cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Reply
AdamWilliams
Frequent Visitor

Breaking out of Scope

I was wondering if its possible to break out of a scope?

 

I have a number of steps which id like to place into a single scope [Scope 1], then if any step *fails*, id like to exit the current scope and run the next scope [Scope 2] (which which is configured to run only when the above scope fails, is skipped or timesout).

 

I thought I could do it by using Terminate-Failed, but this skips Scope 2 as well.

 

*Fail* here could either be, those determined by the flow (e.g. status code 400 from a http call) or by some user defined criteria within Scope 1 (e.g. "if value is equal to xxxx then Fail")


TIA

Adam

5 REPLIES 5
Expiscornovus
Super User
Super User

Hi @AdamWilliams,


Maybe you can use the configure run after option settings. Over there you can configure when the second scope should run. You can for instance set that one up that it only runs when the previous scope fails.

 

configurerunafter_failed.png

Expiscornovus
Super User
Super User

Hi @AdamWilliams,

 

Apologies, after reading your original post it looks like you are already using that configure run after setting, correct?

 

For additional checks you can probably use a condition action and look for instance at the statuscode of the result outputs of the different actions within your scope.

 

Below example gives back the statuscode of the first action within scope action.

 

result('Scope')[0]['outputs']['statusCode']

 

 

 

AdamWilliams
Frequent Visitor

Hi @Expiscornovus 

 

Yes its already configured and so this works in the case where a failure is determined by the flow (e.g. status code 400 from a http call)

However (as far as I can tell) I cannot manually trigger a "Fail" for some other user defined condition e.g.

 

AdamWilliams_0-1623950606734.png

 

Essentially I want a "break" 🙂

 

Thanks Adam 

 

 

 

AdamWilliams
Frequent Visitor

Ok, so in my reply to @Expiscornovus I figured I "could" trigger a failure generated by the flow.

By intentionally calling a http request which would give a 404, which in turn is handled by the flow as a failure.

As below

 

AdamWilliams_0-1623952067692.png

AdamWilliams_1-1623952085435.png

 

For an input "Yes" we get

 

AdamWilliams_2-1623952200502.png

 

And an input "No":

AdamWilliams_3-1623952235365.png

 

But the very fact I "could" do this, really doesn't I "should".

Any other "proper" suggestions 😄


Thanks

Adam

 

Cam
Kudo Collector
Kudo Collector

i would also like this.

i have the exact same scenario - i'm using a TRY CATCH FINALLY pattern, and i'm trying to self-generate error messages in the TRY block, which i want to be handled by the CATCH block.

 

 

@AdamWilliams did you find a way?

Helpful resources

Announcements
Power Platform Conf 2022 768x460.jpg

Join us for Microsoft Power Platform Conference

The first Microsoft-sponsored Power Platform Conference is coming in September. 100+ speakers, 150+ sessions, and what's new and next for Power Platform.

New Ideas Forum MPA.jpg

A new place to submit your Ideas for Power Automate

Announcing a new way to share your feedback with the Power Automate Team.

Carousel_PP_768x460_Wave2 (1).png

2022 Release Wave 2 Plan

Power Platform release plan for the 2022 release wave 2 describes all new features releasing from October 2022 through March 2023.

MPA Virtual Workshop Carousel 768x460.png

Register for a Free Workshop

Learn to digitize and optimize business processes and connect all your applications to share data in real time.

365 EduCon 768x460.png

Microsoft 365 EduCon

Join us for two optional days of workshops and a 3-day conference, you can choose from over 130 sessions in multiple tracks and 25 workshops.

Users online (5,574)