| Author |
Message
|
| dipankar |
 Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2007 3:03 am Post subject: Message Set |
 |
|
Disciple
Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 171
|
Hi,
I have different messeges with the same wire format TDS. However in different messages, there are so many commonly used element. So what would be better solution if I consider the performance impact?
1) For every message type, create new message set.
2) Create a single message set with multiple messages so that common element can be reused.
Please point me in right direction.
Thanks in advance.
_________________
Regards |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| kimbert |
| Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2007 3:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 5542
Location: Southampton
|
| There is no performance impact either way, but I find the question very puzzling. A message set is a set of messages. It would be very strange to create one message set for each message type. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| dipankar |
| Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2007 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 171
|
Hi Kimbert.
| Quote: |
| There is no performance impact either way, but I find the question very puzzling. A message set is a set of messages. It would be very strange to create one message set for each message type. |
I know message set is a set of messages. However I thought if I add many messages in a single message definition file, the file will be very large, thus might have some performance impact.
Thanks a lot.
_________________
Regards |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2007 6:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
It's the same amount of data, whether it's in one message set or many message sets.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kimbert |
| Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2007 6:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 5542
Location: Southampton
|
| Quote: |
| However I thought if I add many messages in a single message definition file, the file will be very large, thus might have some performance impact |
Why should the message set be large just because it contains more than one message definition? Do you have particularly large messages? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| dipankar |
| Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2007 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 171
|
Hi Kimbert,
| Quote: |
| Why should the message set be large just because it contains more than one message definition? Do you have particularly large messages? |
I am talking about message definition file which would be large if I add many messages in message definition file(.mxsd)
| Quote: |
| Do you have particularly large messages? |
Not very big.
One message contains around 50 fields.
_________________
Regards |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| pathipati |
| Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2007 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 296
|
| dipankar wrote: |
| 2) Create a single message set with multiple messages so that common element can be reused. |
I guess this is good idea. If you have so many commonly used elements. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kimbert |
| Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2007 8:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 5542
Location: Southampton
|
| OK - in that case you should definitely create a single message set with multiple messages. This is expected usage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mapa |
| Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:14 am Post subject: Development workflow |
|
|
Master
Joined: 09 Aug 2001
Posts: 257
Location: Malmö, Sweden
|
There could be a consideration with regards to development work flow and version control.
It have nothing to do with performance though.
We actually use (forced to) the version control software that is already used at our company for the .Net guys (SourceOffsite).
This software lock files, so we have each message in a separate message set project, since we check out/in the whole folder structure underlying the workspace project.
If we didn't do this, only one developer at the time could work with one of the messages contained in the message set.
I guess there are better ways to do this, but it works ok for us (we are four people).
Regards Magnus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| pathipati |
| Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 5:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 296
|
| Quote: |
| If we didn't do this, only one developer at the time could work with one of the messages contained in the message set. |
Why do you think so?
What if you four people need four message sets at the same time for all of your flows? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 5:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Some version control systems implement exclusive checkout, such that only one person can make a local copy of any resource at a time - and only the person who has the file checked out can commit any changes.
The fact that CVS did not implement exclusive checkout is one of the major factors that lead to it's widespread adoption for use with largescale distributed development projects.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mapa |
| Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 5:27 am Post subject: Clarification |
|
|
Master
Joined: 09 Aug 2001
Posts: 257
Location: Malmö, Sweden
|
Example:
Message set ERP_X containing messages Order, OrderResponse, RequestForQuote and Quote.
If I need to change the Order and Joe is currently doing changes on the Quote and has checked out the project, I have to wait for him to finish his work and then Susan for me do finish Order before she can adjust Invoice.
That's why we put each message under a separate MessageSet project.
EDIT: Or you can explain it more easy in much fewer words like jefflowrey 
Doing it this way does create extra work of course if the messages is built using mainly same "standard" elements, like same Address record etc.
But we mainly use MRM for legacy inhouse formats where this is seldomly the case. When using EDIFACT messages we actually process that in a more EDI native software that ships with complete message repositories. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| broker_new |
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 614
Location: Washington DC
|
I have a very strange requirement.
This is from TDS --> XML
1)I have created two messages (ADD and SUB) in message set.
2)if the Input message starts with 1111 we need to process the ADD message.
3)if the Input message starts with 2222 we need to process the SUB message.
I did this by using the group indicator for this.
I assigned 1111 for ADD and 222 for SUB ,but i think this is not the right way.
can anyone help me on this doing in another way
I tried by giving the message alias with 1111 for the ADD message and
2222 for SUB message but its not working..
_________________
IBM ->Let's build a smarter planet |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kimbert |
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 5542
Location: Southampton
|
If you really need ADD and SUB to be separate message definitions ( rather than separate elements within the same message definition ) then you should keep trying with the message alias approach.
You'll have to give more info, though. 'It's not working' is not a problem statement |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
