| Author |
Message
|
| Terence |
 Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 2:23 am Post subject: How to wrap the aggregation flow with a synchronous WS? |
 |
|
Novice
Joined: 08 Aug 2011
Posts: 12
|
Hi,
My aggregation flow is implemented by MQ nodes, I want to wrap the flow with a synchronous web service? I tried to leverage the MQ service facade request-reply pattern, but failed. There are 2 MQReply nodes, one is for aggregate, one is for MQ facade pattern, I failed to connect the 2 MQReply nodes. Is it possible to combine them? In addition, is there other method to wrap it with a synchronous WS?
Is asynchronous WS better for this scenario? thanks!
Terence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 4:12 am Post subject: Re: How to wrap the aggregation flow with a synchronous WS? |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Terence wrote: |
| I tried to leverage the MQ service facade request-reply pattern, but failed. |
Failed how? Computer blew up? Your hands fell off? On the face of it, it's a reasonable enough thing to do.
| Terence wrote: |
| There are 2 MQReply nodes, one is for aggregate, one is for MQ facade pattern, |
Why? Why use 2? Design clue please?
| Terence wrote: |
| I failed to connect the 2 MQReply nodes. |
Connect how? Why?
| Terence wrote: |
| Is it possible to combine them? |
Why do you want or need to?
| Terence wrote: |
| In addition, is there other method to wrap it with a synchronous WS? |
This doesn't sound bad, but there are other ways. It's a design thing - share your thinking and requirements.
| Terence wrote: |
| Is asynchronous WS better for this scenario? |
What scenario? Either you're trying to front the MQ-based flow as a syncronous web service, or you're trying to front it as an asyncronous one, or you're trying to front it as both. Depending on which of these scenarios you're trying to implement, you front the flow differently.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 4:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
The facade pattern works like this:
SOAPInput->...->MQOutput(backend q)
MQInput(reply q)->...->SOAPReply
So your backend flow must look like
MQInput(backend q)->...->MQOutput(reply Q)
But it's probably a lot easier to make your backend flow look like
MQInput->...+....+..->MQOutput
SOAPInput..| |...->SOAPReply
where the bit in the middle stays the same and you have something that you can look at to determine whether to call MQOutput or SOAPReply |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
where the bit in the middle stays the same and you have something that you can look at to determine whether to call MQOutput or SOAPReply |
This isn't that hard if you look at the different headers.
IF there is an MQMD then use MQ
else
...
..
..
end;
_________________
WMQ User since 1999
MQSI/WBI/WMB/'Thingy' User since 2002
Linux user since 1995
Every time you reinvent the wheel the more square it gets (anon). If in doubt think and investigate before you ask silly questions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Terence |
| Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 6:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 08 Aug 2011
Posts: 12
|
Sorry, I didn't describe my question clearly.
There are 2 groups of flows, aggregate flow and MQ facade flow
1. the aggregate flow
a) Fanout flow
MQInput (q1)->Aggregate control ->MQOutput (q2) -> agg request
(There are 2 aggregate branch)
b) FanIn flow
MQInput(q3)->aggregate reply -> compute node-> MQoutput(q4)
c)Aggregate Reply
MQInput(q2)-> ....(logic nodes) ->MQReply (q2-->q3)
2.The Facade flow
d) Request flow
SoapInput->...->MQOut(q5)->MQOut(store message q6)
e)Response flow
MQInput(q7)->....->SoapReply
f)MQ reply
MQInput(q5) ->...->MQReply ( q5-->q7)
The 2 groups of flows can work seperately. I want to wrap the aggregate flow with the facade flow to provide synchronous soap service, but i failed to connect them. Asynchronous soap service is also acceptable for me.
The main logic is time-consuming, and I hope it can be executed in parallel and merge the result, so i chose aggregate nodes.
Could you guys give me some guidance about the design? thanks a lot! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 7:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Terence wrote: |
| I want to wrap the aggregate flow with the facade flow to provide synchronous soap service, but i failed to connect them. |
Again you say failed, but don't say why. What goes wrong?
| Terence wrote: |
| The main logic is time-consuming, and I hope it can be executed in parallel and merge the result, so i chose aggregate nodes. |
Reasonable enough.
| Terence wrote: |
| Could you guys give me some guidance about the design? |
Well it seems fine; you could problably use some of the techniques described earlier to "improve" it but in principle it looks ok.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Terence |
| Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 7:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 08 Aug 2011
Posts: 12
|
| Vitor wrote: |
Again you say failed, but don't say why. What goes wrong?
|
Thanks Vitor!
In my test, I set q3=q5 and q7=q4, the error is 'MQ back out to max number', there are 2 mqreply nodes in the 2 groups of flows, I doubt something is wrong with the mqreply. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 7:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Terence wrote: |
| In my test, I set q3=q5 and q7=q4 |
Set where? Certainly not on the MQReply node, which doesn't take any parameters?
| Terence wrote: |
| the error is 'MQ back out to max number', |
The error from what? WMQ? WMB? The guy who sits next to you? Is that the entire message text?
If we assume that wherever that error is being generated from it indicates that a WMQ message has hit it's backout threshold, this indicates that somewhere there is a processing error causing that message to be backed out. Perhaps finding that will help.......?  
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Terence |
| Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 8:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 08 Aug 2011
Posts: 12
|
This Means q3 and q5 use the same backend queue.
| Vitor wrote: |
In my test, I set q3=q5 and q7=q4
Set where? Certainly not on the MQReply node, which doesn't take any parameters?
|
The error was from system event viewer, which was reported by the WMB runtime.
| Vitor wrote: |
The error from what? WMQ? WMB? The guy who sits next to you? Is that the entire message text?
|
Yes, after QueueManger/broker/EG were restarted, the soap reply is returned, It seems the problem is dispeared, I need to confirm it further. Thanks you very much for your help.
| Vitor wrote: |
If we assume that wherever that error is being generated from it indicates that a WMQ message has hit it's backout threshold, this indicates that somewhere there is a processing error causing that message to be backed out. Perhaps finding that will help.......? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Terence |
| Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 08 Aug 2011
Posts: 12
|
| Sorry, I made a mistake in this thread, q1 and q5 use a same queue, q4 and q7 use a same queue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
