Complex mapping

[oscar_mller]

People,

I have a source xml where the structures are independent. The link between them is via the id field. See the example below:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<ns0:mtOrigem xmlns:ns0="http://poc.wilson.sons:testejoinentreestruturas">

   <header>

      <id>1</id>

   </header>

   <header>

      <id>2</id>

   </header>

   <item>

      <id>2</id>

      <item>2A</item>

      <valor>2000.00</valor>

   </item>

</ns0:mtOrigem>

In this example I have two headers (id 1 and 2) and an item on the id 2.

The problem is that the target structure is linked (the item is below the header). How to make that link? Notice that, after mapping, the item was below the id 1, when the correct would be below the id 2 :

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<ns0:mtDestino xmlns:ns0="http://poc.wilson.sons:testejoinentreestruturas">

   <header>

      <id>1</id>

      <item>

         <item>2A</item>

         <valor>2000.00</valor>

      </item>

   </header>

   <header>

      <id>2</id>

   </header>

</ns0:mtDestino>

Can anyone help me solve this issue? In the attached image is the print of the mapping.

Thanks,

Oscar Möller

[RaghuVamseedhar · Accepted solution]

Oscar,

Please write multiple input, multiple output UDF with execution type 'all values in queue'. Input fields, id from header and all fields under item. Output fields as item field and valor field

Below is sample code

 for (int i = 0; i < id_header.length; i++) {  
            for (int j = 0; j < id_item.length; j++) {  
                if (id_header[i].equals(id_item[j])) {  
                    result1.addValue(item_field[j]);
      result2.addValue(valor[j]));
                }  
            }  
            result.addValue(ResultList.CC);  
        } 

Please check

[oscar_mller · Accepted solution]

Raghu,

Thanks for the reply.

This UDF must be created according to what parameters and arguments? Then how should I use it in the mapping?

Thank You,

[RaghuVamseedhar · Accepted solution]

Oscar,

Attaching screenshot of an example. Please develop UDF, similar to it.

Note:- Remove context of input fields.

[oscar_mller · Accepted solution]

Thanks for the reply.

Only I have a question. What is the "CC" field in the last line: ResultList.CC

Thanks,

[oscar_mller · Accepted solution]

Raghu,

I researched and found that the CC is the "context Change". Ok, but have not worked. The "CC" should not be after creating fields of the item? I put there, but it is only creating the first item of the first id. I'm trying to understand how the logic applies in the creation of tags. I removed the contexts of all input parameters. Is that so?

Thaks

[oscar_mller · Accepted solution]

To help you, here are the attachments that illustrate what is happening.

Thanks

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Oscar,

Please find the below screen shots.

Check the above logic and let me know if your requirment is fulfilled or not.

Regards,

Raju.

[oscar_mller · Accepted solution]

Excelent Raju.

I had not put the ResultList.CC for items.

Thank you very much.

[Former Member]

Hi Oscar,

Please try this method on your mapping.

Quickly building the mapping on my side.

Regards,

Jannus Botha

[oscar_mller]

Jannus,

Thank's for your reply. In its mapping, ROID is a structure? PartID is in the header or item?

Thank you,

Oscar

[Former Member]

Hi Oscar,

Think i got the mapping. Not sure if all the scenario you have will work but this one will with the following mapping. Please see screen shots below.

The objects with the blue marking are from ITEM level.

Regards,

Jannus Botha

[oscar_mller]

Jannus,

It worked. Many thanks for the help.

Oscar

[oscar_mller]

Jannus,

Really worked for the example, but if I put more than one item for the same header or another item in another header, gives error in useoneasmany function.

The reason is that the second parameter is not much the number of contexts corresponding to the number of items or contexts of the first parameter.

I understood the logic of your mapping, but I can not find something valid for the second parameter, which makes work for all cases.

Can you help me again?

Thank's,

[Former Member]

Hi Oscar,

You will need to provide me with a list of scenarios to be able to come up with a solution. Because the problem you had posted initialy was resolved by my mapping design.

So technically should this thread by closed.

Please provide me with the test cases.

Regards,

Jannus Botha

[oscar_mller]

Jannus,

Note that, in the source layout, the two structures are unbounded. So I can have 0..n items for each header. Here are other examples:

<? xml version = "1.0" encoding = "UTF-8"?>

<ns0: mtOrigem xmlns: ns0 = "http: //poc.wilson.sons: testejoinentreestruturas">

    <header>

       <id> 1 </ id>

    </ header>

    <header>

       <id> 2 </ id>

    </ header>

    <item>

       <id> 2 </ id>

       <item> 2A </ item>

       <value> 2000.00 </ value>

    </ item>

    <item>

       <id> 1 </ id>

       <item> 1A </ item>

       <value> 1000.00 </ value>

    </ item>

</ ns0: mtOrigem>

<? xml version = "1.0" encoding = "UTF-8"?>

<ns0: mtOrigem xmlns: ns0 = "http: //poc.wilson.sons: testejoinentreestruturas">

    <header>

       <id> 1 </ id>

    </ header>

    <header>

       <id> 2 </ id>

    </ header>

    <header>

       <id> 3 </ id>

    </ header>

    <item>

       <id> 3 </ id>

       <item> 3A </ item>

       <value> 3000.00 </ value>

    </ item>

    <item>

       <id> 1 </ id>

       <item> 1A </ item>

       <value> 1000.00 </ value>

    </ item>

    <item>

       <id> 3 </ id>

       <item> 3B </ item>

       <value> 3300.00 </ value>

    </ item>

</ ns0: mtOrigem>

Thank´s