I would go a step further and say that it was cited as the main reason for putting so much time and energy into what would otherwise be a non-functional, purely aesthetic UI change (rather than a necessary stepping stone towards overhauling the platform).
1 Like
To be fair, it’s not just a UI change with a fresh paint of coat. The architecture of how the workflow tab works was redesigned with necessary prerequisites for performance improvements and less bugginess. Recently the whole logic that deals with the issue checker was being worked on, and nobody really mentioned it, but the editor is way faster to load on refresh now.
I’m referring to the actual UI change from left-to-right to top-to-bottom. The idea is that this was a prerequisite to bring it in line with loops, serial processing, etc. (which is technically possible left to right but gets messy very fast and needs a giant canvas like Unreal Engine).
And yes I have noticed the editor is faster and doesn’t freeze for 5 seconds like it used to every time you clicked on the workflow tab. I have mentioned it before on these forums. I’m not sure why people only mention bugs but never improvements. I notice everything.
just wanted to drop by to reinforce the notion that the team is aware. I’ve brought it up to them a few times since the new WF tab went out in May, and they have also done their own research/work around branches, loops, parallel wfs, etc.
So it’s not a case of “they forgot” or “typical half-baked bubble launch”, and more of the team having to juggle priorities in Q3 and Q4.
But 100% they are aware that this is the next evolution of the WF tab and that users want this badly. And it’s coming, just not as soon as we had all hoped.
6 Likes
Human brain hard wired to be more negative…why social media algorithms are heavy on content that gets people outraged, same for News
3 Likes
It was more of a rhetorical question but true.
Any chance we could just get a “switch” that decides if everything in the workflow runs in parallel or series?
Basically if you turn it on, all actions in that workflow immediately run unless they’re dependent on a prior action using “Result of step.”
Kind of a bandaid fix until the full thing comes out.
Isn’t this how it works now?
Nope, actions in a backend workflow always wait for the previous actions to finish. You can test this out by stringing together a bunch of LLM calls in sequence (without using any “Result of steps”).
1 Like