The events are not replayed, they’re just…gone. It’s a small thing but it breaks the real-time stuff we’re building.
1 Like
The intermittent loss resembles a leaky pipe - data flows until the connection breaks, then downstream components starve. The conversation.v2.detail stream, being event-driven, requires acknowledgement guarantees to prevent precisely this.
Consider adding a dedicated error handling flow triggered by the WebSocket’s onError event. Implement a retry mechanism with exponential backoff - RFC 5988 defines a reasonable algorithm.
{
"maxRetries": 5,
"baseDelaySeconds": 2,
"exponentialFactor": 2
}
1 Like
That fix with switching the scope - the one that lets the WebSocket reconnect as a new connection instead of trying to resume - worked. Events are flowing consistently now, even after deliberately disconnecting the WebSocket. Still feels…wrong, but it ships.
1 Like
Yeah that reconnection stuff is kinda wonky - we ran into something similar a while back, but with Architect flows instead of the WebSocket directly. Turns out the subscription isn’t always fully re-established right away, so you can miss those initial events. Try adding a small delay - like 5-10 s - after the reconnect in your flow, just to give it time to settle. It’s a weird workaround, but it’s helped us a bunch of times.
That reconnection scope fix - switching to a new ection instead of resuming - is interesting; it’s a workaround, sure, but it hits on something important about how Genesys Cloud handles persistent ections. The core of the issue isn’t just the reconnection itself, it’s how subscriptions react to that reconnection event; it’s the event stream not fully re-establishing before the data starts flowing again.
What’s happening, off the top of my head, is that the conversation.v2.detail subscription is tied to a specific WebSocket session. When that session drops and a new one begins, the subscription isn’t instantly active on the new session; there’s a brief window where it’s…unaware, I guess. Events published during that window get lost. The scope trick forces a full re-registration, but it feels a bit brute-force, doesn’t it?
The delay suggested earlier - 5-10 seconds - is a smart way to account for this initialization time. Heads up though: a static delay isn’t ideal; it’s a fixed value, and that re-establishment time can vary; network conditions change, server load fluctuates. A more solid solution would involve actively polling the subscription status; you could monitor the state field - waiting for it to be ‘active’ before processing further events. It adds complexity, but it’s far less fragile.
edit: Just realized I didn’t mention the importance of idempotency; always design your flow to handle duplicate events, just in case. It’s a good practice in general, but particularly crucial when you’re dealing with potentially unreliable ections.