Requested Start / Wait until (dynamic date)

[Michael Pokraka]

Hi Rick,
There are two modes, depending on the volume of your workflows.
- Periodic monitoring, where you schedule the job to run every n minutes
- As needed - the job schedules itself for whenever the next deadline is due (Or the WF system reschedules it when it is needed). At low volumes, this is very [erformance efficient.
 
I had an issue with this a while back, where the job was in fact rescheduling itself too often and would fail because we had hundreds of DLs being reached each day. The net effect was that it only ran every few hours. Thus 'just one WF' is irrelevant as it is the number of deadlines that matter.
My own guesstimate would range at around 5-10 deadlines set/reached per hour being a reasonable 'threshold' value to switch from 'as needed' to periodic.
 
HTH
Cheers
Mike
 
On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 12:03:52PM -0500, Rick Sample wrote:
> I created a background Activity Task using SELFITEM.SENDTASKDESCRIPTION.
> I passed in a container element for the date to the Requested Start as an expression.
> The WF started and when I look at the log it stated it was "Waiting..." It passed the
> date I wanted it to execute.
>
> We have not used Deadline Monitoring for any other WFs.
> I believe I missed turning some Deadline monitoring setting?
> What is the impact on the system for turning this on if I need it?
> Is turning on the Deadline monitoring on over kill for just one WF and one message?
>
> What if I created a background task the waits for "X" days then execute the
> Activity Task SELFITEM.SENDTASKDESCRIPTION. Performance issues?
>
>
> >>> fa.kouw at td.klm.com 7.28.2003 2:31:48 AM >>>
> Hi,
>
> We're on 4.6C and it's not possible to specify deadlines in mail steps. Another solution is to include a task that is meant to send the mail in a normal activity step (background
> task, object SELFITEM, method SENDTASKDESCRIPTION). You can create this task by first modelling a mail send step in your workflow, and use the task created in the activity step. Take
> a look at the container bindings generated for the mail send step for specifying the correct bindings from the activity step to the task.
>
> Hope this helps a bit.
>
> Regards,
>
> Fred
>
> Michael Pokraka wrote:
>
> > Sounds like a perfect match for a 'Requested start' deadline... You porobably need a dummy task in between, can't remember if any versions let you specify deadlines on mail steps.
> > Cheers
> > Mike
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 10:23:22AM -0500, Rick Sample wrote:
> > > 4.6C
> > >
> > > I have a need to delay a message (SENDTASKDESCRIPTION) until a given date (not seconds).
> > > Basically we want to delay a send message at the end of a WF on a given "dynamic" date.
> > > Get an effective date from container and pass to a method / background task, whatever to
> > > then send the message. I looked at creating a method "WAIT UP TO xxx SECONDS." But I would rather not
> > > have to calculate seconds from days and not sure what impact this would have on the system.
> > > We are not currently using Deadline monitoring.
> > >
> > > Any given Demos or examples of this type I can look?
> > >
> > > Any help is appreciated.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________________________________
> > This inbound message from KPN has been checked for all known viruses by KPN IV-Scan, powered by MessageLabs.
> > For further information visit: http://www.veiliginternet.nl
> > _____________________________________________________________________________________________
>
>
> **********************************************************************
> This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged
> material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you
> are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed,
> copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or
> attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received
> this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail,
> and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its
> subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or
> incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible
> for any delay in receipt.
> **********************************************************************
>
> _____________________________________________________________________________________________
> This outbound message from KPN has been checked for all known viruses by KPN IV-Scan, powered by MessageLabs.
> For further information visit: http://www.veiliginternet.nl
> _____________________________________________________________________________________________