| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| [solved] BIP5502E on MRM messageSet with xs:anyType |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| j.f.sorge |
 Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 4:05 am Post subject: [solved] BIP5502E on MRM messageSet with xs:anyType |
 |
|
Master
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 218
|
I have created a XML schema file which contains xs:anyType element. Importing this xsd into messageSet with MRM domain completed successfully. When I try to deploy the messageSet onto my 6.1.0.8 / 6.1.0.9 broker runtime it fails with BIP5502E.
The only way to let deploy complete successfully is the remove the MRM domain from the messageSet and use the XMLNSC directly. But this will force me to create two separate msets: one for the (input) XML message definition and one for severaly (output) CWF message definitions.
Any ideas how to resolve this issue in a different way?
_________________
IBM Certified Solution Designer - WebSphere MQ V6.0
IBM Certified Solution Developer - WebSphere Message Broker V6.0
IBM Certified Solution Developer - WebSphere Message Broker V6.1
IBM Certified Solution Developer - WebSphere Message Broker V7.0
Last edited by j.f.sorge on Wed Aug 17, 2011 7:50 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 4:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
So you have two logically separate message types: one an XML formatted document, and the other a set of various structures that are not XML Formatted.
Does it really seem important to keep such drastically different structures in the same message set?
You're not going to be doing something as simple as just changing the physical format in order to do your transformation, are you? Or is that the point of the wildcard - that you can define a single XML message definition that then can be "mapped" to the correct MRM by altering the physical format?
That seems like you're trying to be overly clever here - that this will leave you with a working but hard to maintain and hard to debug solution...
If you really want to do this, you should be able to use XMLNSC to parse the input document, use enough ESQL or etc. to route the message based on the resolution of the wildcard, and then reparse as the relevant XML doc and then switch the physical format to CWF.... The XMLNSC parser is fast enough and can do enough partial parsing that the reparse shouldn't be a significant overhead.
But I'd look for a more straightforward solution - unless your "severally" cwf message definitions is more like "hundreds". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| j.f.sorge |
| Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 4:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 218
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| So you have two logically separate message types: one an XML formatted document, and the other a set of various structures that are not XML Formatted. |
correct
| mqjeff wrote: |
| Does it really seem important to keep such drastically different structures in the same message set? |
no, they don't need to be in the same mset. I only thought it would be a (good) idea to do it as I like the validation error message of the MRM parser instead of those of the XMLNSC parser.
| mqjeff wrote: |
| You're not going to be doing something as simple as just changing the physical format in order to do your transformation, are you? Or is that the point of the wildcard - that you can define a single XML message definition that then can be "mapped" to the correct MRM by altering the physical format? |
no, I don't want to map by only switching the physical format. Some transformation has to be done.
| mqjeff wrote: |
| That seems like you're trying to be overly clever here - that this will leave you with a working but hard to maintain and hard to debug solution... |
would be nice to be such clever! 
| mqjeff wrote: |
| But I'd look for a more straightforward solution - unless your "severally" cwf message definitions is more like "hundreds". |
no, several means less than 10
So I'll split the mset into two seperate ones and check whether it'll work as I expected it.
_________________
IBM Certified Solution Designer - WebSphere MQ V6.0
IBM Certified Solution Developer - WebSphere Message Broker V6.0
IBM Certified Solution Developer - WebSphere Message Broker V6.1
IBM Certified Solution Developer - WebSphere Message Broker V7.0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| j.f.sorge |
| Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 7:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 218
|
A separate mset does it, bar can be deployed and processing works as expected.
Thanks for your help!
_________________
IBM Certified Solution Designer - WebSphere MQ V6.0
IBM Certified Solution Developer - WebSphere Message Broker V6.0
IBM Certified Solution Developer - WebSphere Message Broker V6.1
IBM Certified Solution Developer - WebSphere Message Broker V7.0 |
|
| 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
|
|
|
|
