Orchestrator Triggers randomly not creating jobs or logging failures

Hi all

Having an issue similar to that others have raised but I haven’t seen a solution applicable to me

We have 3 processes deployed to our production orchestrator.

These are called by daily time based triggers and we queue them up at specific times of the day, a minute apart to allow the robot to process all of them one by one in order.

We are having intermittency in 2 of the jobs randomly not running at all and not even registering jobs when the time trigger is reached. I would understand an issue if they never ran but i can see they ran this week already.

The odd thing is that the trigger once passed reports that it will be run again in a day, even though a job never happened and I have no (or dont know where to look for) a failure that isn’t listed in the jobs

I have tried recreating these triggers from scratch to rule out an error in that process but no change, randomness in whether it runs or not

The very first set of jobs that i setup runs every time without failure.

Any thoughts?


Hi Andrew,

Welcome to the forum!

How are yo scheduling this jobs?
Are you using Chron expressions?

An image will help :slight_smile:

Hi buddy, thank you for the kind welcome :slight_smile:

Here is a screenshot of the trigger itself (redacted parts, sorry)

Arguments and settings of this job in particular are identical to another that runs at 7:12 am without issue.

This one (7:12pm) just does nothing sometimes, that is the bit that confuses me

Is there a limit to the number of queued jobs a robot can tolerate?

I cant find anything odd on you settings.

But as you suspected there is a limit to the number of queued jobs.

The following link explains the behaviour in detail

1 Like

Hi Sebastian, thanks for that link, very useful

So it seems to relate to execution times and this is what is biting me “If the same process is scheduled on the same Robot multiple times and their execution time overlaps, only one process is queued”

I guess the way around this might be to create a new process for each group of executions.

So instead of having 3 processes I could perhaps create 6, one set of 3 for each set of arguments.

Hmm, will have to look into that

Thanks for the help buddy, appreciate it!

Stay safe


1 Like

Sounds like an alternative!

Glad we could understand what was happening!

This topic was automatically closed 3 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.