I have an split in batches that outputs its done content into two list nodes before a merge node that “wait both inputs”. It should execute the lists nodes only after the loop is done, but it’s executing while the fist loop is running.
I made some testes and found out that if my done branch is connected to the merge node, it triggers this error. When I disconnect the merge node, the loop runs fine.
How can I stop the done branch from outputting when it’s not really done?
ERROR: Couldn’t find the field ‘created_at’ in the input data (because the done branch is not Done)
n8n version: 0.231.2 Database :SQLite n8n EXECUTIONS_PROCESS setting (default: own, main): Running n8n via Docker
jan
June 16, 2023, 4:22pm
2
That could be one of the issues that should also be fixed after this PR got merged:
n8n-io:release-v1 ← n8n-io:workflow-version-2
opened 08:43PM - 29 Sep 22 UTC
This PR contains two changes that make it possible to configure how nodes with m… ultiple inputs behave. It is now possible to control if incoming nodes get forced to execute (currently default), and it is possible to define which inputs are required.
Important to mention that the setting `forceInputNodeExecution` always force executes all nodes from all inputs rather than just the ones defined in `requiredInputs`. (Background: this specific behavior is currently not required and may never be, so no need to spend time on it and unnecessarily complicate the code)
## Example of how new versions of the Merge-Node will behave now
Current data processing behavior:
New data processing behavior:
Community topics:
https://community.n8n.io/t/merge-data-node-getting-triggered-even-without-data-input-from-both-source/22174
https://community.n8n.io/t/getting-error-in-if-node/22179
https://community.n8n.io/t/if-node-is-true-and-false-in-one-execution/3169/5
https://community.n8n.io/t/if-node-continues-to-both-branches-even-though-it-is-false-and-data-is-on-the-false-side/21908
https://community.n8n.io/t/merge-wait-seems-broken/18725
https://community.n8n.io/t/unexpected-behavior-from-unvisited-nodes-in-a-switch-and-merge-workflow/10278
https://community.n8n.io/t/merge-node-suggestion-add-option-to-disable-triggering-of-previous-nodes/9931/13
https://community.n8n.io/t/workflow-nodes-execution-order/13546/6
https://community.n8n.io/t/bug-merge-node-makes-all-preceding-nodes-execute/25939
https://community.n8n.io/t/merge-node-merging-multiple-outputs/19580/9
https://community.n8n.io/t/merge-behavior-not-expected/26226
You could give this branch a try and see if it actually fixes the issue.
How can I give it a try? Is there an how to where I can follow?
I made the workflow linear instead of parallel with merge. It worked.
Maybe it can help someone =)
2 Likes
system
June 23, 2023, 8:02pm
5
This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
