| Author |
Message
|
| sapna49 |
 Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 8:42 pm Post subject: Using two nodes together--SOAP INPUT AND MQ |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 26 Jul 2011
Posts: 8
|
[b]I am using two input nodes together . I am not sure how will we get the output
[list]using routing node to route to specific node (mq o/p and soap reply )
or there will be some other logic in getting that ouput.[/list][/b] |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| j.f.sorge |
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 218
|
It sounds that it'll be better to create two flows and implement business logic within a subflow which will be used by both separate flows. Then you won't get the problem to find the correct output "protocol" / adapter.
Probably it'll work to use the header information of the message and check for the existance within a FilterNode in order to decided which "protocol" / adapter to use for output.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| sapna49 |
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 26 Jul 2011
Posts: 8
|
| ya...that really sounds better!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| sapna49 |
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 9:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 26 Jul 2011
Posts: 8
|
IS NOT FAIR USING TWO INPUT NODES TOGTHER?
AND LINKING THEM TO SINGLE BUISNESS LOGIC THERE ITSELF IN 1 FLOW |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| j.f.sorge |
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 218
|
| sapna49 wrote: |
IS NOT FAIR USING TWO INPUT NODES TOGTHER?
AND LINKING THEM TO SINGLE BUISNESS LOGIC THERE ITSELF IN 1 FLOW |
Scream? I don't understand!
_________________
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 |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
| sapna49 wrote: |
IS NOT FAIR USING TWO INPUT NODES TOGTHER?
AND LINKING THEM TO SINGLE BUISNESS LOGIC THERE ITSELF IN 1 FLOW |
Please don't shout. We can hear you...
We use both SOAP and MQInput nodes in the same flow. It is quite easy to test when you want to Reply to either message type.
Just test for the existance of one of the unique headers.
SOAP
SOAPHeader
MQ
MQMD Header
OR
You can put a ComputeNode on each leg on the input and set a value in the Environment to tell the flow which message type is being used.
MQ
SET Environment.MsgType = "MQ";
SOAP
SET Environment.MsgType = "SOAP";
Put a Trace Node on each Input and look at the ${Root} structures for yourself...
_________________
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Aldrine |
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 25 Jul 2011
Posts: 22
Location: India
|
It is not impossible or incorrect.
On based on you design necessity you have to follow.
If you need to tinker around with the Header values I suggest you follow sorge's idea.
But if you going to act only on the data you can put them in one flow itself; which is not in your case; you are trying to route the output to the same protocol that came in with.
It is better and easy with Different Flows rather than making your flow complex.
Better at many levels; better maintainability, better functionality...
_________________
--
Aldrine Einsteen |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
| Aldrine wrote: |
It is better and easy with Different Flows rather than making your flow complex.
Better at many levels; better maintainability, better functionality... |
Only if you have unlimited resocurces available in your servers.
For every function you are now going to have twice the flows, twice the memory used etc etc.
Not all of us have that luxury out here in the real world.
_________________
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| sapna49 |
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 9:35 pm Post subject: thanks all |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 26 Jul 2011
Posts: 8
|
| i am new to WMB .Thansk to all.Hope you support in future |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
| Each input node in a flow will automatically cause a new flow instance. So it's like having two flows - one with the MQ node and one with the Soapinput node. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| sapna49 |
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 26 Jul 2011
Posts: 8
|
| ya...using two input nodes in 1 flow is making the flow more complex and it too seems to me making two flows will be a better approach |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| sapna49 |
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 26 Jul 2011
Posts: 8
|
[quote="j.f.sorge"][quote="sapna49"]IS NOT FAIR USING TWO INPUT NODES TOGTHER?
AND LINKING THEM TO SINGLE BUISNESS LOGIC THERE ITSELF IN 1 FLOW[/quote]
Scream? I don't understand![/quote]
i dnt understand it too |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| WGerstma |
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 18 Jul 2011
Posts: 55
|
| smdavies99 wrote: |
| Aldrine wrote: |
It is better and easy with Different Flows rather than making your flow complex.
Better at many levels; better maintainability, better functionality... |
Only if you have unlimited resocurces available in your servers.
For every function you are now going to have twice the flows, twice the memory used etc etc.
Not all of us have that luxury out here in the real world. |
But seperating Adapter Logic from the business functionality is a good design in all worlds, also in WMB. So I would also advocate multiple flows to handle the different protocols with business functionality onyl supporting the "standard" MQ protocol.
I agree, slightly more ressources consumed than in a single flow. slightly less performant. But to figure out such tradeoffs is job of the software architecture. You have to balance between maintainability and runtime ressources. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 11:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
| sapna49 wrote: |
| ya...using two input nodes in 1 flow is making the flow more complex and it too seems to me making two flows will be a better approach |
No, I would not draw that conclusion. Having multiple input nodes is actually quite a good way to re-use code. I am just pointing out that in an execution sense - you get two flows, but to have only one in a design sense is good.
Another option is to transfer other protocols onto MQ in a separate protocol bridging flow. Then keep the main flow just MQ based. This can also offer some better transactional integrity and rollback options. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| sapna49 |
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 26 Jul 2011
Posts: 8
|
| wat is protocol bridging flow? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
