Using multiple bot to improve builder performance. Copy/paste JUMP issue.
I've just discovered Typebot, and I'm creating my first bot.
I've experienced a huge slow-down (on the builder) because my bot was becoming too big, and I suspect that my browser had issues with the number of elements created.
It got to the point where it slows down typing text. I've already tried to disabled extension like adblocker / password manager.
So I decided to explode my huge bot into smaller, more manageable bots. And I extensively use the "Link to another typebot" logic.
First question, is it a good idea ? Should I be concerned about something I did not see coming ?
I noticed that when copy/pasting blocks from bot A to B, it broke the "Jump". I need to re-create the reference.
I understand why this could happen, probably some "referencing" errors.
I also noticed that the "Link to another typebot" does not seem to have this issue when copy/pasting blocks from bot A to bot B.
So I was wondering if it was a good idea to always use "Link to another typebot" with a reference to self by default, instead of using "normal jump", so that I could "refactor" more easily in the future.
It will allow me to copy/paste to another bot without re-creating all the reference afterward.
5 Replies
Someone will reply to you shortly. In the meantime, this might help:
I think the slowdown happens if your bot has too many blocks. So I don't think using Jump blocks would solve the issue since there would still be as many blocks as before, right?
Indeed you maybe found a bug when we copy jump blocks
Yeah, Jump block won't fix the slowdown issue.
But the "Jump to another typebox" fix it.
But, since I can't copy/paste block with jump block to another bot (because it reset the destination, I have to update all jump after a copy/paste), I was wondering if :
- Abandoning "normal" jump
- replacing it with "Jump to another bot" but the another bot is "self"
was a good idea. Because those, I can copy/paste from bot A to B without any issue. Because the "self reference" seems to be preserved in someway.
But if it's considered a bug, then my solution is not needed anymore. I didn't know if this was "normal" or not.
Yes it's a bug. Will be fixed soon!