QOS File to SOAP scenario

[Former Member]

I have a File to SOAP scenario which processes a file with many records and calls a webservice once per record.

The QOS of the sender File adapter is set to 'Exactly Once' but the SOAP messages have QOS 'Exactly Once In Order'.

I would like the SOAP messages to have QOS 'Exactly Once' to avoid messages going into 'Holding' status after an error occurs with a previous message.

Any suggestions greatfully received.

Thanks

Mark Briggs

[moorthy]

Hi,

Are you getting any error in the message queues ? check with transaction SMQ2..

Check out the SXMB_MONI and trace .. so that you can find where exactly this quality os service comes..

Hope this helps,

regards,

moorthy

[Former Member]

Thanks for your suggestions. This scenario does not use BPM.

This is an asynchronous scenario as the sender is file based. The QOS of the File sender Adapter is set to 'Exactly Once'. I do not think it is possible to set the QOS of the receiver SOAP adapter. I understood that the QOS of the receiver was determined by the QOS of the sender.

The records in the source file are independent of each other and so I do not want subsequent messages to go into a holding status when a record is in error.

Is there any way to make the QOS of the receiver SOAP adapter 'Exactly Once'?

[Former Member]

Hi Mark,

Yes, I understand that the outbound sender interface is asynchronous ( file ) and exactly once.

But the (possible ) Qos are also determined by the message interface settings.

So ,for sure, you also have an inbound receiver message interface and what happens if you set that one to synchronous ? ( in the IR / message interface )

How is the Qos in the message influenced ? ( I suspect it becomes 'BE', not yet what you want, but probably better then EOIO )

rgds

Dirk

[Former Member]

Hi,

Please check on this thread:

http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04/helpdata/en/5e/164442c1a1c353e10000000a1550b0/content.htm

Regards

Vijaya

[Former Member]

Hi,

Are you using a BPM ?

If not, what happens if you set the receiver interface to 'Synchronous' ?

Or are you passing the queue in the request maybe ?

Dirk