Help get this topic noticed by sharing it on Twitter, Facebook, or email.

50 user group limit with send-email

We seem to be hitting limit on the number of users in a group to which a trigger sends a email.



The trigger is -


{trigger:pageapproved|approval=Publish}
{send-email:user=@Document Notifications@|subject=Controlled Document Published}
{controlleddocumentemailformat}
*Document Published*

Title: *@page@*
Document Number: {report-info:metadata:Document Number}

Please review this document which has been published by [~@user@].
{quote}@approvalcomment@{quote}
{controlleddocumentemailformat}
{send-email}
{trigger}


The parameter @Document Notifications@ points to an AD group with more than 50 users.

Any ideas?
3 people have
this problem
+1
Reply
  • Miguel - this is causing us some problems. Any chance you can take a look at it?

    Thanks, Chris
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • Miguel (Support Engineer) April 10, 2012 23:34
    Hi Chris,

    I can check, how many users are you trying to send to?

    As an alternative, you could try creating some new groups with up to 50 users from the original group and then have {send-email} macro in that trigger for each new group created.

    Thanks,
    Miguel
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • Miguel

    The group is about 70 users, but it's not the largest we have. One of the groups is about 1000 users.

    It looks to me that the workflow is wanting to expand the users in the group and email each individually. Is that what is happening ?

    Is it possible to have the workflow just send the email to the mail server and let the mail server forward to the group. I'm thinking that if we could specify an email address in the {send-email} macro, that would get around this problem.

    Something like this -

    {trigger:pageapproved|approval=Publish}
    {send-email:email=@Document Notifications Email@|subject=Controlled Document Published}
    Please review this document which has been published by [~@user@].
    {send-email}
    {trigger}


    where @Document Notifications Email@ is the email address of the group.

    Possible ?

    Thanks, Chris
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • Miguel (Support Engineer) April 12, 2012 01:13
    Hi Chris,

    Yes, all the users in the group are expanded. For groups that are small it is not a big deal, but bumping it up to a 1000 would likely create some delays and need to be queued.

    We don't allow email addresses directly in the {send-email} macro but what you could do instead if you are just using it for emails is to create a user say "Document Notifications Email" with the group email address. Then Ad hoc Workflows would send an email to that user which would then be expanded to all the users by the mail server.

    Thanks,
    Miguel
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • We cannot split the groups - it would be unmanageable.

    Would it be possible to put in a feature request to allow direct email addresses in the {send-email} macro ?

    Thanks, Chris
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • Miguel (Support Engineer) April 13, 2012 15:02
    Hi Chris,

    For situations like this, we recommend that you create a new confluence user with the desired email address and then use that user for {send-email}. We don't allow email addresses directly in the workflow for spam purposes.

    Thanks,
    Miguel
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • Hi Miguel

    That is not feasible for us as the AD group already has the email address we want assigned to it.

    What about only allowing email addresses which are of the same domain as the confluence installation... ie for us our confluence installation is navigator.mercyships.org and we could restrict emails to only @mercyships.org addresses....

    Chris
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited kidding, amused, unsure, silly

  • Miguel (Support Engineer) May 02, 2012 01:38
    Hi Chris,

    I recently discovered that email addresses are valid as Confluence user ids, which would make this quite complicated to try and sort out what is meant as an email address and what is meant as a user id.

    Could you not instead create a user in AD/Confluence with an email alias to the original group email address?

    Thanks,
    Miguel
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • Hi Miguel

    Our group management in AD is already complicated and difficult to manage. This would add another complexity, when we are actually trying to simplify things. The most simple would be to be able to email to an existing large groups (>50 users), either directly or via the existing group email address.

    For now, we have the email going to the 'Document Manager' who then has to manually send it to the group. Not ideal, but workable for now.

    It wouldn't be complicated if the send-email macro had an alternative option to send directly to a specified email rather than a confluence user, as I suggested in an earlier post.

    Possible feature request... ?

    Thanks, Chris
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I’m wainting for a sign that this older thread is still monitored by ComalaTech...
    Hi all,

    we just also ran into this limitation and cannot understand that the limit is that low.

    We are using the send-mail feature at the end of a publishing workflow to notify all readers and there are usually more than 50 members per group.

    In fact, Confluence offers groups that have two main purposes: security and notification. Our users simply don't accept that they have to maintain groups for space/page permissions but cannot use it for notifications. And I think this applies for other companies/organizations as well.

    So can you tell me any option how to extend this limit? I fully agree there has to be a limit to save Confluence's operational state but I think at least 200 users should be allowed for the send-mail trigger.

    Thank you in advance,
    Uwe
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I’m still waiting for an answer from Comalatech
    Hi all,

    we just ran into this limitation and cannot understand that the limit is that low.

    We are using the send-mail feature at the end of a publishing workflow to notify all readers and there are usually more than 50 members per group.

    In fact, Confluence offers groups that have two main purposes: security and notification. Our users simply don't accept that they have to maintain groups for space/page permissions but cannot use it for notifications. And I think this applies for other companies/organizations as well.

    So can you tell me any option how to extend this limit? I fully agree there has to be a limit to save Confluence's operational state but I think at least 200 users should be allowed for the send-mail trigger.

    Thank you in advance,
    Uwe

    PS: I originally posted this as comment to an existing topic (http://community.comalatech.com/comal...) but decided to create a new one since I got no answer from ComalaTech. A response time greater than 4 days is too much for a customer that have purchased maintenance!

    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
    Limit of 50 users per group for the send-email trigger.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited kidding, amused, unsure, silly

  • Miguel (Support Engineer) February 26, 2013 08:01
    Hi Uwe,

    Sorry for the delay in responding. In our latest versions we added the option to have send-email allow the use of sending to a specific email address using the 'address' parameter which solved the problem for almost all of the clients who had hit this limit(and was the preferred option for them as they had very large groups with pre-existing group email address). As a security precaution, you will need to enabled the 'Email any address' global Workflow configuration option before emails will be sent out using that field.

    As for increasing the limit, we may look at changing it in the future, after an evaluation of performance impact or add a configuration option, but for the moment this is not planned for our next 3.3.5 or 4 releases.

    Thanks,
    Miguel
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • Hi Miguel,

    thanks for your reply. Your workaround does not work for us since we don't have group mail addresses neither want to introduce them just for this basic purpose.
    Our Confluence space owners can currently maintain their own Confluence groups and should be able to use them for workflow notifications. We just can't trigger them to count group members before using it for workflows...

    Within the workflow framework, a validation routine that checks group sizes for performance reasons makes sense but in my opinion the limit should be adjustable by system admins.

    So I have to state the notifications capabilities of the plugin are not ready for enterprise usage yet. To be honest, Confluence is also far away from that since it's Share feature does not allow groups at all!

    You've said there are no plans to change the limit in future releases. So we have to deal with this. Do you have at least a solution for our workflow where the group name will be entered as workflow parameter? Something like a check condition that counts the group members and brings up an error message before the workflow will fail?

    Sorry for these statements but it's annoying that we have to implement workarounds to get such elementary features working in enterprise use cases...

    Best regards,
    Uwe
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited kidding, amused, unsure, silly