I’m trying to regardless of the “IF” node result, to run the same nodes, and in the end use “merge-wait”
so only if the “IF#1” node was true, It will perform additional logic (aka AND logic gate),
This is done to avoid code duplication.
I could use different methods to achieve this, but in the end this way should work too.
After some testing, it seems that the "Merge"node activates when input1 arrives, even if 2nd didn’t arrive yet.
After Additional testing, seems like the “Merge” node is forcing “input2” closest node to be activated even if it shouldn’t, at least the “Wait” node.
Hi @MutedJam Thanks for the explanation, It wasn’t clear from the docs.
I’m still not sure with the “Merge-Wait” node that could be running without waiting for both inputs to arrive (But in the same time it does wait if the input that didn’t arrive is Input1), could you please help me understand the logic behind this?
because From what I’m seeing, the main input is input1 and input two isn’t mandatory for merge execution even on “wait” action;
thous if the logic is complex enough and it’s relying on Wait Logic, and there’s situation that input2 wouldn’t arrive, the “merge-wait” node still run if it the one that didn’t arrive is Input2 (compared to Input1 in the same situation).
From the doc:
The items passed into Input 1 of the Merge node will take precedence.
But that’s not clear to me that Wait wouldn’t wait for input2…
Your idea is great with the information I gave.
My solution (Still, not good as , merge-wait logic ) was to use additional “IF” node that is triggered with the main workflow, with reference to the initial IF result ( so I do not need to worry when using “keep only-set” on the flow).
To understand better, the following flow is why I opened this thread for help: