| Author |
Message
|
| team |
 Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:46 am Post subject: COBOL MQ program to constuct the message in MQRFH2 format |
 |
|
Centurion
Joined: 03 Nov 2006
Posts: 108
|
Could you please verify if the below mentioned fields are correct. This includes MQ Header and MQRFH2 fields
In the below mentioned fields, where can we setup usr field
05 DSCXMQC3-G1.
10 DSCXMQC3-APPLICATION-FIELDS.
15 DSCXMQC3-SERVICE-REQUEST PIC X(24).
15 DSCXMQC3-RESULT-CODE PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-CORRELID PIC X(24).
15 DSCXMQC3-MSGID PIC X(24).
10 DSCXMQC3-GATEWAY-FIELDS.
15 DSCXMQC3-NATIVE-MQ-REQUEST PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-MESSAGE-LENGTH PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-LOCAL-QMGRNAME PIC X(4 .
15 DSCXMQC3-BACKOUTCOUNT PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-OBJECTNAME PIC X(4.
15 DSCXMQC3-OBJECTQMGRNAME PIC X(4.
15 DSCXMQC3-REPLYTOQ PIC X(4.
15 DSCXMQC3-REPLYTOQMGR PIC X(4.
15 DSCXMQC3-CONNECTION-HANDLE PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-WAITINTERVAL PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-EXPIRY PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-GET-MESSAGE-OPTIONS PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-PUT-MESSAGE-OPTIONS PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-OPEN-MESSAGE-OPTIONS PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-PERSISTENCE PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-PRIORITY PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-DYNAMICQNAME PIC X(4.
15 DSCXMQC3-ALTERNATEUSERID PIC X(12).
15 DSCXMQC3-REPORT PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-MSGTYPE PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-FEEDBACK PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-FORMAT.
20 MQRFH2-STRUCID PIC X(4).
20 MQRFH2-VERSION PIC S9(9) BINARY.
20 MQRFH2-STRUCLENGTH PIC S9(9) BINARY.
20 MQRFH2-ENCODING PIC S9(9) BINARY.
20 MQRFH2-CODEDCHARSETID PIC S9(9) BINARY.
20 MQRFH2-FORMAT PIC X(.
20 MQRFH2-FLAGS PIC S9(9) BINARY.
20 MQRFH2-NAMEVALUECCSID PIC S9(9) BINARY.
15 DSCXMQC3-NATIVE-MESSAGE-IND PIC X.
15 DSCXMQC3-USERIDENTIFIER PIC X(12).
15 DSCXMQC3-ONFORWARD-IND PIC X.
15 DSCXMQC3-ONFORWARDQ PIC X(4.
15 DSCXMQC3-ONFORWARDQMGR PIC X(4.
15 DSCXMQC3-OBJECT-HANDLE PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-MATCH-OPTIONS PIC S9(9) COMP.
10 DSCXMQC3-ERROR-FEEDBACK-FIELDS.
15 DSCXMQC3-ERROR-CALL PIC X(6).
15 DSCXMQC3-COMPLETION-CODE PIC S9(9) COMP.
15 DSCXMQC3-COMPLETION-REASON PIC S9(9) COMP. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
Isn't there an XMS C version that could be used /called from COBOL?
Building a correct RFH2 in COBOL is such a nightmare..., Remember to check length and byte alignments and ... and ... and... 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| team |
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 03 Nov 2006
Posts: 108
|
| No, unfortunately we do not have XMS C version. We need to construct in Mainframe using COBOL and send it to message broker. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| team wrote: |
| No, unfortunately we do not have XMS C version. We need to construct in Mainframe using COBOL and send it to message broker. |
OK so why do you think you need to send the RFH2?
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| team |
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 03 Nov 2006
Posts: 108
|
It is the requirement given to us to populate RFH2 header.
This requirement would help the message broker team to route the message without much code effort.
All these days message broker team were populating RFH2, now they want us to populate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 5:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
That copybook doesn't appear to cater for the variable part of the RFH2. I'm guessing your message broker team will want the mcd section at least to guide the creation of the message tree.
Be aware there are rules on field placement in the RFH2 (byte alignment for one) you'll need to meet.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 6:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| team wrote: |
It is the requirement given to us to populate RFH2 header.
This requirement would help the message broker team to route the message without much code effort.
All these days message broker team were populating RFH2, now they want us to populate. |
You should push back. This is something that the broker can do much more elegantly.
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 6:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| You should push back. This is something that the broker can do much more elegantly. |
You should at least ask what information the broker team are using in the header. If, as is possible, they're not using the header at all but just want all messages to have one then it will be much easier for them to add it than for you to add it.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
