| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| Routing Webservice in WMB 6.1 |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| oli |
 Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 12:45 am Post subject: Routing Webservice in WMB 6.1 |
 |
|
Acolyte
Joined: 14 Jul 2006
Posts: 68
Location: Germany
|
Hi all,
we are currently facing the following issue.
MessageBroker should act as a Webservice provider providing 2 endpoints (2 versions of a Webservice). Based on the request the broker should either route the request directly to a Webservice provider or transform (enrich) the message content and then route the request to a Webservice provider. After receiving the response the broker should either send the response directly to the requestor or do again a tranformation of the message content and then send the response to the requestor. I succeeded in doing it in the following way:
Is this the correct way to do this or is there a better one.
Any hints and tips are appreciated 
Thx, Oli |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jbanoop |
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Chevalier
Joined: 17 Sep 2005
Posts: 401
Location: SC
|
In the approach you have chosen, if I am not mistaken, you would have two URLs to be given to the WS clients.
If field(s) or indicators(s) in the payload could be used to identify wheter the request can be 'passthrough' or needs 'manipulation', then you could do the logic in a compute/filter node while presenting a single URL to the webservice client.
I guess your implementation should depend on your requirement. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| MQEnthu |
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 06 Oct 2008
Posts: 329
Location: India
|
Do you have two seperate URLS to be given to WebService clients? If no, then one HTTPInput would be enough.
And if I understand your requirement correctly, based on request/payload message will be routed to either of the WebServices. You can set the target webService URIs in the compute node (after message manipulation if needed) there by avoiding the extra HTTP request node. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| oli |
| Posted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 14 Jul 2006
Posts: 68
Location: Germany
|
Thanks for your answers
@jbanoop
Well, it's clear that i could use a filter node in that case but this is not my problem. The question is, if it's the correct way to use HTTP nodes and not SOAP nodes. For me the SOAPRequest node seems to be too static because I cannot set the "binding operation" dynamically.
@MQEnthu
Yes I could do so (although at the moment I don't know exactly how) but the the problem is how to determine if I must do a transformation after receiving the HTTP response ...
Oli |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mgk |
| Posted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 4:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Padawan
Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 1642
|
Hello,
Actually you can override the operation dynamically in the SOAPRequest/AsyncRequest nodes, but this may have been missed from the docs. You simply set the following field in the LocalEnvrionment before the node in question:
| Code: |
| SET OutputLocalEnvironment.Destination.SOAP.Request.Operation = 'myOperation'; |
Note that the operation must exist in the selected binding (and note that the binding itself cannot be changed dynamically).
Regards,
_________________
MGK
The postings I make on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent IBM's positions, strategies or opinions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
