camunda-7-cockpit-plugin-statistics
camunda-7-cockpit-plugin-statistics copied to clipboard
camunda-community-hub
Not showing history for multiple parallel paths
I'm not sure if this is a bug with Camunda itself, or with this plugin. Look at this picture:
http://postimg.org/image/yigt3s0xf/
I executed this process once, and it run perfectly. Every automated step is a Java delegate with a println. However, when I try to see the steps that took less than some time to run, two of the five parallel executions don't show any history, when I know for a fact that they were executed.
Is this because I shouldn't have more than 3 parallel executions? Is it a Camunda bug? Is it a plugin bug? Any ideas?
Can you do take a look at your history on a raw database level? What happens when you click the badge on the lower boundary of the two activities that were not colored?
When I click on the badge of those activities it says: "There is no historical information available for this activity."
I'm not sure where to look for the raw history in the DB, could you point me to the correct table?
Hi,
try this statement: "Select * from act_hi_actinst where act_NAME_ = 'Insert name of your activity as shown in the cockpit (sth. like .. crear grupos'"
Furthermore you could use any other criteria based on the fields available in the act_hi_actinst table
What the two activities have in common is that both have duration_ as 0. The other println activities have a duration_ of 1, 2, sometimes 4. I believe there is a problem when an activity is so fast that it's almost instantaneous.
Hi
We filter these durations (plugin) - I know that for sure. Maybe something we could give back to the camunda guys (your service implementation did NOT have a duration of 0) ?
In terms of the plugin: there will be no service tasks in "reality" that have a duration of 0. On the other hand a duration with a duration of 0 should be mentioned if you apply the limits overlay..
I will discuss that
Mmm, ok. I'll have that in mind then. I'm not so sure if it's correct to exclude them, because for whatever the reason, if it can happen, I believe it should be considered. For example, I know it's unlikely, but what if I actually wanted to have a task that only does a println?
It doesn't worry me too much because I don't believe we'll ever have something like that, but unless there is a good reason to exclude them, I wouldn't.
Thank you!