Automic Workload Automation

Expand all | Collapse all

IF workflows: not saving dependencies and not propagating fails

Jump to Best Answer
  • 1.  IF workflows: not saving dependencies and not propagating fails

    Posted 01-22-2020 08:55 AM
    Hi,

    I've just filed a ticket on IF workflows in 12.3.

    While the "Time & Dependencies" pane is displayed for the "diamond" at the end, and one can set dependencies on the objects within the "if" workflow there (such as "if task #2 is ENDED_NOT_OK, then block), these changes are not saved. And that's even though it displays a green box saying "changes saved successfully". The next time you open the object again, the tables is once void of any changes.

    Additionally, I can not find any way to have an IF workflow go to ENDED_NOT_OK if one of it's contained items fails. E.g. if item #2 in the "true" branch is ENDED_NOT_OK, and item #3 has an "if item #2 is ENDED_NOT_OK, then abort" clause, the entire IF workflow is still marked "ENDED_OK" in the end, no matter what, which I think this is wrong, too?

    If anyone has additional input on this, please share.


    ​​​​

    ------------------------------
    These contain very good advise on asking questions and describing supposed bugs (no, you do not need to go to StackExchange for Automic questions, but yes, the parts on asking detailed, useful questions ARE usually relevant):

    http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

    https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html

    I will not respond to PM asking for help unless there's an actual reason to keep the discussion off of the public forums.
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: IF workflows: not saving dependencies and not propagating fails
    Best Answer

    Posted 01-23-2020 04:04 AM
    This has been confirmed as a bug and will be passed to development.

    Thus, it appears IF workflows are currently unusable if you want any degree of error testing (unless, possibly, one fiddles with script and PSET, which we didn't).

    Kudos to Automic support for this one, this has been the first support case in a very long time that I can say I am happy with. We received a speedy acknowledgement as a bug, courtesy of the engineer testing this against the old Java client where the functionality works.

    That such rather basic issues exists in the first place is less thrilling though, this one really should have been catched in release testing. But again, IMHO.

    Best regards.

    ------------------------------
    These contain very good advise on asking questions and describing supposed bugs (no, you do not need to go to StackExchange for Automic questions, but yes, the parts on asking detailed, useful questions ARE usually relevant):

    http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

    https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html

    I will not respond to PM asking for help unless there's an actual reason to keep the discussion off of the public forums.
    ------------------------------