2 Replies Latest reply on Jul 26, 2006 9:23 AM by 447722

    Mapping mystery

    447722
      Hi,
      Maybe one of you have an answer to my mystery? I've been working with iStudio/interconnect for some time now, but it have always been wtih simple schemas, a parent, multiple childen(xml). Now I have just finished a project with multiple generations, where a mystery solution was necessary.
      I had to edit in all the mappings, so that the number was 'v0' throughout the integration, if I did not, the application came to a holt! That was the case when I used objectCopy:
      eg: runningorder.elementGroup[v0].element[v0].name[0].....
      In the outgoing adapter I used copyFields, and if didn't edit the numbers, it would only take the first one.
      Now I am in the process of writing the documentation, and I need a good explanation. Is it a bug? I used Oracle Interconnect 9ias release 2.
      Hope some of you can help
      Regards
      Rikke
        • 1. Re: Mapping mystery
          416900
          Rikke,
          I used to have to do that on older versions of OAI too (way back with OAI 3.1.2 !!).
          Have a look at the bug database via Metalink, start with Bugs 2720375 and 4328431.
          I don't profess to be an expert in this area, just a user like you, but the general rule is to use v0 subscripts across the board.
          Use f0 (free subscripts) when you need to create as many objects as required.
          Changing the subscripts manually to v0 still seems to be the only workaround when this "feature" occurs.
          In terms of an explanation - I think it was / is caused by the ObjectCopy transformation picking up the last subscript number, and incrementing it.
          So - try not to use the ObjectCopy. Use the multiple source to multiple target CopyFields transform instead! That is, select, in the correct order, your source fields (using Ctrl + Right-mouse click) - then CopyFields - then your target fields.
          Or just do the CopyFields one-by-one?
          HTH
          Yan
          • 2. Re: Mapping mystery
            447722
            Thank you very much:-)