-
User Field and Worker Issues
Hello Everyone!
I had created a worker trigger that sends an email notification to my email when someone clicks on a clip field (a check box). It is set up like this:
In CATDV Pro Client:
User Field 2 is renamed as “Request by” and is set as plain text.
User Field 29 is renamed as “Order” and is set as checkbox.
NM1 is a built in field for the name of the media.In the worker node we set it up that when User Field 29 equals “true” it would send a notification to the email we set up. Here is what it looks like:
send to: an*******@***il.com
subject: ${U2} wants a file
body:
${U2} would like ${NM1}And when it runs (correctly) it looks like this in my email:
subject: Alex wants a file
body:
Alex would like filename.movHere is the issue; the email does get sent to me still (an*******@***il.com) but it looks like this:
Subject: wants a file
body:
would like filename.movWhat is odd is that after getting frustrated with it, we restarted the worker/CatDV pro/the computer and then it worked fine (where the ${U2} identifies the field. A couple times later we tested it on different clips and it gave us the unintended response such as the example above. We know that it is good practice to have the user fields for the worker in the first 10 (in the client) so we had executed various attempts with everything within the first 3 field definitions and it both worked and didn’t work. The same results happen when we created the User 29 field where it worked and didn’t work as well (couldn’t be triggered by the worker).
Has anyone had this issue? We have a fresh version of CatDV Pro and Worker that is up to date and we are only testing three clips. I am concerned because shutting off everything and rebooting seems to be the only solution, other than deleting the worker action and creating it again.
Any help would be great! Thanks
-
2 Replies
-
That sounds a bit odd. If you’re running a file-triggered task then it’s possible that not all the fields you might like might not be set early enough for a particular purpose (if they depend on the file having been analysed which might not have happened yet, for example), but for server-triggered tasks all the clip fields should be available from the outset as the clip already exists on the server.
Something that can be a big help if you’re using worker 6.1 is to use the Dump Variables processing step to see exactly what variables are available at the time. The other thing you should do if you still have problems is to quit and restart the worker and test it with just a single task that shows the problem, so the file isn’t too large, then mail the worker log to support@squarebox.com so we can investigate the issue for you.
-Rolf
-
We’ve not seen this specific issue on any of our deployments.
The dump variables is really useful, as Rolf said. If that’s not consistent, then you should report a bug.
Also, we usually keep several versions of Worker Node around so we can test on various versions. SBS is fast to fix bugs but there’s no reason not to down-rev and keep working.
What you’re doing has been possible for a long time in Worker Node now so an older version would be fine.
bryson
bryson “at” northshoreautomation.com
northshoreautomation.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up