I notice that only 1 or max of 2 is giving some indication of activity. The notion of running multiple processes is “they all do something at the same time”
But mostly it seems to go one of the time still kinda defeat the purpose.
Btw I have these options ticked in my Workflow Process and even before then it didnt make a difference.
Any suggestion/direction of where is this behaviour can be changed?
The Server manages how it distributes operations to the various engines. When an engine is free, it gets returned to the “available” pool and it gets re-used in priority, which explains why most of the time, you always see the same 1, 2 or 3 engines running, even if you have more available.
The smaller the jobs, the more likely an engine is to complete its task and to be returned to the “available” pool before the next job reaches the Server.
For longer jobs, however, you should be able to see more engines spinning up simultaneously.
Also, and depending on the types of jobs you are running, you may be better served by a different preset in the Parallel Processing tab of the server configuration:
I have actually fiddled with this settings too. And didnt see noticeable impact. Although at some point I would see multiple different type of engines showing activity so thats fine.
I think when its the merge engines running parallel is when I will likely see eg 1/8 will show activity.
Logically if I have 5 identical data files picked up by self-replicating process. If its just a straight forward Connect tasks to output I should see 5 merge(all any) engines showing > 0% activity which is not what I have here.
Anyways I maybe proven wrong as this is an early stage of this process. I would monitor if the ratio changes. But realisticly if I have 10 similar data to process and 10 running self-replicating process I should at least see more than just 1 not just 2(if Im lucky) showing activity if they are on same point in the process.
But will continue to monitor its not critical at the moment but kind of misleading.
