# preCondition onFail="CONTINUE" **URL:** \ **Category:** General Discussion\ **Created:** [November 30, 2010, 2:42am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/precondition-onfail-continue/956 "2010-11-30T02:42:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![rimmeraj](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8c91f0/32.png) [@rimmeraj](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/rimmeraj)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 2:42am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/precondition-onfail-continue/956/1 "2010-11-30T02:42:00Z")
I am using 2.0 RC7 and have a precondition             on the command line I see INFO: Continuing past: db-changes.xml::1::jason::(Checksum: 3:add56c0785f0c14a28c33161f288694b) despite precondition failure:       1 preconditions failed     db-changes.xml : SQL Precondition failed.  Expected ‘1’ got ‘0’ but it still runs my changes. I thought continue means skip and the next time I run it check again and see if it has become true. Am I missing something? ---
**Author:** ![nvoxland](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/87869e/32.png) [@nvoxland](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/nvoxland)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 2:42am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/precondition-onfail-continue/956/2 "2010-11-30T02:42:00Z")
Yes, continue means “continue on past this changeset but don’t mark it ran, so it will be re-evaluated on each update until it passes”. It logs the precondition failure so you know about it, but should continue on. Nathan ---
**Author:** ![rbijkerk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f04885/32.png) [@rbijkerk](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/rbijkerk)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 2:42am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/precondition-onfail-continue/956/3 "2010-11-30T02:42:00Z")
Hi Nathan, Has this been identified as a bug for 2.0 RC7? We are running into the same problem. Even though the precondition fails, the changeset is still running. Regards, Ruud ---
**Author:** ![ljnelson](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.liquibase.org/ljnelson/32/120_2.png) [@ljnelson](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/ljnelson)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 2:42am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/precondition-onfail-continue/956/4 "2010-11-30T02:42:00Z")
> _Originally posted by: rbijkerk_ > We are running into the same problem. Even though the precondition fails, the changeset is still running. Yes, but Nathan just said that CONTINUE, which if I am reading right is what you are using, is for the case when that’s exactly what you want.  You clearly don’t want this behavior, so don’t use CONTINUE. Or am I missing something? Best, Laird ---
**Author:** ![nvoxland](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/87869e/32.png) [@nvoxland](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/nvoxland)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 2:42am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/precondition-onfail-continue/956/5 "2010-11-30T02:42:00Z")
I did find the bug where it was executing onFail=CONTINUE changesets.  It should now be following the documented behavior on [http://liquibase.org/manual/preconditions](http://liquibase.org/manual/preconditions) of: HALT        Immediately halt execution of entire change log [default] CONTINUE Skip over change set. Execution of change set will be attempted again on the next update. Continue with change log. MARK\_RAN Skip over change set, but mark it as ran. Continue with change log WARN        Output warning and continue executing change set as normal. Nathan ---
**Author:** ![svaret](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de053/32.png) [@svaret](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/svaret)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 2:42am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/precondition-onfail-continue/956/6 "2010-11-30T02:42:00Z")
> _Originally posted by: Laird_ > > > _Originally posted by: rbijkerk_ > > We are running into the same problem. Even though the precondition fails, the changeset is still running. > > Yes, but Nathan just said that CONTINUE, which if I am reading right is what you are using, is for the case when that’s exactly what you want.  You clearly don’t want this behavior, so don’t use CONTINUE. > > Or am I missing something? > > Best, > Laird As I understand it cotinued executing that same changeSet when it should continue with the next one, right? ---
**Author:** ![nvoxland](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/87869e/32.png) [@nvoxland](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/nvoxland)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 2:42am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/precondition-onfail-continue/956/7 "2010-11-30T02:42:00Z")
If you have “CONTINUE” it will skip the failing changeset but continue with execution.  “WARN” will execute the failing changeset and continue with execution.  “MARK\_RAN” will skip the failing changeset like "CONTINUE does, but with the added feature of marking it as ran so liquibase will never attempt to run it again. Nathan ---
**Author:** ![un1402399586636r41id](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/59ef9b/32.png) [@un1402399586636r41id](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/un1402399586636r41id)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 2:42am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/precondition-onfail-continue/956/8 "2010-11-30T02:42:00Z")
Why can’t CONTINUE be used for preConditions on changelogs? The documentations says explicitly “Outside a changeset (e.g. at the beginning of the change log), only HALT and WARN are possible values.”, but there is no explanation why. I would like to have a “master” changelog which includes other “sub-changelogs”. In these ones I would like to have a precondition check with CONTINUE or MARK\_RAN, so that a whole sub-changelog can be skipped. Writing the precondition in every changeset would be much more work and has the risk of forgetting it on a changeset. ---
**Author:** ![nvoxland](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/87869e/32.png) [@nvoxland](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/nvoxland)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 2:42am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/precondition-onfail-continue/956/9 "2010-11-30T02:42:00Z")
The reason is because preconditions on child changelogs are considered global to the entire changelog. There is a feature request in jira to support preconditions that cause the changelog it is in to be skipped, but the current functionality is that if a changelog has a top level precondition it is checked before anything is run, even changeSets in other changelogs. Nathan