Solved

Differences in programming for scripts started via Foxhub

  • 9 September 2019
  • 5 replies
  • 6 views

We've recently gotten access to Foxhub & Foxbots and I was working to try to schedule an existing script for launch via Foxhub. The script launched with no difficulty.

 

The problem is, I have a start up/log in task and then a task that goes through the repetitive actions. The Startup task ends with a "Run Task" command. When the program launched from Foxhub, the startup task ran over and over, rather than kicking over to the repetitive task.

 

How do you work around this?

icon

Best answer by john_armstrong 9 September 2019, 21:37

View original

5 replies

Hey Bo,


 


In FoxHub, is the Job setup as a Data Job or a Solo Job?


 


Thanks,


John.

I was trying to run it as a Data Job.

We are running through several mass updates to clean up our data over the next several months. My hope was to split the records up with a data job to speed the run time. 

Great, thanks for the additional info on that. Without getting more specific, here's my thoughts


 


A Data Job running thru FoxHub is going to work a little bit different than what you're used to running an attended botflow and loading data manually. As you experienced, a Data Job will start at the top of the Startup Task for each record in the dataset. Using certain tokens like [*CURRENT_RECORD_NUMBER] and [*TOTAL_RECORDS] will not work either, as the Bot is not "aware" of the full dataset.


 


What I would suggest is to rework your botflow a little bit. There is a feature called "Before Task" that you can use for your login steps. This Before Task will only run once per Bot, meaning it will not repeat for each record and will only run once at the beginning of the Job.


 


Then the Startup Task can be the 'work' portion of processing the data. There is no need to add any Loops to loop through the data, since it is distributed one record at a time from FoxHub.


 


Hopefully this helps! If it answers your question, please mark this reply as the Solution :)


 


- John

This sounds exactly like what I need. Thank you so much!

Reply