| Author |
Message
|
| Gaya3 |
 Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:17 pm Post subject: Dynamically route - idea required |
 |
|
Jedi
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 2493
Location: Boston, US
|
Hi All,
I have found that Route to Label is expensive and Heavy in using,
are there any way around to dynamically route the different messages to different queues.
Destination List is used to propagate the same message to different queues,
Please push some ideas over here..
Regards
Gayathri
_________________
Regards
Gayathri
-----------------------------------------------
Do Something Before you Die |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| elvis_gn |
| Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:13 pm Post subject: Re: Dynamically route - idea required |
|
|
Padawan
Joined: 08 Oct 2004
Posts: 1905
Location: Dubai
|
Hi Gaya3,
| Gaya3 wrote: |
| are there any way around to dynamically route the different messages to different queues. |
On what basis do you decide which message has to be sent to which queue in the first place ?
How many messages are you propagating ?
Regards. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Gaya3 |
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 2493
Location: Boston, US
|
Hi Elvis,
For me, its only 2 messages to propagate,
If the condition is true then i have to propagate, the two different messages to two different locations.
Input ---- Compute ------ MQ Output 1
------ MQ Output 2
here one message is an event message and another an output message
Regards
Gayathri
_________________
Regards
Gayathri
-----------------------------------------------
Do Something Before you Die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| AkankshA |
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 12 Jan 2006
Posts: 1494
Location: Singapore
|
u can use the multiple output terminals provided in v6 ..
i never used route to label after we moved to v6
_________________
Cheers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Gaya3 |
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 2493
Location: Boston, US
|
Hi
I understood what you are trying to say,
taking compute node as eg:, there are out, out1 (multiple output connections)
but we have set a condition inside the ESQL, to tell specifically about the routing isn't it,
I am using WBIMB 6 only
Regards
Gayathri
_________________
Regards
Gayathri
-----------------------------------------------
Do Something Before you Die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| AkankshA |
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 12 Jan 2006
Posts: 1494
Location: Singapore
|
yes..
code in eSQL to propagate the msgs
something like
| Code: |
IF <.....>
propagate to Out
propagate to Out1
end if |
say return false for no further propagation of msg
_________________
Cheers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
I don't understand why you think RouteToLabel can be heavyweight?
Also, in v6 and later you can 'PROPAGATE TO <label>'.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Gaya3 |
| Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 2493
Location: Boston, US
|
Hi Jeff,
Route to Label requires a node and ESQL coding,
by calculating this i thought its Heavy and expensive
Propagate does it require any extra node, Some esql coding is enough.
But 2 output nodes required here . (Here my requirement is just only 2 Output nodes)
Say if i need to push the data to multiple queues (more than 2) then Route to Label works better.
Regards
Gayathri
_________________
Regards
Gayathri
-----------------------------------------------
Do Something Before you Die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Gaya3 wrote: |
Hi Jeff,
Route to Label requires a node and ESQL coding,
by calculating this i thought its Heavy and expensive
|
Nope, not really. 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Gaya3 |
| Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 2493
Location: Boston, US
|
Hi ,
Let me clear my point,
Here i am sending 2 different messages to 2 different queues (thats the reason i didn't use Destination Lists)
Route to Label or Propagate is the next options
Regards
Gayathri
_________________
Regards
Gayathri
-----------------------------------------------
Do Something Before you Die |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 4:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
I would use a DestinationList if I need to send messages to more than one queue.
Then if I need to send different data, I would propagate a different message with a different DestinationList for each set of queues that needs each message.
Unless the queues were fixed, and would not be based on the data in the message.
Then I would use two MQOutput nodes, and likely I would use two output terminals as you're doing.
RouteToLabel is better suited for branching than for "parallel" processing.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
