Workflow works when manually ran but not always on as scheduled

Hello Josh Shutts​ -

You will want to use Commit Pending Changes action before you query the item to ensure you are getting any updates that have occurred. Check out Video: Batched Actions and Committing Changes in Nintex Workflow for a more elegant explanation by Mike Fitzmaurice​.

One aspect to think about is if users are initiating the workflows, do they have permissions to update the corresponding lists? If you run it and never encounter the issue, it may be permissions.

Hope this helps!

Thank you Jesse! I had been placing the commit pending changes to the very end of my workflow. From the video, it sounds like you have to be careful where you place these because the workflow doesn't necessarily  run in the order it's built. I will let you know my outcome.

And thanks Cassy Freeman​ for responding. Sorry if I tag you too much. :-)

Hello Josh Shutts​ -

If you are making updates/changes to items and then calling a Commit Changes action, the forces the workflow to batch the updates. Keep in mind though, that if you are not reading from the updated item, it is a bit overkill. You only need a commit before a dependent read (reading something that is dependent on a previous update).

I try to stick to the same logic for each of my workflows; query lists/items, perform required action(s), update required lists/items.

I try not to read and update the same field multiple times within a workflow to avoid these issues, but sometimes it is required. I like to use State Machines (probably too much...) as they help break the actions into more manageable sections. This allows me to visually see what actions will be batched and executed once the state machine is directed to move to another state.

Hope this helps! If you need anything else, or a stumped, please let us know!

Always happy to help

Hello Josh Shutts​ -

From what I can gather, you are simply querying a list to get IDs (for items that are "Past Due") and storing them in a Collection variable.

Using a for each loop action, you are looping through the collection of IDs and then querying the list again for more due date. Do a calculation to find the updated due date, and then update the list item. Correct? (See my example to the left)

Your questions:

1. You do not need a commit changes unless you are querying the item/list again later in the workflow for something else. You can always test the results at that point by adding in a Log History action or emailing yourself the data to verify.

2. It looks good to me and this is similar to how I would approach the problem. I did notice that you are using a "Update Multiple Items" action, rather than a single update. Is there a reason that you are using that? I would think that updating the item you are working with in the loop currently should be updated in consecutive order would be better.

Hope this helps!

Question for you -

Does your second query look at the list where you just created the item (in the previous action)?

You should be good to go then, no need for a Commit Pending Changes.

Post more questions to the community if you have any other issues and I'm sure someone will help out!