Difference in XLATE results under LINUX QDX5.5 vs AIX 5.5

Homepage Clovertech Forums Read Only Archives Cloverleaf Cloverleaf Difference in XLATE results under LINUX QDX5.5 vs AIX 5.5

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #50610
    Sundeep Kumar
    Participant

    We are migrating to LINUX QDX5.5 and I am observing a issue in an XLATE. The destination variant has an [{NK1}] in it and the XLATE itself does a path copy on NK1. Now under QDX5.2 AIX testing tool we always seem to get a NK1 segment put out irrespective of wether the incoming message (ADT_A04) has NK1 or not. However under QDX5.5 Linux it does not put out that NK1 when it is absent from the incoming HL7, which seems to jive with what one would expect.

    Has Anyone seen such a difference in XLATE results under LINUX QDX5.5 Vs AIX QDX5.2 ? I have included a image snapshot of the xlate and the variants.

Viewing 3 reply threads
  • Author
    Replies
    • #66771
      Anonymous
      Participant

      I would bet this is more a variant problem.

      The OS would have little to nothing todo with a message at this level.

      Check your Variants. Make sure they got moved and or defined the same on both systems.

    • #66772
      Sundeep Kumar
      Participant

      John,

      Thanks for your suggestion. I looked at the formats and we were using the default 5.2 (integrator/formats) for ADT_04 for both input and output. I do not want to change the 5.5 formats with the 5.2 formats if possible. As of yesterady our support was saying that this may be a QDX5.2 bug that never got patched and 5.5 is running correctly!

    • #66773
      Russ Ross
      Participant

      I have access to a running version of

      Russ Ross
      RussRoss318@gmail.com

    • #66774
      John Mercogliano
      Participant

      Take a look at this post it. It sounds like you are experiencing the same thing because it’s a repeating.

      http://clovertech.infor.com/viewtopic.php?t=2723&highlight=” class=”bbcode_url”>http://clovertech.infor.com/viewtopic.php?t=2723&highlight=

      I would not be surprised that this is associated with using pathcopy with a repeating field or segment.  They have done a lot of work on pathcopy between 5.2 and 5.6.  

      Just know that for good or ill, the way it worked in 5.2 is incorrect. 🙄

      John Mercogliano
      Sentara Healthcare
      Hampton Roads, VA

Viewing 3 reply threads
  • The forum ‘Cloverleaf’ is closed to new topics and replies.

Forum Statistics

Registered Users
5,092
Forums
28
Topics
9,274
Replies
34,365
Topic Tags
281