[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-5979?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Yogesh Rao updated CAMEL-5979:
------------------------------
Description:
I am facing an issue with camel-quickfix component for the following scenario.
We have a FIX message coming in to the Quickfix/J engine i.e. logon request
with only the senderID and TargetID populated and the engine successfully
processes the logon request based on the configuration. The subsequent requests
for Single Order (Tag # 35 = D) the message received contains the optional
values SenderSubID and TargetSubID populated, the message is picked up by the
camel component without any issue but its only when a reply has to sent to the
sender the component ends up throwing a error i.e. IllegalStateException :
Unknown Session... I looked into the code
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/camel/trunk/components/camel-quickfix/src/main/java/org/apache/camel/component/quickfixj/QuickfixjConsumer.java
and found the issue. The session ID is being reconstructed from the in value
being set into the exchange object, which as per API used would construct the
session containing SenderID,SenderSubID,TargetID and TargetSubID which is
getting compared to the session set during the logon process which only
contains the SenderID and TargetID and hence doesn't matches and returns a
null. On receiving the null value the code ends up throwing the
IllegalStateException. Looking at the QuickFixJConsumer code i do understand
the importance of reconstructing the SessionID object from the Message set as
Out in Exchange but from what i read about various client implementations on
using FIX the above scenario mentioned also holds good. For now I have gone
ahead and patched the QuickFixJConsumer code for my project by picking up the
session id set in Exchange object rather than recreating it using the
MessageUtils. But i feel in a longer run a elegant solution has to be put in
place rather than user of camel patching the code up for their use:)
In case you need any further details do let me know..
was:
I am facing an issue with camel-quickfix component for the following scenario.
We have a FIX message coming in to the Quickfix/J engine i.e. logon request
with only the senderID and TargetID populated and the engine successfully
processes the logon request based on the configuration. The subsequent requests
for Single Order (Tag # 35 = D) the message received contains the optional
values SenderSubID and TargetSubID populated, the message is picked up by the
camel component without any issue but its only when a reply has to sent to the
sender the component ends up throwing a error i.e. IllegalStateException :
Unknown Session... I looked into the code
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/camel/trunk/components/camel-quickfix/src/main/java/org/apache/camel/component/quickfixj/QuickfixjConsumer.java
and found the issue. The session ID is being reconstructed from the out value
being set into the exchange object which as per API used would construct the
session containing SenderID,SenderSubID,TargetID and TargetSubID which is
getting compared to the session set during the logon process which only
contains the SenderID and TargetID and hence doesn't matches and returns a
null. On receiving the null value the code ends up throwing the
IllegalStateException. Looking at the QuickFixJConsumer code i do understand
the importance of reconstructing the SessionID object from the Message set as
Out in Exchange but from what i read about various client implementations on
using FIX the above scenario mentioned also holds good. For now I have gone
ahead and patched the QuickFixJConsumer code for my project by picking up the
session id set in Exchange object rather than recreating it using the
MessageUtils. But i feel in a longer run a elegant solution has to be put in
place rather than user of camel patching the code up for their use:)
In case you need any further details do let me know..
> Camel-Quickfix dynamic SenderSubId/TargetSubId issue
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CAMEL-5979
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-5979
> Project: Camel
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: camel-quickfix
> Affects Versions: 2.10.3
> Environment: QuickFix/J version 1.5 on JDK 1.6.x
> Reporter: Yogesh Rao
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: Future
>
>
> I am facing an issue with camel-quickfix component for the following scenario.
> We have a FIX message coming in to the Quickfix/J engine i.e. logon request
> with only the senderID and TargetID populated and the engine successfully
> processes the logon request based on the configuration. The subsequent
> requests for Single Order (Tag # 35 = D) the message received contains the
> optional values SenderSubID and TargetSubID populated, the message is picked
> up by the camel component without any issue but its only when a reply has to
> sent to the sender the component ends up throwing a error i.e.
> IllegalStateException : Unknown Session... I looked into the code
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/camel/trunk/components/camel-quickfix/src/main/java/org/apache/camel/component/quickfixj/QuickfixjConsumer.java
> and found the issue. The session ID is being reconstructed from the in value
> being set into the exchange object, which as per API used would construct the
> session containing SenderID,SenderSubID,TargetID and TargetSubID which is
> getting compared to the session set during the logon process which only
> contains the SenderID and TargetID and hence doesn't matches and returns a
> null. On receiving the null value the code ends up throwing the
> IllegalStateException. Looking at the QuickFixJConsumer code i do understand
> the importance of reconstructing the SessionID object from the Message set as
> Out in Exchange but from what i read about various client implementations on
> using FIX the above scenario mentioned also holds good. For now I have gone
> ahead and patched the QuickFixJConsumer code for my project by picking up the
> session id set in Exchange object rather than recreating it using the
> MessageUtils. But i feel in a longer run a elegant solution has to be put in
> place rather than user of camel patching the code up for their use:)
> In case you need any further details do let me know..
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
