Searching thru OBX message question

[Chris Wethey]

I am looking at an OBX line that have multiple lines from 1 to 14 and I am trying to search thru those lines to locate specific information to replace.  I am iterating to the 3 groups and then searching the second field which would be CN or TX (1(%g1).1(%g2).1(%g3).OBX.#3.[1]) but it is not searching thru the ORU message to see which OBX line has what I am looking for but the logic is not working.  Not sure if I have to perform another iterate within the OBX part OBX(%g4).#3.[1] or not. ???

Topic

[Jim Kosloskey]

Chris,

Assuming your variant and message match up, then the next essential is to make sure your basis at each level is correct.

In nested ITERATEs it is necessary to enter the parent level counter %gx in the child basis. For instance if the OBX is a child of the OBR then in the OBX ITERATE basis and assuming %g1 as the counter for the OBR ITERATE, it is necessary to include the %g1 OBR counter in the basis of the OBX ITERATE (in the proper location) or you will only ITERATE on OBXs for the FIRST OBR.

Maybe that is what is going on.

If you would like some assitance off line, email me.

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

[bill bearden]

You might try just one iterate and just one group variable (i.e. %g1).

Iterate just on 1(0).1(0).3, or whatever you had as your most specific iterate basis.

Then, look at 1(0).1(0).3(%g1).OBX(0).#5 or whataver field you were looking for.

[Chris Wethey]

Most of the logic was correct especially with ITERATE but the outbound fields that I was replacing were not correct.  I used the same logic format that was built in 5.7 version was different that what I figured out in the 5.8.4 version.  This is what i had to change the logic to for it to work. (1(%g1).1(%g2).1(%g3).OBX(0).#3(0).[3] ).

I had to have the (0) after the OBX and #3 information but the earlier format did not need the (0).  

Thanks for your responses – it made me look at the logic a bit more to understand the reason why.

Thanks

Chris Wethey

[Author]

Replies