| Author |
Message
|
| Missam |
 Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:25 am Post subject: message set debug |
 |
|
Chevalier
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 424
|
Hi,
Can anybody help me on explaining on how to debug the message set.
In my flow i had a MQInput node followed by RCD. in the RCD i'm experincing parsing error.
Is there any easy way to find out at which element exactly its failing.
I'm getting the below error.
| Quote: |
BIP6118E:
The remaining bitstream is too small to contain the indicated structure.
|
Thanks
Srinivas |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Put a trace node in. Trace ${Root}, as well as ${ExceptionList}.
The last element parsed will usually show up by name in the ExceptionList, and if it doesn't it will show up in Root as the last element in the tree.
Your particular error means that either your input message really doesn't match your logical message tree, or most likely that your repeating structures aren't being handled correctly.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kimbert |
| Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 5542
Location: Southampton
|
Parsers which issue BIP6118 are:
Idoc
MQPCF header parser
MQRFH2 header parser
MQRMH header parser
Note that BIP6118 is never issued by the MRM parser, so it is not necessarily caused by a fault in your message set. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Oh, sure. Get technical on me. 
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Missam |
| Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chevalier
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 424
|
Thanks for the reply,
we are using IDOC parser only in our scenerio.
| Quote: |
| so it is not necessarily caused by a fault in your message set |
does it mean the problem may be with the data we are using?
Thanks
Missam |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| elvis_gn |
| Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Padawan
Joined: 08 Oct 2004
Posts: 1905
Location: Dubai
|
Hi Missam,
| Missam wrote: |
| does it mean the problem may be with the data we are using? |
At first glance it looked like the data u were sending was not enough for the defined message set...i.e some fields were missing...
Regards. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Missam |
| Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chevalier
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 424
|
Thank you very much for the reply.
This particular message set was woking fine before in V5 toolkit. when we imported it to V6. we experinced an issue. complaing that the
| Quote: |
Element declaration 'e_IFW2_Element' has parent content model <unorderedSet>, which prohibits duplicates.
|
The parent type of this element has two child elements of the same type with the composition property as unordered set.
when we opened a PMR with IBM , they replied that they tightened up the behaviour in fixpack 2 and asked us to modify the property to sequence.
at this point we are failing with the same set of data which worked before.
Is there any way that i can debug Element by Element and see where exactly the problem exist.
can you please suggest a method to debug the message set
Thanks
Srinivas. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
If you're using IDoc Parser, the message set isn't used.
If you're using MRM, then use the trace node as I said.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kimbert |
| Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 5542
Location: Southampton
|
Sounds like an MRM parsing problem to me - but the error which you have quoted is not an MRM parsing error. Please check the system log for other errors issued at the same time.
If you cannot find any, please take a user trace while parsing your message, and post the relevant section of the trace output here. That way you are guaranteed to see any parsing exceptions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
