| Author |
Message
|
| Dave Ziegler |
 Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 10:41 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Centurion
Joined: 15 Apr 2014
Posts: 118
|
I'm not sure what you mean... looks normal to me. It looks the same as if I created a new library in this project. The files are referenced though, and I did not copy them into the workspace. So I also see the little arrow/Reference folder also containing this library.
That second part is the heart of the matter. I can't deploy this or create a BAR file because of the error in the subject line of this thread. If I move the referencING schema, then I can deploy just fine.
Maybe it is PMR time. I think Toolkit should be complaining before I attempt to deploy, and at this point it is not. All is swell, and then it complains when I try to deploy to my local integration node. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
What I mean by the bit about the folder is at least loosely described here: http://www-01.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSKM8N_8.0.0/com.ibm.etools.mft.doc/bc23150_.htm
But perhaps I'm being overly technical. It doesn't look like the Application Development perspective will show you normal folders, it will only show you Broker Schemas.
I'm also not sure what you mean by 'did not copy them into the workspace'? The library project should be in your workspace. The ESQL file should be in the library project.
Certainly a PMR is not an unreasonable step. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Dave Ziegler |
| Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 15 Apr 2014
Posts: 118
|
There was a step in the Add Library Reference process that asked about copying the references into the workspace vs using virtual directories.
I'm going to log a pmr, something just isn't adding up. I will post the outcome here! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Dave Ziegler |
| Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2014 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 15 Apr 2014
Posts: 118
|
I'm still waiting to hear back on this, but:
"In my opinion, this is a defect, and I am going to send it to the Level 3 team for further analysis. -Level 2 support" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| akil |
| Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2014 6:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 27 May 2014
Posts: 338
Location: Mumbai
|
Hi
Did you get a reply on this ? Is this a defect or is there a way to make this work? I am having the same problem ..
_________________
Regards |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Dave Ziegler |
| Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2014 6:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 15 Apr 2014
Posts: 118
|
| "I'm sorry for the delay. I will reach out to the Level 3 team for an update." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Dave Ziegler |
| Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2014 11:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 15 Apr 2014
Posts: 118
|
Reply from IBM support:
| Quote: |
You can resolve the deployment errors by bringing the default broker schema into scope.
This isn't obvious from the documentation, but it can be done by changing the BROKER SCHEMA statement as follows:
BROKER SCHEMA Shared PATH "";
I suspect the ESQL validator in the toolkit needs fixing, so that it displays errors for the code as-is.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| akil |
| Posted: Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 27 May 2014
Posts: 338
Location: Mumbai
|
Ah! Should have given this a try , the default schema indeed is represented as "" in various property panes...
Thank you.
_________________
Regards |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
