Error in "Place On Hold" node that went away on refresh without changes. Ideas why?

[Berto2002]

I have a node configured like this:

And which fell into error:

12.231338s

ERROR

Execution Failed: Xmlmc method invocation failed for BPM invocation node 's1/flowcode-6ebcf2ee': <methodCallResult status="fail"> <state> <code>0200</code> <service>apps</service> <operation>updateReqHoldStatus</operation> <error>FlowCode Exception (com.hornbill.servicemanager/entities/Requests/fc_bpm/updateReqHoldStatus): nodeName: Invoke Flowcode: Update Request Sub-status; nodeId: 43f485c9-6101-49cb-9f5f-28f843ced23d; At 386/1: &quot;Uncaught EspMethodCall::invoke: Operation[apps/com.hornbill.servicemanager/Requests::systemSmUpdateSubstatus] /apps/com.hornbill.core/flowcode/fc_modules/xmlmc.js(189): error X1001: Uncaught EspMethodCall::invoke: Operation[data::entityUpdateRecord] Superfluous entity record update detected for &apos;Requests&apos;. The primary record was updated but no data changes were applied.&quot; throw(e); _fc_node_exec_43f485c9_6101_49cb_9f5f_28f843ced23d</error> </state> <flowCodeDebugState> <step>43f485c9-6101-49cb-9f5f-28f843ced23d</step> <executionId>a530f241-279c-45f1-890c-05f213c5676d</executionId> </flowCodeDebugState> </methodCallResult>

I don't know what was wrong but I just re-loaded the record from the UI and it ran-through fine.

It's a bit odd because at 10.09 there is a second entry in the timeline that it's been taken off hold again; this node must have done that...

Was this a back-end blip or is there something in my configuration that is not right that strangely made it fail to put on hold and therefore set to in progress again on first run but succeed on restart?

[Steve Giller]

Sorry this one got missed - it would be very difficult to diagnose at a distance, but generally speaking anything that a refresh fixes is not a "back-end" blip as you're refreshing your browser - or more precisely ensuring your front-end is as up to date as the back-end.

 

However, the timeline entries you show appear to be exactly as expected - place on hold for two days, at which point it comes off hold. If the error occurred between these times then the message "The primary record was updated but no data changes were applied." would be correct - that would be changing the sub-status from "Awaiting LM Approval" to "Awaiting LM Approval" which would be updating without changing, as described.