| Author |
Message
|
| vikas.bhu |
 Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2012 11:54 pm Post subject: Wtx map is running alternatively |
 |
|
Disciple
Joined: 17 May 2009
Posts: 159
|
Hi,
below is the .profile file entries..for envocation of map at run time.
DTX_MQSI_EXEGRP_ACC_REQ_HOME=/var/mqsi/components/FCLBRK/e0670626-3001-0000-0080-d27515aeed9b/config/MAR/
DTX_MQSI_EXEGRP_FCL_default_HOME=/var/mqsi/components/FCLBRK/5104f625-3001-0000-0080-c72cba69b596/config/MAR/
DTX_MQSI_EXEGRP_FX_UPLOAD_HOME=/var/mqsi/components/FCLBRK/32e6c269-3001-0000-0080-e25ca12c6429/config/MAR/
DTX_MQSI_EXEGRP_CRN_LA_HOME=/var/mqsi/components/FCLBRK/2db08ed0-3001-0000-0080-ff81bce42194/config/MAR/
DTX_MQSI_EXEGRP_EOD_HOME=/var/mqsi/components/FCLBRK/822bd5d0-3001-0000-0080-e67376e7ae50/config/MAR/
DTX_MQSI_EXEGRP_EM_HOME=/var/mqsi/components/FCLBRK/867722da-3001-0000-0080-ae50570a1c4b/config/MAR/
DTX_MQSI_EXEGRP_FCL_HOME=/var/mqsi/components/FCLBRK/316a8935-3301-0000-0080-d98b6bee7afb/config/MAR/
export PATH
export DB2INSTANCE
export LD_LIBRARY_PATH
export ODBCINI
export LIBPATH
export JAVA_HOME
export LDR_CNTRL
export DTX_MQSI_EXEGRP_ACC_REQ_HOME
export DTX_MQSI_EXEGRP_FCL_default_HOME
export DTX_MQSI_EXEGRP_FX_UPLOAD_HOME
export DTX_MQSI_EXEGRP_CRN_LA_HOME
export DTX_MQSI_EXEGRP_EOD_HOME
export DTX_MQSI_EXEGRP_EM_HOME
and in the UDP we are accessing the as below..
FCL_WTX_DummyFlow/ACC_REQ_SOLD_LA/AccountRequest_SOL_Legacy_Adapter_WTX/map.aix
Now the problem is. once we are getting error (as per the debuging):
Map not found
second time it is running successfully..
Why this alternate behaviour is there...
Please suggest.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| vikas.bhu |
| Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2012 1:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 17 May 2009
Posts: 159
|
Map Audit in log:
][ERROR]: |:: ABORT:: WTX Map Audit is: [Audit Message:<MapAudit StartTime="03:32:07 February 6, 2012">
<Platform>RUN Function for IBM(TM) RS/6000 AIX(TM) - Version 8.2(77)</Platform>
<Burst count="1">
<DataLog>
<output card="1">
</output>
</DataLog>
</Burst>
<ExecutionSummary MapStatus="Error" mapreturn="9" ElapsedSec="0.052" BurstRestartCount="0">
<Message>Target not available</Message>
<CommandLine>/var/mqsi/components/FCLBRK/316a8935-3301-0000-0080-d98b6bee7afb/config/MAR/FCL_WTX_DummyFlow/EM_REQ_FA/Earmark_Request_Format_Adapter/EM_REQ_FA.aix -AEDWM -IE1S666 %lt;data;%gt;</CommandLine>
<SourceReport card="1" adapter="Echo" bytes="666" adapterreturn="0">
<Message>Data retrieved successfully</Message>
<TimeStamp>03:32:07 February 6, 2012</TimeStamp>
</SourceReport>
<TargetReport card="1" adapter="IBM WebSphereMQ (server)" bytes="1517" adapterreturn="-13">
<Message>Connection failed</Message>
<Settings>PUT</Settings>
</TargetReport>
<WorkArea type="File">
<inputarea card="1" Path="/var/mqsi/components/FCLBRK/316a8935-3301-0000-0080-d98b6bee7afb/config/MAR/FCL_WTX_DummyFlow/EM_REQ_FA/Earmark_Request_Format_Adapter/EM_REQ_FA.I01" TimeStamp="03:32:07 February 6, 2012" bytes="66802"/>
<outputarea card="1" Path="/var/mqsi/components/FCLBRK/316a8935-3301-0000-0080-d98b6bee7afb/config/MAR/FCL_WTX_DummyFlow/EM_REQ_FA/Earmark_Request_Format_Adapter/EM_REQ_FA.O01" TimeStamp="03:32:08 February 6, 2012" bytes="65536"/>
</WorkArea>
</ExecutionSummary>
</MapAudit>
]
06-02-2012 03:32:08:031 [FCL_ISA_14.ORCHESTRATOR [WTX]][ERROR]: |FCLBEM14211::ABORT:: WTX message transformation error:Target not available
06-02-2012 03:32:08:031 [FCL_ISA_14.ORCHESTRATOR [WTX]][INFO ]: |WTX Mapping Step: COMPLETED WITH ERRORS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| vikas.bhu |
| Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2012 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 17 May 2009
Posts: 159
|
Is there any thing to do with size..?
cputime unlimited
filesize unlimited
datasize unlimited
stacksize 4194304 kbytes
coredumpsize 1048575 kbytes
memoryuse 32768 kbytes
descriptors unlimited
threads unlimited
processes unlimited |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2012 6:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
You've discovered why WTX is not being used anymore in new message flows. You're better off developing new message flows without WTX. The current implementation of WTX is a legacy product and will likely be sunset very soon (or totally re-made).
_________________
http://leanpub.com/IIB_Tips_and_Tricks
Save $20: Coupon Code: MQSERIES_READER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kimbert |
| Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2012 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 5542
Location: Southampton
|
lancelotlinc: That's a rather one-dimensional view of the situation. IBM offers the WTX node for a very good reason; people have a lot of WTX type trees that they do not want to discard.
| Quote: |
| You're better off developing new message flows without WTX. |
Yes, that much is true. It's simpler and better in cases where it is possible. There needs to be a reason for using WTX instead of native facilities. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2012 6:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
Kimbert: I respect your opinion and agree that existing WTX customers need to have a migration path.
_________________
http://leanpub.com/IIB_Tips_and_Tricks
Save $20: Coupon Code: MQSERIES_READER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bdebruin |
| Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2012 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 14 Apr 2010
Posts: 12
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| inMo |
| Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2012 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 27 Jun 2009
Posts: 216
Location: NY
|
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
| Kimbert: I respect your opinion and agree that existing WTX customers need to have a migration path. |
Where did Kimbert state that customers need to have a migration path off of WTX? I read something about having a decision making process to avoid unnecessarily developing NEW flows in WTX.[/b] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
I refer the Honourable Lancelotlinc to the situation with respect to
'Message Broker with rules and formatter'
For many releases it was not recommended to write new code using this legacy stuff (it came from V1.0 and was bought from a company called N.E.O.N). IBM still supplied the software for those customers who had invested time and money writing code that used those components. This gave those customers time to migrate away.
I humbly suspect the WTX might going the same way.
As the HHGTG says, 'Don't Panic'.
WTX Customers probably know the real situation and don't need reminding at every opportunity especially the people who frequent this forum who are unlikely to be in a role that could influence those decisions.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| nathanw |
| Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 550
|
| smdavies99 wrote: |
I refer the Honourable Lancelotlinc to the situation with respect to
'Message Broker with rules and formatter'
For many releases it was not recommended to write new code using this legacy stuff (it came from V1.0 and was bought from a company called N.E.O.N). IBM still supplied the software for those customers who had invested time and money writing code that used those components. This gave those customers time to migrate away.
I humbly suspect the WTX might going the same way.
As the HHGTG says, 'Don't Panic'.
WTX Customers probably know the real situation and don't need reminding at every opportunity especially the people who frequent this forum who are unlikely to be in a role that could influence those decisions. |
As I was a person who worked for N.E.O.N. and went through all of this I suspect that smdavies is correct
_________________
Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard drive?
Artificial Intelligence stands no chance against Natural Stupidity.
Only the User Trace Speaks The Truth  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
WTX still has some little spark of life left in it, until a common solution can be found for certified validation for things like EDI messages.
There is an interesting service being developed for IaaS EDI certification:
https://www.edivance.com/company.php
If the solution proves viable from a cost perspective, I can see us deprecating all our WTX flows and using this Cloud service instead.
BTW - it uses WTX behind a Web Service fascade.
_________________
http://leanpub.com/IIB_Tips_and_Tricks
Save $20: Coupon Code: MQSERIES_READER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
If the solution proves viable from a cost perspective, |
The MUST be a lot more to this decision than Cost. Security, Availability, Performance, Viability (what happens if the go bust? get taken over by a competitor etc etc etc)
_________________
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 |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bdebruin |
| Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 14 Apr 2010
Posts: 12
|
[quote="lancelotlinc"]WTX still has some little spark of life left in it, until a common solution can be found for certified validation for things like EDI messages.
There is an interesting service being developed for IaaS EDI certification:
https://www.edivance.com/company.php
If the solution proves viable from a cost perspective, I can see us deprecating all our WTX flows and using this Cloud service instead.
BTW - it uses WTX behind a Web Service fascade.[/quote]
lancelotlinc,
Edivance.com does not use WTX in any way.
I know this because I own it:
http://www.linkedin.com/in/debruin
It's not meant to be a cloud service. Instead, it's a web based, manual tool for QA professionals to upload HIPAA data. It is not a distributed runtime engine at this point in time and is also not for runtime validations via the cloud.
We hope to have the runtime engine available for distribution in the future, but validating large transactions via the cloud does not make sense for most of our clients. They want speed and security. Most are very wary of uploading any HIPAA data (PHI) due to security and most do not want to add the upload time of validation large files via the cloud.
The PHP we use at Edivance could certanly be called by Message Broker to validate HIPAA transactions and replace WTX, but the speed of WTX transformations is tough to match. WTX is compile C, so transforming an 50 meg 837 to copybook can be done in 12 seconds. It's fast and it's not going anywhere.
I totally agree WTX will most likely be obsorbed into IBM Stering, WMB, WESB, and DataPower since it already runs on all four of these products.
Barry DeBruin
Founder, Edivance |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
Wow, thats cool ! I'm not sure where I heard about edivance using WTX, I'll try to find the source and post it for you so you can address that rumor. I stumbled across your site through an article about it, I'm sure.
Edivance would fit very nicely into our architecture. The mgt here has already bought into the SOA concepts as well as the idea of combining best-offerings to present a better customer solution. Your website is a little sparse with facts but I understand your service is still being developed.
Whether or not the tool can be used in the cloud would be less important than being able to call it to validate each EDI document in production (ie. more than a developer tool, an actual production runtime step). I could envision validating a doc, and dumping the payload to a queue if it failed validation.
What mgt likes about cloud offerings is the ability to pay per transaction, as they don't want the headache of in-sourced IT problems and like the idea of using cloud-based technology on a per-transaction basis. So, if we had to host your product in-house, it would be less attractive than if we could call it in the cloud. This implies some sort of indemnification with regard to securing the HIPAA data within each doc.
_________________
http://leanpub.com/IIB_Tips_and_Tricks
Save $20: Coupon Code: MQSERIES_READER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
