I know there is documentation on doing HTTPS request to the Glide API but there is now a Glide specific module in Make for edit rows. I would prefer using this and have setup several automations with it. The issue is that about 30% of the time, it never actually modifies the row. It shows as successful in Make’s history and is going to the correct row ID, it just never actually shows up in Glide itself.
Simply re-running the scenario exactly the same, often makes it go through. This had me thinking it might be a timeout issue. However, I have added sleep modules and that does not resolve the issue. Additionally, there is no timeout errors being shown in Make at all.
Curious if anyone has experience or knowledge on what could be happening here. Thanks!
Do you think it is work making HTTPS modules to the API or would that do the same thing? I can’t tell if it is an issue with GlideTables or with the Glide module.
Well thank you for replying, I’m glad I’m not alone on this. At a bit of a loss on where to go from here. With it not even sending errors, it will inevitably create lots of data issues that are impossible to track. If it’s this unreliable, is the API edit rows feature just basically unusable?
Well as we put it this way, it’s clearly very hard to track for errors and data loss is inevitable. I don’t have a good way to go forward here, my use cases recently mostly involve something that user would immediately know it’s not working if the API doesn’t return anything, so I can live with it for now.
Just switched topic category from “Ask for Help” to “Report a Bug” since others are experiencing it and I don’t see anything of this nature reported yet. Thanks Thinh, hopefully we get a fix.
I can tell you that I have Apps that between them are making hundreds and sometimes thousands of API calls per day using the Make HTTP module, and I’ve never known of an update or add row that didn’t work. I’m not sure about the Glide Make module as I don’t use it because it doesn’t provide the flexibility that I need.
Thanks for replying Darren. Starting to work on this alternative now. However, it looks like this will require a business plan instead of my current maker plan. I think that will cause issues as my app has a couple thousand public users and the business plan is marketed for only up to 40. Am I misunderstanding something there? I have reached out to their sales team but haven’t heard back.
Don’t think you miss anything. If you intend for it to be a public app then it should be on Maker, otherwise your price to pay for users will be a lot.
I use make.com to perform thousands of operations monthly and never experienced this before…that would be actually disastrous for my app. My app is pretty much 100% API driven with little user interaction inside the app.
If this were the case for more users there would be some notice sent out, I suggest you contact support on this issue.
