| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| FileExtender Node(FileOutput Node) Exception in MB 5.0 |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| RAJUPA |
 Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 3:03 pm Post subject: FileExtender Node(FileOutput Node) Exception in MB 5.0 |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 6
|
Hi all,
I am using MB v 5.0.1.5, Windows 2000 and FileExtenderNodes with servicepack 2.
My flow is like this:
HttpInput Node --> FlowOrder Node(1st Terminal) --> Compute Node(Set Http Response) -->HttpReply Node.
FlowOrder Node(2nd Terminal) -->Compute Node(Map To File) -->FileOutput Node.
I have set the follwing properties in the FileOutput Node:
Format:
DataType = Text
Record Type = Fixed length
End of Record = Native
Advanced:
Destination Mode = output directory
Disposition = Generate a new File
New file name criteria = add counter before file extention.
I am getting XML SOAP message from HttpInput Node and mapping to the required output format in the compute node(Map To File) and while writing to the file using FileOutput node i am getting the following exception in flow debugger:
"The node 'SpazioOutputNode' needs a Transaction manager".
Trace file of MBFE contains the following exception:
[2006.11.27 - 17:39:37:624 EST - Thread-23 - FATAL - com.primeur.wmqife.AbstractFileOutputNode]: The node 'SpazioOutputNode' cannot find its Transaction manager
We are unable to find out the reason for the above exception.Any one who
has worked on FileExtender nodes ,give us some suggestions to resolve the issue.
Thanks in advance.
_________________
Raju P,
email: paraju.capricorn@gmail.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| pottas |
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 2:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 27 Oct 2005
Posts: 185
Location: South Africa
|
I get the same error:
"The node 'SpazioOutputNode' needs a Transaction manager"
My configuration on FileOutputNode is:
Format:
DataType = Text
Record Type = Fixed record length
End of Record = Native
Advanced:
Destination Mode = Output Directory
Disposition = Generate a new file
New file name criteria = Add counter before file extension
Any help appreciated |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ian |
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 22 Nov 2002
Posts: 152
Location: London, UK
|
It is my understanding that this flow configuration is not supported by MBFE.
Reading the MBFE documentation (C3466661.pdf) it states support for :
F2M (file to message)
F2F (file to file)
M2F (message to file)
where the message only covers MQ Input and MQ Output nodes.
Your flow configuration falls into the M2F scenario, however you are using an HTTP Input node (and not an MQ Input node).
In the MBFE documentation there is a section called "M2F Message Flows design checklist". Here it talks about the need for each M2F message flow to have a FileProxy node wired right after the MQInput node and wiring the Synch terminal for transactional requirements.
In WMB the input node is what drives the transaction processing and coordination. In an MBFE M2F flow File Extender uses the MQ Input node and FileProxy node manage the transaction.
My (untested) suggestion would be to decouple your HTTP processing and file writing, so for example :
HTTP In -> Processing -> MQ Out
MQ In -> Processing -> File Out
If you still have issues around this then open a probelm with you IBM support team.
_________________
Regards, Ian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| shalabh1976 |
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 18 Jul 2002
Posts: 381
Location: Gurgaon, India
|
Ian,
In Rajupa's flow the FileProxy is not used at all. Probably he can try using it first.
Regards,
Shalabh
_________________
Shalabh
IBM Cert. WMB V6.0
IBM Cert. MQ V5.3 App. Prog.
IBM Cert. DB2 9 DB Associate |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ian |
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 8:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 22 Nov 2002
Posts: 152
Location: London, UK
|
Shalabh,
I assume you are suggesting : HTTP In -> FileProxy -> processing -> File Out
In which case, unfortunately not.
MBFE supports the three types of flows I described previously.
If the current flow is decoupled into two seperate flows then the second part would be M2F and in that case you would have to use the FileProxy node as well.
Here is the relevant extract from the MBFE docs :
| Quote: |
WebSphere Message Broker File Extender enables message flow programmers
to write new types of message flows that have a file source as input and/or a file
destination as output, with several file handling options to choose from.
The extended set of message flows that can be written using file nodes can be
divided into three categories:
• File to file (F2F) message flows: these are pure file transformation and or
routing message flows, no WebSphere MQ messages are actually involved
in the computation. Both FileInput and FileOutput nodes are needed in this
scenario.
• File to message (F2M) message flows: these are message flows than can be used
to split file contents into many records that are passed to the message flow
for transformation and routing; the resulting information will typically be
put on an output WebSphere MQ queue using the built-in MQOutput node
(F2M message flows can also include FileOutput nodes if needed).
Only a FileInput node is typically needed in this scenario.
• Message to file (M2F) message flows: these are message flows that aggregate
the contents of WebSphere MQ messages over files; messages are read from
a queue using an IBM provided MQInput node.
Both FileProxy and FileOutput nodes are needed in this scenario.
In the architecture of a message flow, the role of the input node is pivotal, in that
it is the input node’s responsibility to drive commit and implement appropriate
error management/recovery logic.
For this reason WebSphere Message Broker File Extender requires that when
implementing a M2F message flow (that is, a message flow rooted in an
MQInput node) you wire a FileProxy node immediately downstream of each
MQInput node. This node will act as a transparent proxy for all FileOutput
nodes contained in the flow, preserving any existing custom error management
logic. |
_________________
Regards, Ian |
|
| 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
|
|
|
|
