| Author |
Message
|
| akil |
 Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2015 5:28 am Post subject: IIB9: UserDefinedNode from SubFlow |
 |
|
Partisan
Joined: 27 May 2014
Posts: 338
Location: Mumbai
|
Hi
The documentation states the following
| Quote: |
You cannot use user-defined nodes that are created from subflows in subflows that are defined in .subflow files.
|
In an integration project, the default code that is generated puts each operation in a sub-flow of its own.
With the above stated limitation, it effectively means that user defined nodes cant be used in integration services, unless the generated code is changed..
Am I missing something?
_________________
Regards |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| nelson |
| Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2015 4:48 pm Post subject: Re: IIB9: UserDefinedNode from SubFlow |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 02 Oct 2012
Posts: 313
|
| akil wrote: |
Hi
The documentation states the following
| Quote: |
You cannot use user-defined nodes that are created from subflows in subflows that are defined in .subflow files.
|
In an integration project, the default code that is generated puts each operation in a sub-flow of its own.
With the above stated limitation, it effectively means that user defined nodes cant be used in integration services, unless the generated code is changed..
Am I missing something? |
I'm afraid you won't be able to deploy a UDN in a subflow created from a subflow... I would try to code the UDN in C or Java  We have faced this situation in the past... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 4:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
Or, you know, don't use the default logic/configured flow.....
Put everything that need your UDN into the main flow, and decide what makes sense to use in a subflow.
_________________
chmod -R ugo-wx / |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| akil |
| Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 7:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 27 May 2014
Posts: 338
Location: Mumbai
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
Or, you know, don't use the default logic/configured flow.....
Put everything that need your UDN into the main flow, and decide what makes sense to use in a subflow. |
In the IntegrationService, whenever you add an operation , the defaults come back, so it's a bit of an irritant.. but that's what I am trying now ..
_________________
Regards |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
Presumably it only adds a new subflow for the new operation?
_________________
chmod -R ugo-wx / |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| akil |
| Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 27 May 2014
Posts: 338
Location: Mumbai
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| Presumably it only adds a new subflow for the new operation? |
Yes, but sometimes if you change the parameters / add a new fault to the operation, the sub-flow is re-generated..
_________________
Regards |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
Well.
I suppose you could also put a route-to-label node in the subflows that points to a label on the main flow that calls the UDN... 
_________________
chmod -R ugo-wx / |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| inMo |
| Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 27 Jun 2009
Posts: 216
Location: NY
|
Is it worth mentioning that there is another angle here? You don't necessarily have to use the .subflow file. There is the option to use a message flow as a subflow. Doing so will mean you have eliminated some build options, but that would allow it a UDN from SF to be embedded in a SF.
Any thoughts on how this great capability to create a UDN from SF could be enhanced to allow it to cooperate with .subflow files? Maybe the 'compile' would break it into two pieces: Toolkit Node and Broker Component. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
I'd guess the UDN-from-subflow issue is only Runtime and not Toolkit at all, unless Toolkit produces warnings or error.
It's likely that the issue is with linking things together during runtime. At a guess.
_________________
chmod -R ugo-wx / |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| inMo |
| Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 27 Jun 2009
Posts: 216
Location: NY
|
If that was based on my comment, I suspect you are correct. The current UDN-from-SF requires that mqsicreatebar or compile in toolkit be used. I suspect that is due to the source residing only at the toolkit level, so the broker runtime could not possibly compile it.
I suspect if the UDN generation/compile/packaging process resulted in two components (Toolkit Piece & Runtime Piece) would remove that restriction. This is a similar, but not the same, idea of a UDN-from-Java resulting in a Toolkit Node placeholder piece and a Broker Piece. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| timber |
| Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Aug 2015
Posts: 1292
|
| I agree that it is an inconvenient limitation. If there was an RFE then I would vote for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
