A method, device, computer equipment and storage medium for reviewing works

Abstract

The present disclosure provides a method, apparatus, computer equipment and storage medium for reviewing works, wherein the method comprises receiving a first work to be reviewed sent by a user terminal, generating a first review task corresponding to the first work to be reviewed, and adding the first review task to a review queue; in response to an update operation of the user terminal, receiving an updated second work to be reviewed sent by the user terminal and corresponding to the first work to be reviewed; wherein the first work to be reviewed has the same work identifier as the second work to be reviewed; generating a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed, and adding the second review task to the review queue; and adding the identification information of the first review task to a list of canceled review tasks, so that the review tasks in the review queue can determine whether they need to be reviewed based on the list of canceled review tasks before being reviewed.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present disclosure relates to the field of computer technology, and in particular to a work review method, apparatus, computer equipment and storage medium. Background Art

[0002] With the development of Internet technology, online education has become popular. Online education can break through the limitations of time and space, improve learning efficiency, and lower the threshold of learning. Users will have some interactions during online education, such as answering questions with voice or text, or recording videos following teaching templates, thereby generating corresponding works. In order to avoid the works containing bad information, users' works need to be reviewed.

[0003] In the related art, when reviewing the works of users, in order to avoid missing any review, it is necessary to generate corresponding review tasks according to the work identifiers of all works published by the user, and then the reviewers review the works corresponding to the work identifiers one by one according to the review tasks. When a user updates a certain work, since the updated work and the work before the update carry the same work identifier, when the reviewer reviews the work, the work obtained based on the work identifier may be the work before the update, or may be the work after the update. If it is the work before the update, it may result in invalid review, and if it is the work after the update, it may result in repeated review of the same work, thereby affecting the review efficiency of the work. Summary of the invention

[0004] The embodiments of the present disclosure at least provide a method, apparatus, computer device and storage medium for reviewing works.

[0005] In a first aspect, the present disclosure provides a method for reviewing a work, including:

[0006] Receive a first work to be reviewed sent by a user terminal, generate a first review task corresponding to the first work to be reviewed, and add the first review task to a review queue;

[0007] In response to the update operation of the user terminal, receiving an updated second work to be reviewed corresponding to the first work to be reviewed and sent by the user terminal; wherein the work identifiers of the first work to be reviewed and the second work to be reviewed are the same;

[0008] Generate a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed, and add the second review task to the review queue; and add the identification information of the first review task to a list of canceled review tasks, so that the review tasks in the review queue can determine whether they need to be reviewed based on the list of canceled review tasks before being reviewed.

[0009] In a possible implementation manner, after generating a first review task based on the first work to be reviewed and adding the first review task to a review queue, the method further includes:

[0010] After detecting that the first review task exists in the review queue, the review status of the work corresponding to the work identifier in the database is updated to being reviewed.

[0011] In a possible implementation manner, the method further includes:

[0012] Obtaining the review status of each work in the database at a first preset time interval;

[0013] Based on the review status of each work currently obtained and the review status of each work previously obtained, determining a first target work that has not been reviewed normally;

[0014] Generate a third review task corresponding to the first target work, and add the third review task to the review queue.

[0015] In a possible implementation manner, the second target work corresponding to any audit task in the audit queue is audited according to the following steps:

[0016] Parsing the audit queue to obtain identification information of any audit task;

[0017] Based on the identification information of any audit task and the list of canceled audit tasks, if it is detected that any audit task is a task that needs to be audited, determining the identification information of the second target work corresponding to any audit task based on the identification information of any audit task;

[0018] The second target work is reviewed based on the identification information of the second target work.

[0019] In a possible implementation manner, the method further includes:

[0020] After the review of the second target work is completed, the corresponding review result is saved in the database, and the review status of the second target work is updated to reviewed.

[0021] In a possible implementation manner, the detecting, based on the identification information of the any audit task and the canceled audit task list, that the any audit task is a task that needs to be audited includes:

[0022] When it is detected that the canceled audit task list does not contain the identification information of any audit task, it is determined that any audit task is a task that needs to be audited.

[0023] In a possible implementation manner, after adding the identification information of the audit task to the list of canceled audit tasks, the method further includes:

[0024] In response to any audit task in the canceled audit task list satisfying a preset deletion condition, the identification information of the audit task is deleted from the canceled audit task list.

[0025] In a possible implementation manner, the preset deletion condition includes at least one of the following:

[0026] The review status of the work corresponding to any of the review tasks is reviewed; any of the review tasks is deleted from the review queue; or the time for which any of the review tasks is added to the canceled review task list exceeds a second preset time.

[0027] In a possible implementation manner, adding the identification information of the first audit task to the list of canceled audit tasks includes:

[0028] When it is detected that the review status of the first work to be reviewed is unreviewed or under review, the identification information of the first review task is added to a list of canceled review tasks.

[0029] In a second aspect, the present disclosure also provides a work review device, including:

[0030] A receiving module, configured to receive a first work to be reviewed sent by a user terminal, generate a first review task corresponding to the first work to be reviewed, and add the first review task to a review queue;

[0031] An updating module, configured to respond to an updating operation of the user terminal and receive an updated second work to be reviewed corresponding to the first work to be reviewed and sent by the user terminal; wherein the work identifiers of the first work to be reviewed and the second work to be reviewed are the same;

[0032] An adding module is used to generate a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed, and add the second review task to the review queue; and add the identification information of the first review task to the canceled review task list, so that the review tasks in the review queue can determine whether they need to be reviewed based on the canceled review task list before being reviewed.

[0033] In a possible implementation manner, after generating a first review task based on the first work to be reviewed and adding the first review task to a review queue, the receiving module is further configured to:

[0034] After detecting that the first review task exists in the review queue, the review status of the work corresponding to the work identifier in the database is updated to being reviewed.

[0035] In a possible implementation manner, the adding module is further used to:

[0036] Obtaining the review status of each work in the database at a first preset time interval;

[0037] Based on the review status of each work currently obtained and the review status of each work previously obtained, determining a first target work that has not been reviewed normally;

[0038] Generate a third review task corresponding to the first target work, and add the third review task to the review queue.

[0039] In a possible implementation manner, the device further includes a review module, and the review module reviews the second target work corresponding to any review task in the review queue according to the following steps:

[0040] Parsing the audit queue to obtain identification information of any audit task;

[0041] Based on the identification information of any audit task and the list of canceled audit tasks, if it is detected that any audit task is a task that needs to be audited, determining the identification information of the second target work corresponding to any audit task based on the identification information of any audit task;

[0042] The second target work is reviewed based on the identification information of the second target work.

[0043] In a possible implementation manner, the audit module is further used to:

[0044] After the review of the second target work is completed, the corresponding review result is saved in the database, and the review status of the second target work is updated to reviewed.

[0045] In a possible implementation manner, when the audit module detects that any audit task is a task that needs to be audited based on the identification information of any audit task and the list of canceled audit tasks, it is configured to:

[0046] When it is detected that the canceled audit task list does not contain the identification information of any audit task, it is determined that any audit task is a task that needs to be audited.

[0047] In a possible implementation manner, after adding the identification information of the audit task to the list of canceled audit tasks, the adding module is further used to:

[0048] In response to any audit task in the canceled audit task list satisfying a preset deletion condition, the identification information of the audit task is deleted from the canceled audit task list.

[0049] In a possible implementation manner, the preset deletion condition includes at least one of the following:

[0050] The review status of the work corresponding to any of the review tasks is reviewed; any of the review tasks is deleted from the review queue; or the time for which any of the review tasks is added to the canceled review task list exceeds a second preset time.

[0051] In a possible implementation manner, when adding the identification information of the first audit task to the list of canceled audit tasks, the adding module is used to:

[0052] When it is detected that the review status of the first work to be reviewed is unreviewed or under review, the identification information of the first review task is added to a list of canceled review tasks.

[0053] In a third aspect, an embodiment of the present disclosure further provides a computer device, comprising: a processor, a memory and a bus, wherein the memory stores machine-readable instructions executable by the processor, and when the computer device is running, the processor and the memory communicate via the bus, and when the machine-readable instructions are executed by the processor, the steps of the above-mentioned first aspect, or any possible implementation of the first aspect are performed.

[0054] In a fourth aspect, an embodiment of the present disclosure further provides a computer-readable storage medium, on which a computer program is stored. When the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps of the above-mentioned first aspect or any possible implementation of the first aspect are executed.

[0055] The work review method, device, computer equipment and storage medium provided by the disclosed embodiment can generate a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed after receiving the updated second work to be reviewed sent by the user end, and add the second review task to the review queue; then add the first work to be reviewed corresponding to the first work to be reviewed to the list of canceled review tasks, so that the review tasks in the review queue can determine whether they need to be reviewed based on the list of canceled review tasks before being reviewed. In this way, it can effectively avoid the situation where the same work is reviewed repeatedly because two review tasks in the review queue correspond to the same work identifier.

[0056] In order to make the above-mentioned objectives, features and advantages of the present disclosure more obvious and easy to understand, preferred embodiments are specifically cited below and described in detail with reference to the attached drawings. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0057] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present disclosure, the following is a brief introduction to the drawings required for use in the embodiments. The drawings herein are incorporated into the specification and constitute a part of the specification. These drawings illustrate embodiments consistent with the present disclosure and are used together with the specification to illustrate the technical solutions of the present disclosure. It should be understood that the following drawings only illustrate certain embodiments of the present disclosure and should not be regarded as limiting the scope. For ordinary technicians in this field, other relevant drawings can also be obtained based on these drawings without creative work.

[0058] Figure 1 A flow chart of a work review method provided by an embodiment of the present disclosure is shown;

[0059] Figure 2 A flowchart showing a specific method for adding an audit task to an audit queue in the work audit method provided by an embodiment of the present disclosure;

[0060] Figure 3 A flowchart showing a specific method for reviewing a second target work in the work review method provided in an embodiment of the present disclosure;

[0061] Figure 4 A flowchart showing another work review method provided by an embodiment of the present disclosure is shown;

[0062] Figure 5 A schematic diagram of the architecture of a work review device provided by an embodiment of the present disclosure is shown;

[0063] Figure 6 A schematic diagram of the structure of a computer device provided by an embodiment of the present disclosure is shown. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0064] In order to make the purpose, technical solutions and advantages of the embodiments of the present disclosure clearer, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present disclosure will be clearly and completely described below in conjunction with the drawings in the embodiments of the present disclosure. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present disclosure, rather than all of the embodiments. The components of the embodiments of the present disclosure generally described and shown in the drawings here can be arranged and designed in various different configurations. Therefore, the following detailed description of the embodiments of the present disclosure provided in the drawings is not intended to limit the scope of the present disclosure for protection, but merely represents the selected embodiments of the present disclosure. Based on the embodiments of the present disclosure, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without making creative work belong to the scope of protection of the present disclosure.

[0065] It should be noted that similar reference numerals and letters denote similar items in the following drawings, and therefore, once an item is defined in one drawing, further definition and explanation thereof is not required in subsequent drawings.

[0066] The term "and / or" herein only describes an association relationship, indicating that three relationships may exist. For example, A and / or B may represent the following three situations: A exists alone, A and B exist at the same time, and B exists alone. In addition, the term "at least one" herein represents any combination of at least two of any one or more of a plurality of. For example, including at least one of A, B, and C may represent including any one or more elements selected from the set consisting of A, B, and C.

[0067] According to research, when reviewing a user's works, in order to avoid missing any review, it is necessary to generate corresponding review tasks based on the work identifiers of all works published by the user, and then the reviewers review the works corresponding to the work identifiers one by one according to the review tasks. When a user updates a certain work, since the updated work and the work before the update carry the same work identifier, when the reviewer reviews the work, the work obtained based on the work identifier may be the work before the update, or it may be the work after the update. If it is the work before the update, it may lead to invalid review, and if it is the work after the update, it may lead to repeated review of the same work, thereby affecting the review efficiency of the work.

[0068] Among them, since the update and review of the work are asynchronous tasks (that is, there is no clear time sequence relationship when executing), it is not certain whether the work has been updated when the review is being conducted. If the work to be reviewed is a video, the update time when the updated work is saved to the database is long, so it may happen that the work fails to complete the update when the review is being conducted, that is, the work obtained based on the work identifier may be the work before the update, in which case the review of the work before the update may be invalid; in another possible case, the update time when the updated work is saved to the database cannot be determined. In order to ensure that each work will be reviewed, it is necessary to regenerate the review task based on the updated work and add the regenerated review task to the review queue. If a new review task is not added to the review queue based on the updated work, the first situation may occur, resulting in the inability to review the updated work; and if a new review task is added to the review queue based on the updated work, the review task before the update may not be executed during the review, so there may be a situation where the work identifiers corresponding to multiple review tasks in the review queue are the same, in which case the updated work will be reviewed twice in succession, that is, repeated review of the same work.

[0069] Based on the above research, the present disclosure provides a method, device, computer equipment and storage medium for reviewing works. After receiving the updated second work to be reviewed corresponding to the first work to be reviewed sent by the user end, a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed can be generated, and the second review task can be added to the review queue; then the first review task corresponding to the first work to be reviewed is added to the list of canceled review tasks, so that the review tasks in the review queue can determine whether they need to be reviewed based on the list of canceled review tasks before being reviewed. In this way, the repeated review of the same work caused by two review tasks corresponding to the same work identifier in the review queue can be effectively avoided.

[0070] To facilitate understanding of this embodiment, a work review method disclosed in the embodiment of the present disclosure is first introduced in detail. The execution subject of the work review method provided in the embodiment of the present disclosure is generally a computer device with certain computing capabilities, and the computer device includes, for example, a server or other processing device. In some possible implementations, the work review method can be implemented by a processor calling a computer-readable instruction stored in a memory.

[0071] See also Figure 1 FIG. 1 is a flowchart of a method for reviewing works provided by an embodiment of the present disclosure, wherein the method includes steps S101 to S103, wherein:

[0072] S101: Receive a first work to be reviewed sent by a user, generate a first review task corresponding to the first work to be reviewed, and add the first review task to a review queue.

[0073] S102: In response to the update operation of the user terminal, receiving an updated second work to be reviewed and corresponding to the first work to be reviewed, which is sent by the user terminal; wherein the work identifiers of the first work to be reviewed and the second work to be reviewed are the same.

[0074] S103: Generate a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed, and add the second review task to the review queue; and add the identification information of the first review task to the canceled review task list, so that the review tasks in the review queue can determine whether they need to be reviewed based on the canceled review task list before being reviewed.

[0075] The following is a detailed description of the above steps.

[0076] For S101, the first work to be reviewed can be text, pictures, videos and other content sent by the user that needs to be reviewed. Each of the first work to be reviewed has a unique corresponding work identifier. After receiving the first work to be reviewed, the server can add the first work to be reviewed to the database, and start a coroutine to generate a first review task corresponding to the first work to be reviewed, and then add the first review task to the review queue; wherein, the review queue can exemplarily be a rocketmq message queue.

[0077] Exemplarily, taking the database management system corresponding to the database as the relational database management system MySQL as an example, when the first work to be reviewed is added to the database, a work table may be generated for the first work to be reviewed, and the work table may be as shown in Table 1 below:

[0078] Table 1

[0079]

[0080] In Table 1, the first column indicates the field names in the database, the second column indicates the data types corresponding to each field name, and the third column identifies the descriptions corresponding to each field name; when the first work to be reviewed is added to the database, the work content of the first work to be reviewed can be stored in "content", so that the work content of the first work to be reviewed can be determined through "content".

[0081] Specifically, when adding the first review task to the review queue, the coroutine may add the work identification of the first work to be reviewed and the identification information of the first review task to the review queue; wherein, the identification information of the first review task may be generated based on the work identification of the first work to be reviewed, for example, some strings may be concatenated after the work identification of the first work to be reviewed to generate the identification information.

[0082] In addition, since the first work to be reviewed has not been reviewed at this time, after the first work to be reviewed is added to the database, the publishing status of the first work to be reviewed can be set to be invisible to the outside world (that is, the first work to be reviewed is only visible to the user end at this time), and a prompt message is sent to the user end to prompt the user that the first work to be reviewed has been successfully saved to the database.

[0083] In a possible implementation, after generating a first review task based on the first work to be reviewed and adding the first review task to the review queue, after detecting the existence of the first review task in the review queue, the review status of the work corresponding to the work identifier in the database can be updated to under review.

[0084] In actual applications, when starting the coroutine to add the work identification of the first work to be reviewed and the identification information of the first review task to the review queue, abnormal conditions such as network instability may occur, resulting in failure to add the first review task, thereby causing the first work to be reviewed to be missed.

[0085] Based on this, when the first work to be reviewed is added to the database, its default review status is unreviewed. When it is detected that there is a first review task corresponding to the first work to be reviewed in the review queue, it indicates that the first work to be reviewed has entered the normal review process at this time. Therefore, the review status of the first work to be reviewed can be updated to under review.

[0086] In a possible implementation, Figure 2 As shown, you can also add review tasks to the review queue by following the steps below:

[0087] S201: Obtaining the review status of each work in the database at a first preset time interval.

[0088] Here, the first preset time length can be set according to actual needs. For example, the first preset time length can be 5 minutes, that is, the review status of each work in the database is obtained every 5 minutes.

[0089] In addition, in order to speed up the acquisition and save computing resources, when obtaining the review status of the works in the database, only the review status of some of the works in the database can be obtained; for example, the some of the works can be works added to the database within the last 24 hours. Works added to the database more than 24 hours ago have generally been reviewed, so there is no need to monitor the review status.

[0090] S202: Based on the review status of each work currently obtained and the review status of each work previously obtained, determine the first target work that has not been reviewed normally.

[0091] Here, in order to prevent the database from being used to store bad information, all works stored in the database need to be reviewed. If a work to be reviewed was unreviewed when the review status was obtained last time, and is still unreviewed when the review status is obtained this time, it can be determined that the work to be reviewed is the first target work that has not been normally reviewed.

[0092] In addition, due to factors such as network fluctuations and delays, it may happen that the review task corresponding to a work to be reviewed has been added to the review queue, but the review status corresponding to the work to be reviewed has not been updated in time. If the first target work that has not been reviewed normally is directly determined based on the review status of each work obtained once, it may cause the work to be reviewed to be submitted for review repeatedly. Therefore, the first target work can be determined based on the review status of each work obtained twice adjacently.

[0093] S203: Generate a third review task corresponding to the first target work, and add the third review task to the review queue.

[0094] Here, after determining that the first target work has not been reviewed normally, a coroutine can be started to generate a third review task corresponding to the first target work, and the third review task can be added to the review queue, thereby effectively avoiding missing reviews of works to be reviewed in the database.

[0095] Specifically, after starting a coroutine to generate a first review task corresponding to the first target work and adding the first review task to the review queue, due to the coroutine's own properties, regardless of whether the preset task (generates the first review task and adds it to the review queue) is completed, the coroutine will be terminated after its life cycle is reached. Therefore, after determining that the first target work has not been reviewed normally, it is necessary to restart a new coroutine to generate a third review task corresponding to the first target work, and add the third review task to the review queue.

[0096] S102: In response to the update operation of the user terminal, receiving an updated second work to be reviewed and corresponding to the first work to be reviewed, which is sent by the user terminal; wherein the work identifiers of the first work to be reviewed and the second work to be reviewed are the same.

[0097] Here, after sending the first work to be reviewed, the user terminal can also respond to the update instruction and send the updated second work to be reviewed to the server; since the first work to be reviewed and the second work to be reviewed have the same work identifier, when the server stores the second work to be reviewed, it is necessary to add the work content of the second work to be reviewed to the position corresponding to the first work to be reviewed in the database, that is, to replace the first work to be reviewed with the second work to be reviewed.

[0098] S103: Generate a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed, and add the second review task to the review queue; and add the identification information of the first review task to the canceled review task list, so that the review tasks in the review queue can determine whether they need to be reviewed based on the canceled review task list before being reviewed.

[0099] Here, similar to generating a first review task corresponding to the first work to be reviewed, a coroutine may be started to generate a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed, and the second review task may be added to the review queue.

[0100] In a possible implementation, when it is detected that the review status of the first work to be reviewed is unreviewed or under review, the identification information of the first review task may be added to a list of canceled review tasks.

[0101] Specifically, after the second review task is added to the review queue, since the first task to be reviewed may not have been reviewed, there may be two review tasks corresponding to one work identifier in the review queue, resulting in repeated reviews of the same work.

[0102] Therefore, in order to avoid repeated review of the same work, the identification information of the first review task can be added to the canceled review task list, so that the review tasks in the review queue can determine whether they need to be reviewed based on the canceled review task list before being reviewed.

[0103] In a possible implementation, Figure 3 As shown, the second target work corresponding to any review task in the review queue can be reviewed by the following steps:

[0104] S301: Parse the audit queue to obtain identification information of any audit task.

[0105] S302: Based on the identification information of any review task and the list of canceled review tasks, when it is detected that any review task is a task that needs to be reviewed, the identification information of the second target work corresponding to any review task is determined based on the identification information of any review task.

[0106] Here, the canceled audit task list may be a set list in a key-value pair storage database Redis, which is used to store identification information of the audit tasks whose audits are canceled.

[0107] In one possible implementation, when it is detected that the list of canceled audit tasks does not contain the identification information of any audit task, it can be determined that any audit task is a task that needs to be audited; correspondingly, when it is detected that the list of canceled audit tasks contains the identification information of any audit task, it can be determined that any audit task is a task that does not need to be audited. At this time, any audit task can be directly deleted, and the parsing operation of the audit queue can continue to be performed according to the preset parsing order.

[0108] S303: Reviewing the second target work based on the identification information of the second target work.

[0109] Here, when reviewing the second target work, you can use any of the following two methods:

[0110] Method A: Manual review.

[0111] Specifically, the second target work may be sent to the review end corresponding to the reviewer, and after the reviewer completes the review of the second target work, the review result for the second target work sent by the review end is received.

[0112] Method B: Automatic review.

[0113] Specifically, during the automatic review, the second target work may be automatically reviewed by a review module preset in the server.

[0114] Exemplarily, taking the second target work as a video work as an example, when conducting automatic review, the video work can be sampled according to a preset sampling interval to obtain multiple sampled video frames, and the sampled video frames can be identified using a trained neural network to determine whether there is any illegal content in the sampled video frames; in addition, the audio data contained in the video work can also be identified, and based on the identified audio content, a matching method such as keyword matching can be used to determine whether the audio data contained in the video work contains any illegal audio content.

[0115] Furthermore, after the review of the second target work is completed, the corresponding review result can be saved in the database, and the review status of the second target work can be updated to reviewed.

[0116] Specifically, when the review status of the second target work is updated to reviewed, the corresponding review result can be sent to the user terminal to prompt the user terminal that the review is completed. If the review result at this time is passed, the corresponding publishing status of the second target work can be updated to be visible to the outside world (that is, the second target work is visible to everyone at this time).

[0117] In one possible implementation, after adding the identification information of the audit task to the canceled audit task list, the identification information of the audit task can be deleted from the canceled audit task list in response to any audit task in the canceled audit task list satisfying a preset deletion condition.

[0118] Specifically, it can be determined whether any audit task in the canceled audit task list meets the preset deletion condition based on the following three conditions:

[0119] Condition 1: Whether the review status of the work corresponding to any of the review tasks is reviewed.

[0120] Specifically, after a work is reviewed, the corresponding review status of the work in the database will be updated to reviewed. Therefore, the works in the database whose review status is under review can be monitored. When it is detected that the review status of the work corresponding to any review task in the cancel review task list is reviewed, the identification information of the review task can be deleted from the cancel review task list.

[0121] Condition 2: Whether any of the audit tasks is deleted from the audit queue.

[0122] Specifically, when it is detected that the canceled audit task list contains the identification information of any audit task, the any audit task can be directly deleted at this time. When any audit task is deleted from the audit queue, the identification information of the audit task can be correspondingly deleted from the canceled audit task list.

[0123] Condition 3: whether the duration of adding any audit task to the canceled audit task list exceeds a second preset duration.

[0124] Here, the second preset time period can be set according to actual needs, for example, it can be set to 30 days.

[0125] Specifically, when the identification information of any audit task is added to the canceled audit task list, the adding time of the identification information of any audit task can be recorded. When the adding time exceeds the second preset time, the identification information of the audit task can be deleted from the canceled audit task list.

[0126] In actual applications, by deleting the identification information of the audit tasks that will no longer be used in the canceled audit task list through the above-mentioned judgment conditions, the speed of traversing the canceled audit task list can be accelerated, thereby quickly determining whether the audit tasks in the audit queue need to be audited and saving computing resources.

[0127] In order to facilitate the understanding of the work review method provided by the present disclosure, the work review method provided by the present disclosure is described in detail below in combination with specific implementation methods. Figure 4 FIG. 1 is a flowchart of another method for reviewing works provided by an embodiment of the present disclosure, including:

[0128] S401: Acquire a first work to be reviewed sent by a user, generate a first review task corresponding to the first work to be reviewed, and add the first review task to a review queue.

[0129] At this time, the first work to be reviewed on the user side is only visible to the user side, and after it is determined that the first review task is successfully added to the review queue, the review status of the first work to be reviewed is updated from unreviewed to under review.

[0130] S402: In response to the update operation of the user terminal, receiving an updated second work to be reviewed corresponding to the first work to be reviewed and sent by the user terminal.

[0131] S403: Detect whether the first work to be reviewed has been reviewed.

[0132] Here, whether the first work to be reviewed has been reviewed can be detected by detecting the review status corresponding to the first work to be reviewed in the database. If it is detected that the first work to be reviewed has been reviewed (the corresponding review status is reviewed), execute S405; if it is detected that the first work to be reviewed has not been reviewed (the corresponding review status is unreviewed or under review), execute S404 and S405.

[0133] S404: Add the identification information of the first audit task to the list of canceled audit tasks.

[0134] S405: Generate a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed, and add the second review task to the review queue.

[0135] S406: Responding to the parsing request for the review queue, obtaining the task to be reviewed; and based on the identification information of the task to be reviewed, reviewing the work to be reviewed corresponding to the identification information of the task to be reviewed.

[0136] Here, the acquiring of the task to be reviewed may be acquiring the first task to be reviewed sent by the user terminal, or may be acquiring the task to be reviewed sent by other user terminals.

[0137] S407: Determine the review result of the work to be reviewed, store the review result of the work to be reviewed in the database, and send the review result to the user end.

[0138] At this time, if the audit result is passed, the publishing status corresponding to the work to be audited can be updated to visible to everyone, and the audit status of the work to be audited can be updated from under audit to audited.

[0139] Specifically, the specific contents of the above steps refer to the relevant description above and will not be elaborated here.

[0140] The work review method provided by the embodiment of the present disclosure can generate a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed after receiving the updated second work to be reviewed sent by the user end, and add the second review task to the review queue; then add the first work to be reviewed corresponding to the first work to be reviewed to the list of canceled review tasks, so that the review tasks in the review queue can determine whether they need to be reviewed based on the list of canceled review tasks before being reviewed. In this way, it can effectively avoid the situation where the same work is reviewed repeatedly because two review tasks in the review queue correspond to the same work identifier.

[0141] Those skilled in the art will appreciate that, in the above method of specific implementation, the order in which the steps are written does not imply a strict execution order and does not constitute any limitation on the implementation process. The specific execution order of the steps should be determined by their functions and possible internal logic.

[0142] Based on the same inventive concept, the embodiment of the present disclosure also provides a work review device corresponding to the work review method. Since the principle of solving the problem by the device in the embodiment of the present disclosure is similar to the above-mentioned work review method in the embodiment of the present disclosure, the implementation of the device can refer to the implementation of the method, and the repeated parts will not be repeated.

[0143] Reference Figure 5 , which is a schematic diagram of the architecture of a work review device provided by an embodiment of the present disclosure, the device includes: a receiving module 501, an updating module 502, and an adding module 503; wherein,

[0144] The receiving module 501 is used to receive a first work to be reviewed sent by a user terminal, generate a first review task corresponding to the first work to be reviewed, and add the first review task to a review queue;

[0145] An updating module 502 is configured to respond to an updating operation of the user terminal and receive an updated second work to be reviewed corresponding to the first work to be reviewed and sent by the user terminal; wherein the work identifiers of the first work to be reviewed and the second work to be reviewed are the same;

[0146] Adding module 503 is used to generate a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed, and add the second review task to the review queue; and add the identification information of the first review task to the canceled review task list, so that the review tasks in the review queue can determine whether they need to be reviewed based on the canceled review task list before being reviewed.

[0147] In a possible implementation manner, after generating a first review task based on the first work to be reviewed and adding the first review task to a review queue, the receiving module 501 is further configured to:

[0148] After detecting that the first review task exists in the review queue, the review status of the work corresponding to the work identifier in the database is updated to being reviewed.

[0149] In a possible implementation manner, the adding module 503 is further used to:

[0150] Obtaining the review status of each work in the database at a first preset time interval;

[0151] Based on the review status of each work currently obtained and the review status of each work previously obtained, determining a first target work that has not been reviewed normally;

[0152] Generate a third review task corresponding to the first target work, and add the third review task to the review queue.

[0153] In a possible implementation, the device further includes an audit module 504;

[0154] The review module 504 is used to review the second target work corresponding to any review task in the review queue according to the following steps:

[0155] Parsing the audit queue to obtain identification information of any audit task;

[0156] Based on the identification information of any audit task and the list of canceled audit tasks, if it is detected that any audit task is a task that needs to be audited, determining the identification information of the second target work corresponding to any audit task based on the identification information of any audit task;

[0157] The second target work is reviewed based on the identification information of the second target work.

[0158] In a possible implementation manner, the review module 504 is further configured to:

[0159] After the review of the second target work is completed, the corresponding review result is saved in the database, and the review status of the second target work is updated to reviewed.

[0160] In a possible implementation, the review module 504, when detecting that any review task is a task that needs to be reviewed based on the identification information of any review task and the list of canceled review tasks, is configured to:

[0161] When it is detected that the canceled audit task list does not contain the identification information of any audit task, it is determined that any audit task is a task that needs to be audited.

[0162] In a possible implementation manner, after adding the identification information of the audit task to the list of canceled audit tasks, the adding module 503 is further used to:

[0163] In response to any audit task in the canceled audit task list satisfying a preset deletion condition, the identification information of the audit task is deleted from the canceled audit task list.

[0164] In a possible implementation manner, the preset deletion condition includes at least one of the following:

[0165] The review status of the work corresponding to any of the review tasks is reviewed; any of the review tasks is deleted from the review queue; or the time for which any of the review tasks is added to the canceled review task list exceeds a second preset time.

[0166] In a possible implementation manner, when adding the identification information of the first audit task to the list of canceled audit tasks, the adding module 503 is used to:

[0167] When it is detected that the review status of the first work to be reviewed is unreviewed or under review, the identification information of the first review task is added to a list of canceled review tasks.

[0168] The work review device provided by the embodiment of the present disclosure can generate a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed after receiving the updated second work to be reviewed sent by the user end, and add the second review task to the review queue; then add the first work to be reviewed corresponding to the first work to be reviewed to the list of canceled review tasks, so that the review tasks in the review queue can determine whether they need to be reviewed based on the list of canceled review tasks before being reviewed. In this way, it can effectively avoid the situation where the same work is reviewed repeatedly because two review tasks in the review queue correspond to the same work identifier.

[0169] For descriptions of the processing flow of each module in the device and the interaction flow between each module, reference may be made to the relevant descriptions in the above method embodiment, which will not be described in detail here.

[0170] Based on the same technical concept, the embodiment of the present disclosure also provides a computer device. Figure 6 As shown, it is a schematic diagram of the structure of a computer device 600 provided in an embodiment of the present disclosure, including a processor 601, a memory 602, and a bus 603. Among them, the memory 602 is used to store execution instructions, including a memory 6021 and an external memory 6022; the memory 6021 here is also called an internal memory, which is used to temporarily store the operation data in the processor 601, and the data exchanged with the external memory 6022 such as a hard disk. The processor 601 exchanges data with the external memory 6022 through the memory 6021. When the computer device 600 is running, the processor 601 communicates with the memory 602 through the bus 603, so that the processor 601 executes the following instructions:

[0171] Receive a first work to be reviewed sent by a user terminal, generate a first review task corresponding to the first work to be reviewed, and add the first review task to a review queue;

[0172] In response to the update operation of the user terminal, receiving an updated second work to be reviewed corresponding to the first work to be reviewed and sent by the user terminal; wherein the work identifiers of the first work to be reviewed and the second work to be reviewed are the same;

[0173] Generate a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed, and add the second review task to the review queue; and add the identification information of the first review task to a list of canceled review tasks, so that the review tasks in the review queue can determine whether they need to be reviewed based on the list of canceled review tasks before being reviewed.

[0174] In a possible implementation manner, the instructions of the processor 601, after generating a first review task based on the first work to be reviewed and adding the first review task to a review queue, further include:

[0175] After detecting that the first review task exists in the review queue, the review status of the work corresponding to the work identifier in the database is updated to being reviewed.

[0176] In a possible implementation manner, the instruction of the processor 601 further includes:

[0177] Obtaining the review status of each work in the database at a first preset time interval;

[0178] Based on the review status of each work currently obtained and the review status of each work previously obtained, determining a first target work that has not been reviewed normally;

[0179] Generate a third review task corresponding to the first target work, and add the third review task to the review queue.

[0180] In a possible implementation manner, in the instruction of the processor 601, the second target work corresponding to any audit task in the audit queue is audited according to the following steps:

[0181] Parsing the audit queue to obtain identification information of any audit task;

[0182] Based on the identification information of any audit task and the list of canceled audit tasks, if it is detected that any audit task is a task that needs to be audited, determining the identification information of the second target work corresponding to any audit task based on the identification information of any audit task;

[0183] The second target work is reviewed based on the identification information of the second target work.

[0184] In a possible implementation manner, the instruction of the processor 601 further includes:

[0185] After the review of the second target work is completed, the corresponding review result is saved in the database, and the review status of the second target work is updated to reviewed.

[0186] In a possible implementation manner, in the instruction of the processor 601, detecting that any audit task is a task that needs to be audited based on the identification information of any audit task and the list of canceled audit tasks includes:

[0187] When it is detected that the canceled audit task list does not contain the identification information of any audit task, it is determined that any audit task is a task that needs to be audited.

[0188] In a possible implementation manner, after adding the identification information of the audit task to the list of canceled audit tasks, the instructions of the processor 601 further include:

[0189] In response to any audit task in the canceled audit task list satisfying a preset deletion condition, the identification information of the audit task is deleted from the canceled audit task list.

[0190] In a possible implementation manner, in the instruction of the processor 601, the preset deletion condition includes at least one of the following:

[0191] The review status of the work corresponding to any of the review tasks is reviewed; any of the review tasks is deleted from the review queue; or the time for which any of the review tasks is added to the canceled review task list exceeds a second preset time.

[0192] In a possible implementation manner, in the instruction of the processor 601, adding the identification information of the first audit task to the list of canceled audit tasks includes:

[0193] When it is detected that the review status of the first work to be reviewed is unreviewed or under review, the identification information of the first review task is added to a list of canceled review tasks.

[0194] The present disclosure also provides a computer-readable storage medium, on which a computer program is stored, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps of the work review method described in the above method embodiment are executed. The storage medium can be a volatile or non-volatile computer-readable storage medium.

[0195] The embodiments of the present disclosure also provide a computer program product, which carries a program code. The instructions included in the program code can be used to execute the steps of the work review method described in the above method embodiment. Please refer to the above method embodiment for details, which will not be repeated here.

[0196] The computer program product may be implemented in hardware, software or a combination thereof. In one optional embodiment, the computer program product is implemented as a computer storage medium. In another optional embodiment, the computer program product is implemented as a software product, such as a software development kit (SDK).

[0197] Those skilled in the art can clearly understand that, for the convenience and simplicity of description, the specific working process of the device described above can refer to the corresponding process in the aforementioned method embodiment, and will not be repeated here. In the several embodiments provided in the present disclosure, it should be understood that the disclosed device and method can be implemented in other ways. The device embodiments described above are merely schematic. For example, the division of the units is only a logical function division. There may be other division methods in actual implementation. For example, multiple units or components can be combined, or some features can be ignored or not executed. Another point is that the mutual coupling or direct coupling or communication connection shown or discussed can be through some communication interfaces, and the indirect coupling or communication connection of the device or unit can be electrical, mechanical or other forms.

[0198] The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separated, and the components shown as units may or may not be physical units, that is, they may be located in one place or distributed on multiple network units. Some or all of the units may be selected according to actual needs to achieve the purpose of the solution of this embodiment.

[0199] In addition, each functional unit in each embodiment of the present disclosure may be integrated into one processing unit, or each unit may exist physically separately, or two or more units may be integrated into one unit.

[0200] If the functions are implemented in the form of software functional units and sold or used as independent products, they can be stored in a non-volatile computer-readable storage medium that is executable by a processor. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of the present disclosure, or the part that contributes to the prior art or the part of the technical solution, can be embodied in the form of a software product, which is stored in a storage medium and includes several instructions for a computer device (which can be a personal computer, a server, or a network device, etc.) to perform all or part of the steps of the method described in each embodiment of the present disclosure. The aforementioned storage medium includes: various media that can store program codes, such as a USB flash drive, a mobile hard disk, a read-only memory (ROM), a random access memory (RAM), a magnetic disk or an optical disk.

[0201] Finally, it should be noted that the above-described embodiments are only specific implementation methods of the present disclosure, which are used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present disclosure, rather than to limit them. The protection scope of the present disclosure is not limited thereto. Although the present disclosure is described in detail with reference to the above-described embodiments, ordinary technicians in the field should understand that any technician familiar with the technical field can still modify the technical solutions recorded in the above-described embodiments within the technical scope disclosed in the present disclosure, or can easily think of changes, or make equivalent replacements for some of the technical features therein; and these modifications, changes or replacements do not make the essence of the corresponding technical solutions deviate from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present disclosure, and should be included in the protection scope of the present disclosure. Therefore, the protection scope of the present disclosure should be based on the protection scope of the claims.

Claims

1. A method for reviewing works, characterized in that: include: Receive a first work to be reviewed sent by a user terminal, generate a first review task corresponding to the first work to be reviewed, and add the first review task to a review queue; In response to the update operation of the user terminal, receiving an updated second work to be reviewed corresponding to the first work to be reviewed and sent by the user terminal; wherein the work identifiers of the first work to be reviewed and the second work to be reviewed are the same; Generate a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed, and add the second review task to the review queue; and add the identification information of the first review task to a list of canceled review tasks, so that the review tasks in the review queue determine whether they need to be reviewed based on the list of canceled review tasks before being reviewed, Wherein, after generating the first review task based on the first work to be reviewed and adding the first review task to the review queue, the method further includes: After detecting that the first review task exists in the review queue, updating the review status of the work corresponding to the work identifier in the database to "under review", The method further comprises: Obtaining the review status of each work in the database at a first preset time interval; Based on the review status of each work currently obtained and the review status of each work previously obtained, determining a first target work that has not been reviewed normally; Generate a third review task corresponding to the first target work, and add the third review task to the review queue.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The second target work corresponding to any review task in the review queue is reviewed according to the following steps: Parsing the audit queue to obtain identification information of any audit task; Based on the identification information of any audit task and the list of canceled audit tasks, if it is detected that any audit task is a task that needs to be audited, determining the identification information of the second target work corresponding to any audit task based on the identification information of any audit task; The second target work is reviewed based on the identification information of the second target work.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that The method further comprises: After the review of the second target work is completed, the corresponding review result is saved in the database, and the review status of the second target work is updated to reviewed.

4. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that: The detecting, based on the identification information of any audit task and the list of canceled audit tasks, that any audit task is a task that needs to be audited includes: When it is detected that the canceled audit task list does not contain the identification information of any audit task, it is determined that any audit task is a task that needs to be audited.

5. The method according to any one of claims 1 to 4, characterized in that: After adding the identification information of the first audit task to the list of canceled audit tasks, the method further includes: In response to any audit task in the canceled audit task list satisfying a preset deletion condition, the identification information of any audit task in the canceled audit task list is deleted from the canceled audit task list.

6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that The preset deletion condition includes at least one of the following: The review status of the work corresponding to any of the review tasks is reviewed; any of the review tasks is deleted from the review queue; or the time for which any of the review tasks is added to the canceled review task list exceeds a second preset time.

7. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The adding the identification information of the first audit task to the list of canceled audit tasks includes: When it is detected that the review status of the first work to be reviewed is unreviewed or under review, the identification information of the first review task is added to the list of canceled review tasks.

8. A work review device, characterized in that: include: A receiving module, configured to receive a first work to be reviewed sent by a user terminal, generate a first review task corresponding to the first work to be reviewed, and add the first review task to a review queue; An updating module, configured to respond to an updating operation of the user terminal and receive an updated second work to be reviewed corresponding to the first work to be reviewed and sent by the user terminal; wherein the work identifiers of the first work to be reviewed and the second work to be reviewed are the same; an adding module, configured to generate a second review task corresponding to the second work to be reviewed, and add the second review task to the review queue; and add the identification information of the first review task to a list of canceled review tasks, so that the review tasks in the review queue can determine whether they need to be reviewed based on the list of canceled review tasks before being reviewed, Wherein, after generating the first review task based on the first work to be reviewed and adding the first review task to the review queue, the receiving module is further used to: After detecting that the first review task exists in the review queue, updating the review status of the work corresponding to the work identifier in the database to "under review", The adding module is also used for: Obtaining the review status of each work in the database at a first preset time interval; Based on the review status of each work currently obtained and the review status of each work previously obtained, determining a first target work that has not been reviewed normally; Generate a third review task corresponding to the first target work, and add the third review task to the review queue.

9. A computer device, characterized in that: include: A processor, a memory and a bus, wherein the memory stores machine-readable instructions executable by the processor, and when the computer device is running, the processor and the memory communicate via the bus, and when the machine-readable instructions are executed by the processor, the steps of the work review method as described in any one of claims 1 to 7 are performed.

10. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that: The computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps of the work review method as described in any one of claims 1 to 7 are executed.

Images