i’m seeing a very strange behaviour with the “chunk loop start node”. i have the following flow, where i’m trying to convert a list of files to another format (rdf),
I’m not sure if the sequence of node execution is as you expected.
What is the difference in your statements “run manually” and “run”?
Please explain this in more detail. In the meantime, maybe adding some workflow-dependencies would do the trick.
to give you some more info on the “manual” versus “run”
manual run:
–basically when building the flow, you just execute the “chunk loop start” with F7, it will fetch the first row and initialize the iteration variables; in my case “max iterations = 3” and “current iteration = 0”.
while continuing to build the flow, in each node, these values are used, and not incremented
normal run:
–basically, by
a) resetting the “chunk loop start” node - has state ‘yellow’
b) selecting the “loop end” node and executing it via F7 (is expected to iterate through all the iterations as indicated in the “loop start flow variables”
i tried your work-around, by incorporating a couple of node steps in the loop and it seems to work as expected: i.e. looping over the 3(all) record iterations
however, still, i don’t see a valid use-case for the loop start / end - with only a subtree - to skip the first iteration0… as one would expect it as default bevaiour
OK, got it. In “manual run mode” you execute the nodes one by one while in “run” you just run the last node and KNIME executes the whole flow to get there.
My strongest guess is still, that there is something in trouble with the sequence of node execution. That’s the main difference between your manual-controlled and full-auto run.
I suggest the following approach:
Reset the workflow completely.
Run the workflow (Shift + F7) and watch the progress bars on each node.
If one of the nodes starts earlier than expected, investigate and set run-conditions (predecessor / successor - connections - aka “the red lines”) if necessary.
If the nodes run in expected sequence, split the data flow into a file writer node to see what is passed exactly in what loop. Based on that, investigate further.
Sorry for not waving the magic wand and solving your problem - it does look like you’ve to dive deeper into it.
about your workflow.
Even so it is possible, we don’t recommend that branches do leave the loop. Especially in your case it seems most of the work is done in side branches.
I would recommend connecting the metanode with flow variables to the loop end node.
