Webhook vs Polling Reconciliation

Design webhook, polling and reconciliation roles for travel booking systems, including duplicate, out-of-order and missing-event recovery.

Editorial information
Advertisement

Webhook and polling are not substitutes. In a production travel system, webhook is fast evidence, while polling and reconciliation provide completeness and recovery.

Reference flow

Webhook and reconciliation architectureWebhook and reconciliation architecture

Mermaid source (.mmd)

Why webhook is not enough

Webhook delivery can be lost, duplicated, reordered, retried or rejected during temporary endpoint failures. Therefore "no webhook means no event" is not a safe assumption.

Why polling is not enough

Continuous polling consumes rate limits, creates unnecessary traffic and delays state propagation. Polling should be targeted and state-aware.

Reconciliation scheduling

Good candidates include long-lived UNKNOWN/PENDING bookings, expected-but-missing webhooks, booking/payment divergence, incomplete cancellation/refund and provider references without a local terminal state.

Use backoff:

text
1 min -> 5 min -> 15 min -> 1 h -> manual threshold

Deduplication and ordering

Do not let ingress update state immediately. First verify authenticity, derive provider event identity, deduplicate, record occurredAt/sequence, then execute transition rules.

An older event must not roll back newer state.

Source precedence

Define precedence for conflicting evidence. One example is:

text
authoritative status lookup
> signed provider webhook
> synchronous API response
> locally inferred timeout state

The exact order can vary by provider, but it should be explicit.

Failure modes

Typical failures include duplicate webhook, replay attack, stale event rollback, polling storms, parallel reconciliation of the same booking and eventual-consistency lag in provider lookups.

Observability

Track webhook receive rate, signature failures, duplicate and out-of-order ratios, webhook-to-state latency, reconciliation queue depth, resolution rate and pending/unknown age.

Production checklist

Require signature/auth verification, idempotent event apply, event storage, ordering/version control, state-aware polling, exponential backoff, reconciliation ownership locking and manual escalation thresholds.

Technical advisory

Let’s review your architecture.

We can assess your travel distribution and metasearch architecture for scalability, failure modes and operations.

Discuss your project →

Related content

troubleshooting

Cancellation Succeeded but Local State Stale

Diagnose cases where provider cancellation succeeded but local booking state stayed stale across webhook, persistence, ordering and reconciliation layers.

cancellationstale-statewebhook
Explore →
architecture

Booking Timeout and UNKNOWN Outcome Recovery

Recover ambiguous travel-booking timeouts with UNKNOWN state, authoritative lookup, reconciliation and safe retry gates.

bookingtimeoutunknown
Explore →
distribution-api

Hotelbeds API Suite: Bedbank Distribution Profile

developer.hotelbeds.com

A technical profile of the HBX Group Hotelbeds API Suite covering hotel booking, content and cache APIs for B2B accommodation distribution.

hotelbedshbxbedbank
Explore →
distribution

OTA vs Metasearch vs Travel Marketplace: Key Differences

Compare OTA, metasearch and travel-marketplace models by transaction ownership, supplier relationships, monetization, handoff and technical architecture.

otametasearchtravel-marketplace
Explore →
distribution

Package Holiday vs Hotel Metasearch: Architecture Differences

Compare package-holiday distribution with hotel metasearch by offer identity, pricing, supplier topology, booking ownership and cancellation.

package-holidayhotel-metasearchtour-operator
Explore →
distribution-api

Sabre Travel APIs: GDS and Travel Distribution Profile

developer.sabre.com

A technical profile of Sabre Travel APIs covering air, lodging, car, booking and agency workflows across a GDS-oriented B2B platform.

sabregdsflight-api
Explore →