Clovertech

processing order of route details

› Clovertech Forums › Read Only Archives › Cloverleaf › Cloverleaf › processing order of route details

  • Creator
    Topic
  • September 25, 2018 at 9:32 pm #55795
    Anonymous

      I have multiple route details under a static route. The outbound messages don’t appear to be processed in the order that they’re defined in NetConfig.

      I’m performing two different Xlates on my inbound ADT messages. The first is an ADT Xlate. The second is an ADT to ORU Xlate.  Both messages are sent to the same outbound destination thread.

      I need to ensure that these messages reach the outbound thread in ADT/ORU order. I don’t think that chaining is the solution, because the translated ADT is missing some of the information required by the ORU Xlate that was in the original ADT.

      Any suggestions? TIA

    • Creator
      Topic
    Viewing 8 reply threads
    • Author
      Replies
      • September 25, 2018 at 10:17 pm #86522
        Keith McLeod
        Participant

          You may want to consider a single xlate that

        • September 25, 2018 at 10:38 pm #86523
          Jim Kosloskey
          Participant

            Keith,

            Wouldn’t that require a variant with both the ADT and ORU definition in one message structure?

            It seems to me that might be kind of messy.

            Perhaps a simpler attempt might be to use chaining. In the first Xlate Create the Xlated ADT and SEND that (that should immediately deliver that to the OB), then in the same Xlate create the full ADT and just let that go. Or you could reverse the logic but do a CONTINUE on the full ADT, a SEND on the ADT for the destination, followed by a SUPPRESS.

            Then the chained Xlate would create the ORU from the previously CONTINUEd ADT message and that would be passed on – ideally arriving at the OB AFTER the SENT message.

            Just an idea…

            email: jim.kosloskey@jim-kosloskey.com 29+ years Cloverleaf, 59 years IT - old fart.

          • September 25, 2018 at 10:50 pm #86524
            Keith McLeod
            Participant

              That does sound simpler. I generally am going from a orm to an adt.

            • September 27, 2018 at 7:06 pm #86525
              Anonymous

                Thanks, Jim and Keith. Based on your suggestions, this is what I came up with.

                I created a Chain Route with 3 Chain Details:

                1. Raw detail with tps proc that creates a 2nd message and sets MSH:8=ORU in 2nd message (just for identification).

                2. Xlate detail for ADT>ADT translation

                 Top of xlt:

                   If MSH:8 = ORU > BULKCOPY, CONTINUE, SUPPRESS

                   proceed with translation of ADT to ADT

                3. Xlate detail for ADT>ORU translation

                 Pre Proc:

                   If MSH:8 = ADT > SEND

                   Else > CONTINUE

                 Top of xlt:

                   If MSH:8 != ORU > SUPPRESS

                   proceed with translation of ADT to ORU

                Basically, the 1st xlt translates the message marked “ADT”, and just continues the message marked “ORU”.

                The Pre Proc on 2nd xlt SENDs the message marked “ADT”, so it doesn’t reach the ADT>ORU xlt.

                So, the message marked “ORU” is the only one that reaches the ADT>ORU xlt.

                Not real elegant. Any suggestions for improvement?

              • September 27, 2018 at 8:18 pm #86526
                Jim Kosloskey
                Participant

                  I am not sure you need 3 Xlates.

                  Might this work?:

                  First Xlate –

                  email: jim.kosloskey@jim-kosloskey.com 29+ years Cloverleaf, 59 years IT - old fart.

                • September 27, 2018 at 8:25 pm #86527
                  Keith McLeod
                  Participant

                    You may be able to just do the send on the first xlate and let the end of code perform the continue as it already does.  No suppress since you actually want it to continue..  Otherwise it does sound lie it would work nicely…

                  • September 27, 2018 at 10:52 pm #86528
                    Steve Pringle
                    Participant

                      Would this be a case where a tcl proc is a better solution?  Seems like this can all be done in one tcl proc.

                    • September 28, 2018 at 6:43 pm #86529
                      Anonymous

                        Steve Pringle wrote:

                        Would this be a case where a tcl proc is a better solution?

                      • September 28, 2018 at 7:37 pm #86530
                        Anonymous

                          Jim Kosloskey wrote:

                          I am not sure you need 3 Xlates.

                          Might this work?:

                          First Xlate –

                      • Author
                        Replies
                      Viewing 8 reply threads
                      • The forum ‘Cloverleaf’ is closed to new topics and replies.