Record packets locked at the end of the run?

[warrencowan]

Hi All, 

Am running a workflow as with multiple batch macros with AMP enabled, and at the end of first macros, it reports an error, citing 

" Designer x64 The Designer x64 reported: Record packets locked at the end of the run: 1" ... and brings the whole workflow to a stop.

All the messages and post run checks indicate that all inputs were successfully read and all outputs successfully written to, yet the workflow errors, and thus prevents the reminaing macros from progressing.

I cant find any info on this error though. does anyone know what it means and how to resolve?

thnx

w

[MarqueeCrew]

@Harley,

Thank you for the post.  

Cheers,

Mark

[MeghanGohil]

Hi Tonya - yes, we are still having the same issues.

I was able to work around by recreating the workflow from scratch. Not the most ideal solution, but at least it worked.

The workflow was to run a batch macro - it was simply TEXT with 1 field called "STEP"; rows had a sequential value (starting at 1 and ending at 9); next step was INSERT-->Batch Macro.

[MeghanGohil]

@TonyaS We did NOT have AMP turned on.

[TonyaS]

and @MeghanGohil  are you on the 2021.3 latest Release version? 

This thread is specific to Batch Macros with AMP Engine - if you are seeing a different issue without AMP, I would suggest starting a separate thread or contacting support. 

[MeghanGohil]

Hi Tonya - here's what we found out:

1) The workflow was originally created with amp, but then switched to "non-amp".

2) I copied all the elements from the old workflow, and pasted the elements into a brand new workflow with a new name.

3) Once I did that and uploaded to the gallery, it ran fine.

[BGirkins]

Can confirm the same issue in 2021.4. Image attached of the batch macro. Works fine on original engine, fails in AMP.

[TonyaS]

If someone can go through Support with very specific details to reproduce - we have fixed several defects already related to record packets getting locked. They are sometimes specific to a tool being used or specific configuration, so we need a lot more detail or a workflow that can be used to reproduce. If you have a workflow that you can send me  you can feel free to email it to me as a yxzp and I can check if it is still reproduced on a new build after 22.1 (or if you do upgrade to 22.1 and can verify that the issue still exists that is helpful too). I have both the 22.1 Release version and a new Development build, so if I get a workflow I can try it on both of those.   

If it's not too large you can message me via Community. Otherwise message me and I can provide my email for you to send it. 

[BGirkins]

Forgot to close the loop here, but we do have a case opened. I think the issue is we had to revert back to 2021.4 because we had many modules still leaning on deprecated SFDC connectors. Those were entirely removed in 2022.1 and so we had the black squares with '?' for each input macro. Until we can update each of those to the new connector, we are in a holding pattern. Reverting all macros (and the workflows containing them) back to the original engine solves the issue for now.

[LANGLOIS]

Hello

I experienced the same anomaly with the Location Optimizer macro using AMP.

I also noticed that AMP is underperforming Location Optimizer macro.

Optimizations run in average 20% faster without using AMP.

It would great if the Location Optimizer macro could become AMP compatible.

Many thanks

Sincerely

Arno

[TonyaS]

@LANGLOIS 

What version are you using?