Community
How can Onify agent access a process?
I try to launch agent script from a workflow. When I use onifyApiRequest in async mode, the agent seem not be able to signal to the process when the script is completed. The agent script get executed, but the flow gets stuck waiting response of agent task. I get this error to Onify app log:
`DEBUG client (403): Agent user agent do not have permission to access process (06bdead772f34b23913e79f5ccaa7b7e)`
How can I give priviledges to agent for accessing the process data and letting it to signal the process when agent task is completed?
Posted by Vesa Jolkkonen 1 day ago
Feature request: Use a generic or assignable username for flows triggered by timer
In /admin/processes the column "User" shows
1. For manual triggered flows - the name of the user who triggered it
2. For timer triggered flows - the name of the user who last published the flow
Point 2 will make it hard to distinguish if a flow was triggered manually or by timer.
Also if you just want to filter on processes triggered by user xxx you will get a lot of false positives.
Finally - if you remove this user, maybe the person started at another company, the flow will not be triggered at all until you republish it with an existing user!!!
It wood be good if all flows triggered by timer had a generic username like "Timer" to distinguish them.
Or it could be definable in a setting like /admin/settings/user_name_to_trigger_timerbased_flows
Posted by Dennis 2 days ago
Possibility to change the 5 minute limit of "Short running synchrone (non persistent) workflows"?
We have a subflow consisting of a few tasks, that takes anything from 1 to approx 9 minutes to finish.
When calling any subflow with /api/v2/my/workflows/run/{key} it is limited to a runtime of 5 minutes before it fails as of <https://support.onify.co/reference/postmyworkflowsrunkey>
This seems to be a hardcoded value, and probably set to be enough for most of such task. But having such a limit will in our case force us to move the logic from a subflow to our main flow to not have timeouts, which is unfortunate in terms of maintainability etc.
Is there any possibility to change set this limit to another value within our own Onify instance?
In return I can provide you with an enhanced and more reliable version of this blueprint. ;)
<https://github.com/onify/blueprint-cloudblue-commerce-change-subscription>
Posted by Dennis 4 months ago
Feature request: Implement retry cycles for servicetasks (failedJobRetryTimeCycle)
It would be great if we could use the Camunda function "retry cycle" in Onify to retry a task, that sometimes fails, a specified number of times with a specified time apart. Now we need to build this logic ourselves around tasks that need such "safety net" to not exit a full flow because of some intermittent downtime or unreliable service e t c. 😊
![](https://files.readme.io/5cf3f89-image.png)
\<bpmn:serviceTask id="sendEmailTask" name="Send Email Task"
camunda:asyncBefore="true"
camunda:failedJobRetryTimeCycle="R3/PT30S">
\</bpmn:serviceTask>
Posted by Dennis 4 months ago
Feature request: In Onify admin - show ALL data in the tables and make it possible to select which fields to show/hide
For example in /admin/configuration/shortcuts I have a lot of shortcuts and when I add a new one the "key" is of course an obligatory field. To keep the naming conventions structured I here need to look at the other keys and it would be so easy if they were in the table, but they are not. 😪 Instead I now have to open the posts one by one to look at the keys for each.
And in an opposite situation - many times a lot of the fields which are shown are not interesting to me at this point and just adds cognitive noise.
So it would be great if the tables as default showed the fields as of today but
- You could chose to show additional fields or hide visible fields as of your liking
- Possibly also save your own presets with different visible settings for different purposes
- In an utopian world also make it possible to include the search query in the presets :heart-eyes:
(This is very similar to how Airtable has solved it with different views for the same data and that is a killer :skull:feature.)
Posted by Dennis 5 months ago