Facing issue with Switch Node
I’ve encountered an issue with a workflow integration in Buildship and need assistance to resolve it. Here are the details:
I created a workflow with a switch node that includes multiple conditions. When tested independently, the switch workflow functions correctly and returns the expected outputs based on the conditions.
I integrated this switch workflow into another workflow using the "Execute Buildship Workflow" node. The switch workflow is called multiple times from this parent workflow.
Issue: Regardless of the action I pass from the parent workflow to the switch workflow, it consistently returns the output for Condition 1, ignoring other conditions.
I’ve attached a recording of the issue for reference.
Could you please help identify and resolve this issue? Let me know if you need additional details or access to the workflows.
14 Replies
AI Support Bot Information
<@1374738993958359092> you can react on the relevant answer (message) with a ✅ in this thread when you think it has been solved, by the bot or by a human!
Anyone can react on this message with a ❌ if the GPT bot is unhelpful or hallucinating answers.
Please note: Team members will review and answer the questions on best efforts basis.
AI Response
It seems like you are facing an issue where the "Execute Buildship Workflow" node does not adhere to the conditions set in the nested switch node. Here are a few potential resolutions for your issue:
1. Check Input Parameters: Ensure that the conditions in the parent workflow are correctly passed to the switch workflow. Double-check the input parameters and ensure they match what the switch node expects.
2. Debug and Logs: Use logs at each conditional node to verify what data is being passed and how the conditions are evaluated. It could be that the condition values are not being passed correctly from the parent workflow.
3. Execution Order: Verify the order of execution and dependencies between nodes in both the parent and switch workflow. Sometimes, the sequence can affect the outcome.
4. Node Caching: If your switch node processes cached inputs instead of new ones, try adding a node to clear previous cache or reset session-like data before executing the next switch condition.
5. Documentation and Support: Reference the official Buildship documentation on switch nodes to ensure that your setup complies with best practices. Here is a link that might help: Switch Node Documentation
If you've tried these steps and the issue persists, it might be beneficial to contact Buildship support directly for further assistance, especially if it involves a bug. You can send a request using the "Support" button directly from your BuildShip Dashboard .
BuildShip AI Support
Thanks for sharing, we'll check and update you via email and discord
Same here. Condition 2 was met, but switch routed through condition 1.
Hi @RFA @AKGDEV7 we are tracking and working on this issue will update you with the fix. We appreciate you sharing videos
Till now what I have understood if you use same custom workflow multiple times It wont work properly . It will cached the result from 1st execution and for next execution it will deliver cached response . I am facing this with my custom workflows with switch and openAI Node.
This defeats the purpose of Re-usability
Can not achieve modularity
I'm seeing the same issue when converting to nested branches. Making it extremely likely it may be that this issue is due to what @AKGDEV7 mentioned: cached result. My cache was not set. Testing with it set to "0".
Still failing. Under "REST API Call > Output > body > args", it's showing the new args passed every time. However, under "INPUTS", it shows args from a previous call.
@RFA Let me know if u get the solution.. Now the only solution is to duplicate ur workflow instead using the same one multiple times. But u r using in loop it wont work
we'll update you with the fix soon
also @RFA could you please share this flow as well? with recording and showing this via jam.dev?
Dm'd you
recorded walkthrough
@RFA @AKGDEV7 Could you pleas re-try this should be fixed
Testing
Success 🙂