Two Types of CPI Mapping Flows

“Mapping Flow” is a concept in CPI that should be more popular. It is useful for the following reasons:

• Organize your complex mapping logic in one place
• Reuse your mapping from different flows
• Easier to test, without involving sender or receiver systems

What is a “Mapping Flow”?

Basically, it is a flow that accepts ProcessDirect connections, applies any number of mapping steps, then returns the result back or calls another flow with the result. Based on this distinction, we can group them under two categories. Here is a diagram explaining the scenarios:

• Each arrow is a ProcessDirect connection
• Arrowheads illustrate only request message flow, response is not shown in the diagram
• Processing is started with Sender Flow
• Each color is a complete process from sender to receiver

Request-Reply Mapping Flow without Receiver

This type is the simpler one if you can use the sender flow to route message to all required receivers. You can combine the routing logic into the caller flow.

Here is a basic example:

Serial Mapping Flow with Receiver

This is useful if you want to delegate the routing to mapping flows and have dynamic chaining flows.

${header.receiver_flow} = null

${header.test_run} = 'true'

${header.receiver_flow}

I wonder your experiences and ideas using Mapping Flows!

See you in the comments & in the next posts!