Hi, we are having a problem executing an expression rule, which contains an a!queryRecordType, where we have: - 1 grouping field - 1 measure field - 4 filters,
on a batchsize of 500 items. In detail, every time we try the rule from expression rule the result is correct but when we insert it in a script task from process model it randomly gives wrong results (correct measure corresponding to wrong group fields). A delay of 1 minute after last node has also been inserted in the process activity.
What could be the problem?
Thanks,
Francesca
Discussion posts and replies are publicly visible
Such random issues are extremely difficult to find. Especially when we have no details. Can you share some?
Probably the parameters differs on each execution in the PM.....
More details on the expression rule please
Hi, this is the first part of the expression rule we call from the process, stored in a local variable because is a partial elaboration of the ER.
Saving its result we can see sometime is not correct in DATA field of the map (we have the right number of element in the map, with correct measure but wrong group).
a!queryRecordType( recordType: 'recordType!{8d214138-b859-4710-9cea-02edebba758c}RECORD', fields: a!aggregationFields( groupings: { a!grouping( field: 'recordType!{8d214138-b859-4710-9cea-02edebba758c}RECORD.fields.{4aa8d14a-37a8-49b3-83cd-a53638bc83e8}DATA_PAGAMENTO', alias: "DATA", interval: "DATE" ) }, measures: { a!measure( function: "SUM", field: 'recordType!{8d214138-b859-4710-9cea-02edebba758c}RECORD.fields.{ce39a834-36e1-4d1e-a837-166a14889542}IMPORTO_PAGATO', alias: "IMPORTO" ) } ), filters: a!queryLogicalExpression( operator: "AND", filters: { a!queryFilter( field: 'recordType!{8d214138-b859-4710-9cea-02edebba758c}RECORD.fields.{d8a3e8d0-eebc-4c54-8fbd-8fda411c4502}TIPO_COMMISSIONE', operator: "in", value: {cons!FET_tipoCommissioneCreditoReteEsternaAssociazioni, cons!FET_tipoCommissioneCreditoReteEsternaAgenti} ), a!queryFilter( field: 'recordType!{8d214138-b859-4710-9cea-02edebba758c}RECORD.fields.{f0d2064b-9f01-44ba-81a0-97ffa82a0ddf}STATO_COMMISSIONE', operator: "in", value: {"PAGATE"} ), a!queryFilter( field: 'recordType!{8d214138-b859-4710-9cea-02edebba758c}RECORD.fields.{0cd4413f-de42-4a9e-935c-176e414421bd}DATA_CREAZIONE', operator: ">", value: cons!FET_DataCut ), a!queryFilter( field: 'recordType!{8d214138-b859-4710-9cea-02edebba758d}RECORD.fields.{4aa8d14a-37a8-49b3-83cd-a53638bc83e8}DATA_PAGAMENTO', operator: "not null" ) }, ignoreFiltersWithEmptyValues: true ), pagingInfo: a!pagingInfo( startIndex: 1, batchSize: 500 ), ).data ,
RIGHT ANSWER:
EXAMPLE OF A WRONG ANSWER:
Are you passing any values to this rule while invoking it in the script task. If yes can share that details
Yes, in the following part of the expression rule we use a rule input but values are used only after the evaluation of this query.
In detail, we run 2 different query, stored in 2 different local variable and we use the rule input to evaluate a third local variable with one of the 2 preceeding.
E.g
local1: a!queryRecordType(...),
local2: a!queryRecordType(...),
local3: if(ri!input="1", local1, local2)
With so many dependencies on private data, it is impossible for me to say anything.
When I had similar issues in the past, I sooner or later had a facepalm moment once I understood that I was the problem.
BTW, why do you do both queries, just to throw away the result of one of it.