Hello, I have tried to filter workflows by name in webinterface. I followed instructions,
I created a group and aded "GROUPRIGHT_MENU_VIEW_JOB_STATUS" and a "FILTER_WORKFLOW_NAME". I created a user and aded a group. I edited the filter with the name of workflow that I want the user lists. Unfortunatelly, he lists all workflows.
The name of workflow is "MOV_para_AD", I tried to edit in several ways, but without
succes.
Could you help me, please?
thanks
Javier
Filtering workfows by name in webinterface
Re: Filtering workfows by name in webinterface
Hey Javier,
welcome to the forum and thank you for using ffastrans
ok, sorry, that is my fault. the "FILTER_WORKFLOW_NAME" currently only actually "filters" the workflows that users see on the job "submit" page, not on the JOB_STATUS page. I am aware that it will make sense to also apply the FILTER_WORKFLOW_NAME to the stuff that users see on the Status page but this will be a lot of work as i also need to filter the count of running and queued jobs, or at least need to "inform" the user that they see a different count of running and queued and error jobs than there is actually on the system.
What is your opinion on this, what count of running/queued/finished/error jobs would you show the user in case they see a "filtered" list of jobs?
Imagine they see their job queued for a long time without any visible reason but in reality there are other jobs currently running that block the execution of their job?
welcome to the forum and thank you for using ffastrans
ok, sorry, that is my fault. the "FILTER_WORKFLOW_NAME" currently only actually "filters" the workflows that users see on the job "submit" page, not on the JOB_STATUS page. I am aware that it will make sense to also apply the FILTER_WORKFLOW_NAME to the stuff that users see on the Status page but this will be a lot of work as i also need to filter the count of running and queued jobs, or at least need to "inform" the user that they see a different count of running and queued and error jobs than there is actually on the system.
What is your opinion on this, what count of running/queued/finished/error jobs would you show the user in case they see a "filtered" list of jobs?
Imagine they see their job queued for a long time without any visible reason but in reality there are other jobs currently running that block the execution of their job?
emcodem, wrapping since 2009 you got the rhyme?
Re: Filtering workfows by name in webinterface
Hello, and thaks for your reply. The fact is that we share one server for several workflows. We want that final users can watch the progress of the workflows they are intersted. Too much rows of diferent workflows could be confuse for them.
No problem about mistakes or overflows, they call us (the administrators) by phone quickly (je, je,
,). And of course, we are watching the complete monitor.
No problem about mistakes or overflows, they call us (the administrators) by phone quickly (je, je,
,). And of course, we are watching the complete monitor.Re: Filtering workfows by name in webinterface
@Javicsur
i understand your usecase totally but still i need a strategy about what count of running/queued/finished/error the "limited" users will see. You know, on the top of the page. What would be your expection on that?
i understand your usecase totally but still i need a strategy about what count of running/queued/finished/error the "limited" users will see. You know, on the top of the page. What would be your expection on that?
emcodem, wrapping since 2009 you got the rhyme?
Re: Filtering workfows by name in webinterface
Hi, I think the count is not very important for final user. That's good for adminitrators. With this information we can balance the worksflows between servers and be alert of errors.
So, I think the count/running/queued/finished/error could be stay the same without limitations. In this way they have some idea of server occupation (running, queued) of all workflows. And in running window they watch their works running or queued and in finished windows their success's and error`s works. This is their truth interest.
I don't know, if it is easier to program for that feauture, or change variables to put in counts the account of limited workflows. For me, the easier, the best.
regards, salut
Javier
So, I think the count/running/queued/finished/error could be stay the same without limitations. In this way they have some idea of server occupation (running, queued) of all workflows. And in running window they watch their works running or queued and in finished windows their success's and error`s works. This is their truth interest.
I don't know, if it is easier to program for that feauture, or change variables to put in counts the account of limited workflows. For me, the easier, the best.
regards, salut
Javier
Re: Filtering workfows by name in webinterface
@Javicsur
Hey Javier, please check out the new release 1.0.4 of the webint, it should work as you expected now with FILTER_WORKFLOW_NAME.
Now this filter applies to both, the job submit page and the job status page
Hey Javier, please check out the new release 1.0.4 of the webint, it should work as you expected now with FILTER_WORKFLOW_NAME.
Now this filter applies to both, the job submit page and the job status page
emcodem, wrapping since 2009 you got the rhyme?
Re: Filtering workfows by name in webinterface
Hi emcodem, I returned recently from holydays. This the reason that I poste so late. Thank you very much for your new release of webinterface. I'll install and test it next week.
regards, salut
Javier
regards, salut
Javier