It's just a lot faff to add R2/offloading (not being used in this project).
It's just a lot faff to add R2/offloading (not being used in this project).
SI understand, my future OSS side project that I've wanting to do might solve that: is to allow some nice abstractions on top of workflows (like natively supporting other storage providers, and other cool stuff that i've been noting down)
FHey 
,
loving workflows so far, one thing I noticed is when you use the
While when I trigger it via cli, it works without any problems.
,loving workflows so far, one thing I noticed is when you use the
Trigger Button to trigger a workflow, the Params are submitted with some extra characters While when I trigger it via cli, it works without any problems.
1try a
JSON.parse() on the params first1But tbh not sure if the
Trigger button doing the stringify, or if wrangler not stringifying would count as a bug hereFThanks 
for the feedback. I think for the button you can only enter „valid json“ so a stringified version is not validated in the modal text input. But yeah you are right if i input a non stringified json, after clicking trigger it gets stringified which makes my workflow fail.
But the stringified cli trigger payload works
for the feedback. I think for the button you can only enter „valid json“ so a stringified version is not validated in the modal text input. But yeah you are right if i input a non stringified json, after clicking trigger it gets stringified which makes my workflow fail. But the stringified cli trigger payload works
LI noticed this as well. You can use a JSON parse when testing through the dashboard but keep in mind that this doesn’t happen when you are actually sending JSON to the workflow when you create a run so don’t leave it in for production
SIs workflows down, some of my requests ahve been stuck in queue for a few minutes and just aren't being procesed.
I am sending thousands of requests so there is some scale to it.
I am sending thousands of requests so there is some scale to it.
SAlso when running more than 2 workflows per second im getting throttled.
Sometimes responses from workflows rest API endpoint to start a new workflow is taking up to 40seconds
Sometimes responses from workflows rest API endpoint to start a new workflow is taking up to 40seconds
DHow many Workflows do you have running?
We are aware of the some performance issue under heavy load (per account) and we are working on fixes for it
We are aware of the some performance issue under heavy load (per account) and we are working on fixes for it
DIs this something new for you? I mean, did you see it in the past?
SFirst time I’ve ran a large workload
FIs there a way to re-run a workflow after sleep when the workflow has finished running?
FMy use case is that I'm writing a workflow to do a visual ping to a website every X minutes and would love to automatically re-run the workflow after it's finished running
FBut not sure if this is even possible
DNot for the moment. A restart feature is on our roadmap
FRoger
FIf you need some API ideas, Restate has a good API for scheduling workflow execution
FYeah, that's it!
FThey have a feature called delayed calls:
FThey have other cool ideas as well that could be useful in workflows, like access to storage (similar to Durable Objects), the ability to have more handlers inside a workflow to return statuses, or whatever you want to return about the current workflow instance, signals, etc.
F
LIs there no TS support? How do you write usable code then?
LI'm not DHH.
MAll of the examples are in TypeScript.
MI’d recommend starting with the guide and then coming back here if you get stuck: https://developers.cloudflare.com/workflows/get-started/guide/
Cloudflare Docs
Workflows allow you to build durable, multi-step applications using the Workers platform. A Workflow can automatically retry, persist state, run for hours or days, and coordinate between third-party APIs.
CIs the "Cross-script calls" feature supposed to work for Workflows local development (
I get
wrangler dev)? (See https://developers.cloudflare.com/workflows/build/workers-api/#cross-script-calls)I get
Worker "workflows:test-item-workflow"'s binding "USER_WORKFLOW" refers to a service "core:user:my-app-workflows", but no such service is defined., even though I am setting the name of the other worker with wrangler dev --name my-app-workflows
Lwere they updated or it was always like that?
MThey were always like that, from the beginning. You can check the commit history: https://github.com/cloudflare/cloudflare-docs/commits/production/src/content/docs/workflows/get-started/guide.mdx
SHi @Cayter . Would you recommend sticking with Cloudflare for Remix developers?
Should we look to moving away from CF Pages and using a Workers + Static assets?
(the diff between Pages and Workers is a very confusing one for me. And Workflows has highlighted how difficult it is [for me] to grasp - but yes I know it's beta!)
Asking bc you seem to have leaned heavily into Remix+CF in the past... but I wonder if you would do so again with so many platform and framework options? workflows
. Would you recommend sticking with Cloudflare for Remix developers? Should we look to moving away from CF Pages and using a Workers + Static assets?
(the diff between Pages and Workers is a very confusing one for me. And Workflows has highlighted how difficult it is [for me] to grasp - but yes I know it's beta!)
Asking bc you seem to have leaned heavily into Remix+CF in the past... but I wonder if you would do so again with so many platform and framework options? workflows
SAm I correct in thinking that I should establish variables each time in a given step as if I define them outside of a step it may not work correctly?
e.g. is this the correct approach establishing my DB client in each step as opposed to one client variable in the parent scope?
e.g. is this the correct approach establishing my DB client in each step as opposed to one client variable in the parent scope?
JI've defined mine in the run function and used it in the steps 
it's working, whether it's best practice I don't know though 
it's working, whether it's best practice I don't know though JIs there a way to alert on failed workflows?
SI thought you could potentially return from a step also, but not sure if that would work as it would be returning a connection not a normal value.
SMaybe someone from CF can clarify, I am using hyperdrive also as the connection string.
SAlso it seems there is an undocumented payload limit on params for workflows.
When I try to pass a base64 in params it will fail to start the workflow every time but will not throw an error when I instantiate the workflow.
When I try to pass a base64 in params it will fail to start the workflow every time but will not throw an error when I instantiate the workflow.
AGm! Loving workflows in general but feels like i'm missing the right way to track errors. I get the exception message when i go to the flow instance page and wrangler tail but no stack trace so it takes a bit longer to debug. Any way to get the full stack trace?
IValues that are returned need to be serializable, so yes, you'll need to recreate the DB conn every step.
IAdditionally, your Workflow may be paused/move machines/etc between steps so putting a DB conn in the global scope isn't advised either
SCheers for confirming yeah thought I read or heard words to the latter.
Hyperdrive should hopefully minimise the additional latency and reuse the connection I guess!
Hyperdrive should hopefully minimise the additional latency and reuse the connection I guess!
IYup - and realistically a DB connection is only on the order of several hundreds of ms/single-digit seconds at the most so unless your Workflow is very time-sensitive it probably won't matter that much.
SIs it possible To have a workflow that uses a websocket? Example. Let's say a user posts a comment on my site and I want that shot off to a workflow and the web client to listen to know when that workflow is done (via a websocket). The workflow does its steps needed on the post data and then the last step in the flow I want it to shoot off a websocket message saying it is done and then the web client can pick up that message and do what needs to be done after that. Is this something possible? Or does the client just have to keep polling the workflow for its status till it is done? Thanks!
SAh ok. Well, that could be something you can add to workflow to have the ability to use websockets within workflow.
JYou can make workflow push updates to Durable Object, which has websocket support
SAny plan on adding option in
cloudflare:test to write test cases? or there is any other way to writing integeration test for steps?
PHi there! I've been porting some python code I had using inngest, and some other built with queues, and I have a bunch of feedback that might be useful.
For reference, the code that I've migrated to workflows usually does something like this:
Pao
For reference, the code that I've migrated to workflows usually does something like this:
- fetches a bunch of resources from the DB
- (fanout) for each resource it does an http call to an API and then it saves some data to the DB
- (fanin) once everything is done, it makes more changes to the DB
- The 256 step limit means that I can't build this as a single workflow. I have to add a queue to implement the "fanout". The alternative is to do a
Promise.allSettled, but then you don't get to retry failed workflow creation. - The http call has a rate limit, and unlike queues, there is no way to specify concurrency/batch size. Since I moved the "fanout" to a queue, this is where I implement the rate limit, but it would be great to be able to describe the whole workflow without queues.
- Because of moving the fanout to queues, there is no way to do the fanin part since it can't be known when all the queues have been processed.
- There is no way to compose workflows. This means that if you have a piece of workflow that is used in several places, you have to abstract away the steps. It would be great if workflows could return values so a workflow could call another workflow like a step.
Pao
POne last thing... Is there a workaround to the "inserted row already exists in table while trying to run multiple workflows locally"? I can't have more than one workflow locally
Jare you using the same workflow id/name?
PGitHub
Which Cloudflare product(s) does this pertain to? Workers Runtime, Wrangler, Other What version(s) of the tool(s) are you using? 3.83.0 What version of Node are you using? No response What operatin...
TI'm not sure if I missed to see the answer to the following question anywhere: is an instantiated workflow guaranteed to run on a dedicated worker?
Asking to understand how the worker-specific limits (e.g., subrequests) possibly apply.
Asking to understand how the worker-specific limits (e.g., subrequests) possibly apply.
