Problem with Workflow And Split step and Timeouts | Community
Skip to main content
October 16, 2015
Solved

Problem with Workflow And Split step and Timeouts

  • October 16, 2015
  • 4 replies
  • 1068 views

In CQ 5.61 I have to create a workflow where three different participants have to approve something (in parallel) to advance to the next step. If any of them don't take an action after some time the workflow have to continue.

So what I did was: add an 'And Split' step with three branches, each branch has a participant step and those participant steps has configure 'Auto Advance' as timeout handler with an specific time (for example 1h).

The problem is that CQ execute the timeout handler only in the last branch, but not in the first two. So if none of them take an action only the third participant step advance but not the others.

Is this a bug in CQ? and, is there any other way to implement that use case?

Thanks, Claudio.

This post is no longer active and is closed to new replies. Need help? Start a new post to ask your question.
Best answer by Sham_HC

Can you please file daycare referencing CQ-3052. Will validate.

4 replies

smacdonald2008
Level 10
October 16, 2015

Is it possible for you to post a screen shot of your workflow map. I would like to see it to better understand how your workflow should advance. 

Sham_HC
Sham_HCAccepted solution
Level 10
October 16, 2015

Can you please file daycare referencing CQ-3052. Will validate.

October 16, 2015

Sure, the important part is first split, which is an 'And Split', each participant step has the timeout configuration that I've attached. But only the last one (Ashley Thompson) is executed. The first two branches aren't so they keep in the inbox's participants.

Just to let you know, the idea is If all participant steps were approved the workflow will execute 'Do Something' step, but if any of the participant steps advance by timeout, the workflow will execute 'Send Timeout Email'

[img]workflow.png[/img]

[img]participant.png[/img]

Level 2
October 16, 2015

FYI: This bug was related to the ticket CQ5-34708