| Author |
Message
|
| 2d0 |
 Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 2:16 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Apprentice
Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 25
|
If I check the output using control + spacebar and follow the whole path, it gives the same path I have created.
Kimbert, you mean that I have to use
ns1:Data_record.ns1:sap_orders04_cwdata? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| kimbert |
| Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 2:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 5542
Location: Southampton
|
| Quote: |
Kimbert, you mean that I have to use
ns1:Data_record.ns1:sap_orders04_cwdata? |
I mean that the names, namespaces and structure of the message tree must match the message definition. I cannot see the whole message definition, so I have to guess at the missing parts.
| Quote: |
| If I check the output using control + spacebar and follow the whole path, it gives the same path I have created. |
Do not check only using ctrl+space. That will only tell you that Y is a child of X. It will not warn you if X is a sequence and you add the children in the wrong order. It will not warn you if X is a choice, and you add two children to it. It will not warn you if you add too many instances of Y.
To summarise, there must be a mismatch somewhere - we just have to find it. What's different between this flow and the other flows which work OK? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| 2d0 |
| Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 2:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 25
|
There is no visual difference between the two flows regarding the ESQL.
Here is the ESQL of the non-working flow.
Last edited by 2d0 on Mon Feb 18, 2008 1:43 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kimbert |
| Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 3:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 5542
Location: Southampton
|
OK - I agree that we are not going to learn very much by comparing a working message flow against a non-working one.
Back to the main issue : what about these points?
| Quote: |
| It will not warn you if X is a sequence and you add the children in the wrong order. It will not warn you if X is a choice, and you add two children to it. It will not warn you if you add too many instances of Y. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| 2d0 |
| Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 4:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 25
|
The types are all sequence closed. For the other working flows it is the same. Standard generated by the MySAP adapter.
Your suggesting that the order of the segments might be incorrect? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kimbert |
| Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 4:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 5542
Location: Southampton
|
What about these two elements in your message tree:
| Quote: |
(0x01000000)http://www.ibm.com/websphere/crossworlds/2002/BOSchema/sap_orders04_cwdata:sap_orders04_e2edk03 = (
(0x03000000):size = 1
(0x01000000)http://www.ibm.com/websphere/crossworlds/2002/BOSchema/sap_orders04_e2edk03:sap_orders04_e2edk03 = ( |
They have the same name but different namespaces. Is that consistent with the message definition? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| 2d0 |
| Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 5:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 25
|
Yes that is consistent with the messageset.
The other trace of a working flow looks exactly the same.
We have an other issue with the same Idoc so it could be the Idoc.
As soon as I need more help, I let you know.
Thanks for all the great help so far ....    |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| 2d0 |
| Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 1:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 25
|
All, thanks again.
I found the issue this morning.
One of the mandatory segments wasn't filled in.
So I kept on searching within the current segments while a mandatory segment was missing.
Again a lesson learned.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
