MQSeries.net :: View topic - XML recurring Sequence vs multiple instances of ComplexType

MQSeries.net

Tech Exchange

Education

Certifications

Library

Info Center

SupportPacs

FAQÂ Â

Usergroups

RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support

RSS Feed - Message Broker Support

MQSeries.net Forum Index » WebSphere Message Broker (ACE) Support » XML recurring Sequence vs multiple instances of ComplexType

XML recurring Sequence vs multiple instances of ComplexType

« View previous topic :: View next topic »

Author

Message

wbintegrator

Posted: Wed May 06, 2015 12:57 am Post subject: XML recurring Sequence vs multiple instances of ComplexType

Voyager

Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 83

Hi everybody.

We have a system that requires to receive an XML that contains the data in the form of Recurring sequences (I guess its called multi-instance sequence)

The desired result (OutpurRoot.MRM) is:

Code:

while the incoming message is of the form:

Code:

Any idea how to create that sequence structure with WMB?

I am trying to do the mapping in ESQL, and have failed to achieve
the sequence structure even though the mxsd is defined correctly.

Mapping to message[i].A creates instances of message
and message.A[i] fails with indexing error.

Any ideas how that can be achieved in ESQL?

Thanks!

smdavies99

Posted: Wed May 06, 2015 1:14 am Post subject:

Jedi Council

Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.

Quote:

The desired result (OutpurRoot.MRM) is:

The MRM XML Parser was deprecated a long time ago. Are you using V2.1 still?
You should be using the XMLNSC parser.

What does your ESQL look like?
_________________
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.

wbintegrator

Posted: Wed May 06, 2015 3:05 am Post subject:

Voyager

Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 83

smdavies99 wrote:

Quote:

The desired result (OutpurRoot.MRM) is:

The MRM XML Parser was deprecated a long time ago. Are you using V2.1 still?
You should be using the XMLNSC parser.

What does your ESQL look like?

Yeah, I know - our infrastructure was written quite a while ago and we sticked to it so far. We are doing massive changes towards IIB9.
Currently we are on WMB7 mostly with MRM XML., utilizing XMLNSC
where possible or mandatory.

Anyway, my esql currently looks like this:

Code:

DECLARE refIn REFERENCE TO InputRoot.XMLNSC.ns1:inMessage;
DECLARE i int 1;

FOR fbRow AS refIn.ns1:rows[] DO
SET OutputRoot.XMLNSC.message.A[i] = fbRow.ns1:Aid;
SET OutputRoot.XMLNSC.message.B[i] = fbRow.ns1:ActionDate;
SET OutputRoot.XMLNSC.message.C[i] = fbRow.ns1:Recipientid;
SET i = i + 1;
END FOR;

which also fails to achieve the desired result

Thanks for the reply!

fjb_saper

Posted: Wed May 06, 2015 5:03 am Post subject:

Grand High Poobah

Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY

You need to have something like...

Code:

FOR fbRow AS refIn.ns1:rows[] DO
CREATE LASTCHILD OF OutputRoot.XMLNSC.message NAME 'A' VALUE fbRow.ns1:Aid;
CREATE LASTCHILD OF OutputRoot.XMLNSC.message NAME 'B' VALUE fbRow.ns1:ActionDate;
CREATE LASTCHILD OF OutputRoot.XMLNSC.message NAME 'C' VALUE fbRow.ns1:Recipientid;
SET i = i + 1;
END FOR;

And replace OutputRoot.XMLNSC.message with a reference...

Think about it and have fun

_________________
MQ & Broker admin

Last edited by fjb_saper on Wed May 06, 2015 5:05 am; edited 2 times in total

mqjeff

Posted: Wed May 06, 2015 5:03 am Post subject:

Grand Master

Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447

wbintegrator wrote:

which also fails to achieve the desired result

What does the result look like?

wbintegrator

Posted: Wed May 06, 2015 6:15 am Post subject:

Voyager

Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 83

mqjeff wrote:

wbintegrator wrote:

which also fails to achieve the desired result

What does the result look like?

An Exception LOL: Array subscript error (same as with MRM domain)

Guess what fjb_saper suggest must be one of the correct ways to achieve the result - but it makes me wonder, how come a structure inherently supported by XSD is not more straightward to achieve in ESQL.

The syntax that fails with the array error seems to be very intuitive and I was pretty sure I had used it before. but, well... My memory could be failing me as well

Thanks guys, I will think about what fjb_saper suggested and have some fun with it

joebuckeye

Posted: Wed May 06, 2015 6:37 am Post subject:

Partisan

Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 365
Location: Columbus, OH

Don't use array syntax, use references instead. FOR loops make this trivial as fjb_saper showed.

This method also performs better.

wbintegrator

Posted: Wed May 06, 2015 6:51 am Post subject:

Voyager

Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 83

joebuckeye wrote:

Don't use array syntax, use references instead. FOR loops make this trivial as fjb_saper showed.

This method also performs better.

Yeah, that's what I did and it does the work perfectly, thanks fjb_saper and everyone!

I'm still perplexed at the idea of having to manually create the structure instead of utilizing the messsageset to generate the desired structure more elegantly.
It seems to me something like creating delimiters by manually concatenating them instead of defining the delimiter and rendering the message in TDS format.

BizTalk 2005 that we are migrating from this specific code, does this sort of structural manipulations based solely on the xsd definition, without manual interference.

Sort of weird

Anyway, thanks again and great day!

inMo

Posted: Wed May 06, 2015 12:25 pm Post subject:

Master

Joined: 27 Jun 2009
Posts: 216
Location: NY

Just curious - Is there really a difference in terms of 'elegance' between what you were willing to write:

Code:

FOR fbRow AS refIn.ns1:rows[] DO
SET OutputRoot.XMLNSC.message.A[i] = fbRow.ns1:Aid;
SET OutputRoot.XMLNSC.message.B[i] = fbRow.ns1:ActionDate;
SET OutputRoot.XMLNSC.message.C[i] = fbRow.ns1:Recipientid;
SET i = i + 1;
END FOR;

and what this thread ended up producing:

Code:

I ask as an academic exercise to understand what else could occur that would qualify as simpler or more elegant? What did the other tool do in this scenario?

maurito

Posted: Wed May 06, 2015 11:51 pm Post subject:

Partisan

Joined: 17 Apr 2014
Posts: 358

inMo wrote:

I ask as an academic exercise to understand what else could occur that would qualify as simpler or more elegant? What did the other tool do in this scenario?

more elegant and efficient would be a nested select from the input message, which, by the way is incorrect as it has 2 level 1 tags, it should be something like

Code:

kimbert

Posted: Sat May 09, 2015 2:21 pm Post subject:

Jedi Council

Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 5542
Location: Southampton

Quote:

more elegant and efficient would be a nested select from the input message

I agree. The SELECT statement would do the task in one ESQL statement. Whether that would be easier to read and maintain is a matter of opinion, of course.
_________________
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way you're a mile away, and you have their shoes too.

inMo

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 6:10 am Post subject:

Master

Joined: 27 Jun 2009
Posts: 216
Location: NY

Any documentation links on performing selects against XML structures? Or an example of one that would work against the structure in this thread?

maurito

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 6:47 am Post subject:

Partisan

Joined: 17 Apr 2014
Posts: 358

inMo wrote:

Any documentation links on performing selects against XML structures? Or an example of one that would work against the structure in this thread?

search for 'Transforming a complex message' in the documentation

Display posts from previous:

Page 1 of 1

MQSeries.net Forum Index » WebSphere Message Broker (ACE) Support » XML recurring Sequence vs multiple instances of ComplexType

Jump to:

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

Protected by Anti-Spam ACP