| Author |
Message
|
| yaakovd |
 Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2003 1:05 pm Post subject: MQSI code transfer from 2.0.2 SP1 to 2.1 SP4 with NEON |
 |
|
Partisan
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Posts: 319
Location: Israel
|
I'm just installed a new version of MQSI and I have some problem with generation output format using NEON (EDI format).
I have repeating format, which in old MQSI version generated as (first element is literal)
| Code: |
SET "OutputRoot"."NEONMSG"."REF_OUT"[1]."REF" = '';
SET "OutputRoot"."NEONMSG"."REF_OUT"[1]."REF01" = 'SL';
SET "OutputRoot"."NEONMSG"."REF_OUT"[1]."REF02" = "InputRoot"."XML"."XMLRoot".... |
Message from compute node was transferred to output node directly.
By IBM recomendation, when we tried to install SP2 for 2.0.2 I change code as:
| Code: |
SET "OutputRoot"."XML"."Edi850S"."REF_OUT"[1].(XML.attr)"NEON-XML-repeating" = 'true';
SET "OutputRoot"."XML"."Edi850S"."REF_OUT"[1]."REF" = ''; |
Message from compute node was transferred via NEONTransformer (it worked for 2.0.2)
I tried also:
| Code: |
SET "OutputRoot"."XML"."REF_OUT"[1].(XML.attr)"NEON-XML-repeating" = 'true';
SET "OutputRoot"."XML"."REF_OUT"[1]."REF" = ''; |
with NEONTransformer.
and:
| Code: |
SET "OutputRoot"."NEONMSG"."REF_OUT"[1].(XML.attr)"NEON-XML-repeating" = 'true';
SET "OutputRoot"."NEONMSG"."REF_OUT"[1]."REF" = ''; |
witout NEONTransformer.
But I have problem with all repeating formats. All lines are identical with first one.
What I missed?
_________________
Best regards.
Yaakov
SWG, IBM Commerce, Israel |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| mapa |
| Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2003 10:43 pm Post subject: The syntax |
|
|
Master
Joined: 09 Aug 2001
Posts: 257
Location: Malmö, Sweden
|
Hello,
For version 2.1 this is the syntax for you:
| Code: |
SET "OutputRoot"."NEONMSG"."REF_OUT"[1]."NNSY-XML-repeating" = 'true';
|
Doesn't matter if you set it first or last for your repeating records.
Best regards Mapa |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| yaakovd |
| Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 1:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Posts: 319
Location: Israel
|
Thanks, Mapa! It working now!!! 
I'm using "OutputRoot"."XML"... and NEONTransformer node.
What is better?
| Quote: |
"OutputRoot"."NEONMSG"
or
OutputRoot"."XML" + NEONTransformer ??? |
_________________
Best regards.
Yaakov
SWG, IBM Commerce, Israel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Yanghui |
| Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 1:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 08 May 2002
Posts: 151
Location: Dublin, Ireland
|
I am thinking it wouldn't be easy to use
OutputRoot"."XML" + NEONTransformer ???
since using NEON to parse incoming XML is not straight forward.
What I am using is
OutputRoot"."MRM" + NEONTransformer
, which tranfers incoming XML to a flat output and hands over to NEONMSG domain.
I never use "OutputRoot"."NEONMSG" but I think one advantage of it is that no msgset is involved. Probably no NEON input format is required either. Is this true? Do you mind to share more your experience here? Thanks a lot.
Regards
-Yanghui |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| yaakovd |
| Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 1:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Posts: 319
Location: Israel
|
Yanghui,
Looks that it working same.
But I'm planning some performance test at end of March with parsing big messages (50 MB) XML --> EDI and EDI --> XML with/without transformer node.
I will update this topic later.
_________________
Best regards.
Yaakov
SWG, IBM Commerce, Israel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Yanghui |
| Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 2:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 08 May 2002
Posts: 151
Location: Dublin, Ireland
|
Thanks for your reply.
I got the impression long time ago that it's impossible to shift from XML domain to NEONMSG directly without using RCD. That's what I have been missing. My current msg process sequence is OutputRoot.MRM in Compute node, then change to NEONMSG in RCD node to use NEON input format parser and then use NEONTranform to use NEON output format generator.
It seems it's not case anymore (from when??) Anyway, from what you are doing, I can see that RCD is not necessary. Is that correct? How about NEON Input Format part? Not necessary as well? Sorry for bothering you by questions. Looking forward to your response. Thanks.
Regards
-Yanghui |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| yaakovd |
| Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 3:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Posts: 319
Location: Israel
|
Yanghui,
I understand that RCD is resetContentDescriptor node?
I never used it here.
| Quote: |
| It seems it's not case anymore (from when??) Anyway, from what you are doing, I can see that RCD is not necessary. Is that correct? |
I set message domain in MQMD in ComputeNode and, in case of NEONTransformer, in its properties also.
| Quote: |
| How about NEON Input Format part? |
I defined it in InputNode.
My anderstanding that inside the flow MQSI working with message tree, and you nee specified format when contact external systems (input/output parsing or DB).
My questions here is only how NEONTranform will influence on performance.
_________________
Best regards.
Yaakov
SWG, IBM Commerce, Israel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| yaakovd |
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2003 7:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Posts: 319
Location: Israel
|
FYI
The result of my performance test with NEON (200 messages 600 K each).
In compute node use XML domain.
| Code: |
SET "OutputRoot"."XML"."REF_OUT"[I].(XML.attr)"NNSY-XML-repeating" = 'true';
SET "OutputRoot"."XML"."REF_OUT"[I]."REF" = ''; ... |
+ with NEONTransformer where define output format.
Actually exactly what we can find in documentation, but
Reset Content Descriptor node is unnecessary.
_________________
Best regards.
Yaakov
SWG, IBM Commerce, Israel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
