on 06-25-2010 9:08 PM
From logical perspective if a particular adapter : eg : JDBC , does not support synchronous processing , then why not create 2 interfaces ,one with sender jdbc and other with recv jdbc. Is this statement correct ?
First of all, JDBC receiver supports sync scenario.
then why not create 2 interfaces ,one with sender jdbc and other with recv jdbc. Is this statement correct ?
Talking about receiver side, this is not "logical", rather its "technically feasible". Sync scenarios are used when a Response is required. e.g. when inserting data, the response may mean the number of rows inserted/ deleted. With any adapter, you can create async scenario with sender and receiver side, but thats not really "logical".
Talking about JDBC sender, for requirement of sync calls, there are cases where such separate interfaces are used. At times however, adapter module (RequestResponseBean) or BPM could also be used.
Regards,
Prateek
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
ok ...so got some idea from above suggesstions.
my req : When a particular kind of bus event is triggered in SAP , it sends a req to oracle database and oracle does some validations and computations and sends back a field to SAP. SAP then takes that particular field ,does a whole FI cycle of events and generates a field and sends back to oracle database.
In this case 2 sync interfaces are needed ? and how will they be triggered.
Thanks
1 )
hmm ok ... but do we not need bpm for this ? or we can count them as 2 sepearate interfaces ?
2) secondly i do not want to connect to database multiple times ,instead i want something like batch processing maybe at 10 am in night , can this be done via jdbc adapters or a stored procedure is needed?
Thanks
hmm ok ... but do we not need bpm for this ? or we can count them as 2 sepearate interfaces ?
If there is no relation between the data passed in first flow and then in second flow.....or....if you dont want to correlate the two messages then no need of BPM, you can consider the two as separate flows. Ask your lead or business consultant how the flow has to be.
2) secondly i do not want to connect to database multiple times ,instead i want something like batch processing maybe at
10 am in night , can this be done via jdbc adapters or a stored procedure is needed?
Are you looking for Availability Time Planning (from SP19) functionality?
Regards,
Abhishek
Edited by: abhishek salvi on Jun 29, 2010 10:32 AM
1) There is a relation :When a particular kind of bus event is triggered in SAP , it sends a req to oracle database and oracle does some validations and computations and sends back a field to SAP. SAP then takes that particular field ,does a whole FI cycle of events and generates a field and sends back to oracle database.
In this case 2 interfaces are needed ( sync + async) or we need a BPM ? and how will interfaces or bpm be triggered.
2) Secondly, the connection to database also has to be kept low becos of performance and something like a batch processing or ATP can also be considered.
In this case 2 interfaces are needed ( sync + async) or we need a BPM ? and how will interfaces or bpm be triggered.
If I get your requirement correct, then XI does not have to do any correlation....XI does not have to take a value from the SYNC flow and then map it with ASYNC flow......it is SAP which has to do the correlation and generate the second flow (ASYNC)......so you wont require a BPM here......design the scenario as one SYNC flow and other as ASYNC.
but how will SAP do this correlation? in SAP workflow ?
XI developers should not be worried about it
In case you are the developer for SAP part also, then better to ask the question on ABAP forum (or workflow forum....if it exists)
Regards,
Abhishek.
Edited by: abhishek salvi on Jun 29, 2010 6:27 PM
Yes,
Ofcourse For this we can create 2 asynchronous scenario.
But the thing is to trigger 2nd scenario on the basis of first we need BPM , or some Other Methedology.
Eg :
Scenario 1: Sender JDBC - > PI - > Receiver Proxy / RFC
( Now in Receiver Proxy or RFC we can write code and trigger another scenario on the basis of 1st).
Scenario 2 : Receiver JDBC < - PI < - Sender Proxy ( this is called from scenario 1 Receiver Proxy or RFC).
if still have ny confusion , please reply ,
regards
Dragon.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
>
> From logical perspective if a particular adapter : eg : JDBC , does not support synchronous processing , then why not create 2 interfaces ,one with sender jdbc and other with recv jdbc. Is this statement correct ?
this is only true for the JDBC sender adapter. the receiver adapter for JDBC support sync calls
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Yes the statement is correct. But all adapters except idoc we can use in synchronous mode just fyi.
Regards,
---Satish
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
JDBC supports synchronous calls.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
User | Count |
---|---|
81 | |
24 | |
11 | |
9 | |
7 | |
5 | |
5 | |
5 | |
4 | |
4 |
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.