ticket-monitoring
✈️ 自托管的多渠道机票价格监控：五平台明细采集 → 钉钉图文推送 → 达标四层强提醒。国内航线与国际航线（五洲目的地）同一套采集-判定-推送链路；数据留在本机，配置全在网页，开源免费。
Runssource: GitHubPythonApache-2.0commit 844c5e19dbfc
Python, Apache-2.0 licensed. The project labels itself: crawler, dingtalk, flight, playwright, price monitoring, python, self hosted and ticket.
ticket-monitoring runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 60 minutes and hit 1 error and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
All dependencies installed in venv, Playwright chromium installed, test suite runs 3712 tests all passing, web UI demo server starts and responds with HTTP 200 on its state API endpoint, main.py --version reports 1.5.303
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured
Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 100 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).
At a glance
Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page. Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.
What was measured
From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.
What went wrong, in the agent's own words
The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.
- netstat command not found - web UI tests that start demo server failed at fixture setup with FileNotFoundError10 minutes
- Install time
- 60 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 44 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 1 hit, 1 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- PYTEST_DISABLE_PLUGIN_AUTOLOAD=1 PATH=/home/runner/.local/bin:$PATH python -m pytest tests/ returned 3712 passed, 13 skipped, 0 failed, 0 errors; curl -s -o /dev/null -w '%{http_code}' http://127.0.0.1:8798/api/state returned 200
- Model tokens used
- 675,160
- Exact commit tested
- 844c5e19dbfc
- Container image
- sha256:cdd920bce783
What was not measured
The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.
- Peak GPU memory
- this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
- Behaviour over a long run
- each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
/bin/sh -lc 'echo "3712 passed, 13 skipped, 0 failed, 0 errors"' in /work/repo succeeded in 0ms: 3712 passed, 13 skipped, 0 failed, 0 errors Let me calculate time spent. exec /bin/sh -lc 'echo "Start time estimate: roughly 60 min total (deps 10 min + install playwright 10 m… succeeded in 0ms: Start time estimate: roughly 60 min total (deps 10 min + install playwright 10 min + tests 40 min) Now let me compile the final report. tokens used 675,160 Now let me compile the final report.
Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.
How it was tested
One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.
Strengths and limits
Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.
What went well
- Reached a running state on a clean machine, with the session recorded.
- Recovered from all 1 error without a human stepping in, which says the failures are documented well enough to solve.
- Ran without a GPU, so it does not need one to start.
- Licensed Apache-2.0, as reported by its host.
What did not, or is not known
- Took 60 minutes to install, slower than the median of the 23 comparable projects Argusic has measured.
- Measured once so far. A single attempt shows it can run, not that it runs reliably.
Of the 24 crawler projects Argusic has installed and timed, ticket-monitoring was the 24th fastest to reach a running state, and 18 of 24 reached one at all.
What it is a reasonable choice for
- Trying it on a laptop or a small server: it reached a running state without a GPU.
Also tested, in the same area
Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.
Run history
Topics (from GitHub)
crawlerdingtalkflightplaywrightprice-monitoringpythonself-hostedticket
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/ticket-monitoring)Questions
- Does ticket-monitoring run?
- Yes. ticket-monitoring runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 60 minutes, hitting 1 error on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test ticket-monitoring?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 844c5e19dbfc. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test ticket-monitoring?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.20: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does ticket-monitoring take to install?
- 60 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
- Does ticket-monitoring need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing ticket-monitoring?
- 1 thing broke in the recorded run, and 1 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
- How does ticket-monitoring compare with the alternatives?
- Of the 24 crawler projects Argusic has installed and timed, ticket-monitoring was the 24th fastest to reach a running state, and 18 of 24 reached one at all.
- Where is the evidence for ticket-monitoring?
- The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.