Skip to Content

Async/Sync Communication using JMS adapter without BPM (SP 19)

This blog deals about Async/Sync communication in JMS adapter. Normally we use BPM to achieve the Async/Sync functionality, but from SP19 there are modules provided to handle this without BPM. The advantage of using this method over the BPM provides a fivefold to tenfold increase in system performance. On the other hand if we have to monitor the Async/Sync communication, then we have to go for BPM.

Consider a scenario where JMS wants to communicate with a database using XI. In this scenario, we retrieve the details of a person from the database based on the id in one queue and insert the details in another queue.


In Design :
1) Accordingly create data types and message types.
2) Create two synchronous interfaces one for JMS and the other for JDBC.
3) Complete the design by creating message mappings and interface mapping.

In Configuration:
1) Configure two communication channels of type JMS, one as a sender and the other as a receiver.
2) Configure a communication channel for JDBC as a receiver.
3) Complete receiver determination, interface determination, sender agreement and receiver agreement.

Configure the communication channels as explained below.
In sender communication channel :
On the Parameters tab page, under Correlation Settings, select JMSMessageID for the XI Conversation ID.


In receiver communication channel :
On the Parameters tab page, under Correlation Settings, select XI Conversation IDas the JMSCorrelationID.


The modules defined in the sender JMS channel sends the response from database to the corresponding receiver.

You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.
  • Please make a note that both blogs are different. My blog deals with Async/Sync communication and venkat’s blog deals with Sync/async communication.
    • Sudheer,
      Was actually wondering the same as Eddy was.

      Couldn’t it have been possible if both the scenarios had been bundled in one blog rather than 2 separate blogs?

      I agree that logically the 2 blogs show 2 different scenarios , but, you would also agree to the fact that technically they are the same, maybe with some slight / minor configuration difference.

      Having them together jumbled as a single blog would have actually made the reading more interesting as you could have drawn a parallel with the two cases and shown the intricasies of such a scenario.

      I no way mean to say that the blog is not useful as this is quite an interesting scenario , but , what I would like to point out is we could have done with one blog instead of two!

      Thanks for blogging,


      • Hi Bhavesh,

        First we(me and venkat) too thought of putting it as a single blog, but the length of that blog was becoming a concern. We also thought that it would be more confusing as a single blog. Thats why we separated them as two blogs. Our only intention was to make the scenarios more readable and understandable.



          And you say this with straight face???

          Oh well, post in 200 words would be definitely tooo big. Oh wait… this way only one of you get 40 points. And company get 40 as well (instead of 80). Now your real concerns are clear.


          • Hi,

            I always say anything with a straight face.The number of points are not at all a concern to me.I can get the points very well by helping others in forums easily. I am just blogging in the community just to help others and not for points.I have already said that we had to post it as two different blogs, just to avoid the confusion of readers. I will be the happiest man if my blog is useful, atleast for a single person and that is equivalent to 10k points in sdn in my perception. Kindly dont pass such sweeping statements.

    • Hi,

      If the blogs are that much different, why didn’t you both make more effort to show the difference. You even refer to each other and indicate that the other one focused on one aspect.
      Maybe one mutual web log was indeed enough, at least to avoid the confusion.


    • Hi Sudheer,
      In JMS – Webservice – JMS scenario I am getting a CPA binding issue during Module Processing at the sender JMS. Error is: Cannot find CPA binding (agreement) for Receiver JMS channel .
      Is a collaboration agreement required for the receiver JMS channel ?? Please advice.