Skip to Content

13 Comments

You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.

  1. Praveen Sirupa
    Good job !!

    I see in UDF that the receivers are hard-coded i.e. ‘MrService’ or ‘MsService’. How does this mapping program respond when moved to QA or PROD system? Do we need to hard-code the receiver system names in mapping?

    thx in adv
    praveen

    (0) 
      1. Bai Li
        Don’t hardcode anything in Integration builder. Use value mapping as part of the configuration. This will help you to easily make any changes on the objects.
        (0) 
    1. Anonymous
      Receivers don’t necessarily be hard coded. Receivers could be part of the incoming message nad / or being determined using a mapping lookup. E.g. you could have a plant code in an incoming document and use a mapping lookup to retrieve the business system belonging to this plant.

      Regards
      Christine

      (0) 
  2. Saurabh Sharma
    hi
    this blog is really superb.being a fresher in XI
    also when i go through the blog i understand the concept of enhanced receiver determination.however when i tried to excute the configuration then till integration directry it was ok,but while clicking to ektended in receiver determination i am not able to populate my interface mapping program.Its not reflecting the message is coming no object found..so can anybody plz tell me what will the probable error…….
    (0) 
  3. Koteswara Rao Bellamkonda
    When i created a scenario by going through this blog it is giving error that — Error when determining the receiver ,  i want to confirm that interface mapping which u specified using UDF is going to return how many values , i have receivers only male_receiver and female_receiver only, my input file has 3 records, Mr, Mr and Ms,
    But when i tested interface mapping it is giving
    3 receivers as output,
    Is it compulsory that to specify values for
    party and agency or not?
    and is it requires 2 receivers structures in datatype instead of one?
    pls. clarify all these issues.
    (0) 

Leave a Reply