1 Sync call with 2 receivers on PI 7.31

[AndyK]

Hello,

we have following problem and BPM is not an option.

Questions:

• Is our scenario feasable at all
• did anyone else face a problem like this. And what was the solution ?

Restrictions:

• The SOAP sender can not be changed or modified in any way

We have 1 sync SOAP sender which sends data to our PO system. From there the message should go to 2 receivers 1 JDBC DB and 1 SOAP (async)receiver.

　

Please se the screenshot of the Iflow attached to the post.

The response for the JDBC insert should be sent back to the SOAP sender as response.

We tried the following:

Add following beans to the SOAP sender so that the request can be sent to 2 receivers

AF_Modules/RequestOnewayBean  -> convert sync request to async request

CallSapAdapter    

AF_Modules/WaitResponseBean     -> wait fro response from one of the receivers (in our case JDBC)

Add following beans to the JDBC receiver

AF_Modules/RequestResponseBean

CallSapAdapter

AF_Modules/NotifyResponseBean

For the second receiver channel (SOAP) we leave it as it is

Unfortunately the response is not sent back to the SOAP sender channel the channel times out after a while appart form that the loog for each channel looks good and all seems to be ok.

Thank You and Regards,

Andreas

[iaki_vila]

Hi Andreas,

Could you change the DB in the target  structure?

You could think in a little workaround, you can do a first sync scenario SOAP - JDBC, in the response you can use  a JDBC lookup to insert the response in a new DB table or you can generate a file in a java mapping. The second async scenario will be a FILE/JDBC - SOAP, if you choose a file or to change a DB table you can get the later response that you stored previously to can be sent to the the second SOAP interface.

Regards.

[AndyK]

Hello,

Thank you for the useful posts. we will think of a work around but would be very happy if the scenario could be implemented as descried above.

Regard,

Andreas

[Former Member]

Hi,

Seems to me this is not possible...anyhow let's hear from any other experts from here if any workaround is possible...

Regards

Rajesh