2018-05-24T10:05:27+02:00 CRIT (2): B: 744565774 - Total #:1 - Executed #: 0 - Success #: 0 - Progress %: 0 - Status: ACTIVE - Checking batch job!
Job at 100%:
2018-05-24T10:05:38+02:00 CRIT (2): B: 744565774 - Total #:1 - Executed #: 1 - Success #: 1 - Progress %: 100 - Status: ACTIVE - Checking batch job!
...
Job still at 100% after around 4-5 minutes:
2018-05-24T10:11:18+02:00 CRIT (2): B: 744565774 - Total #:1 - Executed #: 1 - Success #: 1 - Progress %: 100 - Status: ACTIVE - Checking batch job!
...
Job finished after around 8 minutes:
2018-05-24T10:13:12+02:00 CRIT (2): B: 744565774 - Total #:1 - Executed #: 1 - Success #: 1 - Progress %: 100 - Status: DONE - Completed batch job!
--
The example batch job only has one single Operation to be executed. In this case it would most likely have been a better idea to just execute the single mutate operation directly, yes. Due to the variable size of operations ranging from 1 - 1000+ the same logic is applied in any case currently.
Regardless of the amount of operations I would still expect the batch job to be executed the same way though.