Unlock a world of possibilities! Login now and discover the exclusive benefits awaiting you.
There is a source latency column in EM console that sometimes gives negative latency integer values(for whatever reason and which I think are nonsense) and also values in hh:mm:ss format. As per documentation, the output type is {int32}.
But when we use the REST API to pull the same key:value, it always returns in hh:mm:ss format even for tasks that were showing negative integer latency values on console. What meaning can be given to a negative number converted to that time. Also, the negative sign is lost. Even if you convert hh:mm:ss back to integer, the sign is already lost and it becomes a positive latency value which is wrong.
Hope, I am making myself clear. Is it a bug. How to handle this situation.
Thanks
Has anyone encountered above issue. Any direction will be appreciated.
Hi @RajneeshSharma ,
I'm not sure what's the QEM version you are running now, please consider to upgrade to latest majior version of Qlik Replicate and QEM. Or you may open a support ticket, Our support team will be more than happy to assist you.
Regards,
John.
QEM version 2023.11.0.738
I'm running 2025.11.0.146 and am also seeing this issue when viewing the summary Tasks tab. I have several tasks, all from the same source system, that fluctuate a negative value between -3564 to -3590. The number appears to be seconds and equates to roughly 1 hour. Coincidentally or not, I noticed the negative values a few days after the "Spring Forward" day light savings change. This might be a clue. I did confirm the Qlik Replicate server system time adjusted for day light savings, and I was told that the source systems clock is also accurate, so maybe this isn't the issue, but it smells close to the truth. See Word document attachment for illustration of the problem.
The Apply Latency value is displaying "normally" as a timestamp in HH:MM:SS.
If you could check with next level support on how the source latency value is calculated and under what circumstances it could display as a negative value, that would be appreciated.
Also note that the original poster submitted the question 9 days after the spring day light savings adjustment in 2025.