[This message was posted by David Rosenborg of Pantor Engineering AB <[email protected]> to the "FAST Protocol" discussion forum at http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/46. You can reply to it on-line at http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/read/3e330f84 - PLEASE DO NOT REPLY BY MAIL.]
Sajith - You're correct, you shouldn't send the number of repeated groups as a separate field in FAST. The practice to send the count as an ordinary field is an artifact of the FIX tag/value encoding and should be avoided when there are other intrinsic means to do this (like the sequence length preamble in FAST). /David > Hi, > > I have a question on communicating array sizes in FAST. I'm sending a > message with sub messages. > > When packing the parent message into the data buffer, if there are > repeating blocks, the number of repeating blocks will be included prior > to the repeating blocks according to the FAST implementation. > > Do I have to send the number of repeating blocks explicitly in a > separate field though that's anyway included in the data? > > As I feel, sending that count separately is duplicate. When considering > a large number of FAST clients this increases the bandwidth utilization. > > I'm really grateful to you if you could help me in finding the correct > implementation. > > Thank you, Sajith [You can unsubscribe from this discussion group by sending a message to mailto:[email protected]] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Financial Information eXchange" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/FIX-Protocol?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
