×

Warning message

  • Cisco Support Forums is in Read Only mode while the site is being migrated.
  • Cisco Support Forums is in Read Only mode while the site is being migrated.

CUCCX 7.01 SR4 Build 443 ExecutedStepsExceeded

Unanswered Question
Nov 3rd, 2009
User Badges:

We recently updated to CUCCx 7.01 SR4 and have had a number of scripts exceed the Max Executed Steps defined limit (after aproximately 25 minutes). We didnt have these issues until updating to SR4 - any thoughts?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Loading.
Anthony Holloway Wed, 11/04/2009 - 06:56
User Badges:
  • Purple, 4500 points or more

What is your Max Steps set to? 1000?


What were you on previously? From your wording I would presume 7.0(1) SR something, but it could be that you came from a 4x version.


If that is the case, then note that there are several conversion steps placed in to scripts when upgrading from older versions. This could lead to more steps executing than previous and exceeding the max steps.


One example would be the Select Resource Step, and how it creates a User object and assigns the selected resource to it.

whatuusay1 Thu, 11/05/2009 - 14:57
User Badges:

** UPDATE ** this issue was isolated to a SR4 Defect. We applied the ES2 Hotfix and this has resolved the ExecutedStepsExceeded issues we were experiencing.


Symptom:

UCCX 7.0(1)SR04 script application reaches max step executed steps and causing exception. It works sometimes under smaller loads. Logs show the following example multiple times.


Interruption Handler: Select Resource (--Triggering Contact-- from CSQ )

08869: 3226496: Sep 29 15:40:40.567 EDT %MIVR-ENG-7-UNK:Execute step of Task 21000021008 :


Conditions:

Heavy call volume load.

Version:

CCM - 7.x

UCCX - 7.0(1)SR04_Build0443


Workaround:

An ES (ES2) is available on CCO for UCCX 7.0(1)SR4 at http://www.cisco.com/cgi-bin/special.cgi


Jonathan Schulenberg Mon, 11/16/2009 - 17:39
User Badges:
  • Super Bronze, 10000 points or more
  • Cisco Designated VIP,

    2017 IP Telephony

This is bug CSCtc32123 for those who run across this in a search.

Actions

This Discussion