Activity Chaining

RE: Activity Chaining

Mike Schmitt — Wed, 23 Dec 2020 21:20:49 GMT

great, thanks for confirming.

RE: Activity Chaining

beHumble — Wed, 23 Dec 2020 21:17:44 GMT

Boom, adding that last activity chain in the 2nd sub process worked! Thank you Mike!

RE: Activity Chaining

Mike Schmitt — Wed, 23 Dec 2020 21:12:26 GMT

[quote userid="17483" url="~/discussions/f/process/20131/activity-chaining/78675#78675"]all nodes EXCEPT from the last node to the end node[/quote]

Well, this would break chaining in the parent process, so can you change it?

[quote userid="17483" url="~/discussions/f/process/20131/activity-chaining/78675#78675"]I set the call trip rec sync subprocess to synchronous[/quote]

I'm not sure why you'd do that - this would either have no effect or have the opposite effect for what you're trying to do. Again, asynchronous subprocesses are essentially ignored by activity chaining (the subprocess launches in a separate thread essentially and can do whatever it wants). So you definitely want to leave it asynchronous.

RE: Activity Chaining

beHumble — Wed, 23 Dec 2020 21:08:34 GMT

I set the call trip rec sync subprocess to synchronous before my post and had no luck.

I checked the two subs you have highlighted

1st sub is Synchronous and has chaining from the start node, to the write node, to the end node

2ns sub is Synchronous and has activity chaining on all nodes EXCEPT from the last node to the end node

We can't move the task unfortunately ..

RE: Activity Chaining

Mike Schmitt — Wed, 23 Dec 2020 20:56:04 GMT

No worries, I was able to download the image and zoom in - the "call trip recording sync" subprocess is asynchronous so chaining inside it is irrelevant. You need to make sure chaining is enabled all throughout the two synchronous subprocesses (highlighted), as well as making sure the steps they contain don't push you over the 50-node chaining limit.

Also: can the task be moved earlier in this process flow by any means? Or does it completely rely on the processing done in all of these nodes? Usually the best answer in cases like this is to reevaluate the process flow and move certain operations to run in parallel with the task, instead of before it.

RE: Activity Chaining

beHumble — Wed, 23 Dec 2020 20:50:33 GMT

This is probably to small, sorry

RE: Activity Chaining

beHumble — Wed, 23 Dec 2020 20:46:40 GMT

RE: Activity Chaining

Mike Schmitt — Wed, 23 Dec 2020 20:36:01 GMT

Can you confirm that your related action process has activity chaining enabled on every flow line between the start node and the eventual User Input Task node?

If any subprocesses are originally set to "Asynchronous", you should leave them that way - chaining will essentially "skip over" asynchronous subprocess nodes and ignore any broken chaining found within them. Synchronous subprocesses, on the other hand, will allow chaining to proceed in the parent if and only if the flow within is fully chained.

It might be helpful if you could provide a screenshot of the process flow(s) leading up to your task. Your description pretty much confirms to me that chaining is not happening correctly between the start node and the task, one way or the other - the signs you described at first exactly match what I'd expect in this case.