Re: [Quickfix-developers] Droping messages...
Brought to you by:
orenmnero
From: <OM...@th...> - 2003-04-01 23:57:37
|
Well, QuickFIX will ignore any message that is considered "mangled". This could mean they have an incorrect message length or checksum. Is this a possibility with these messages? --oren |---------+-----------------------------------------------> | | Nicholas Palmer | | | <nic...@sl...> | | | Sent by: | | | qui...@li...ur| | | ceforge.net | | | | | | | | | 03/31/2003 06:31 PM | | | | |---------+-----------------------------------------------> >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: "'qui...@li...'" | | <qui...@li...> | | cc: | | Subject: [Quickfix-developers] Droping messages... | >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hey All, I am having some trouble with a QuickFIX application I am developing. Unfortunately it requires that I interface with a vendor who uses a bastardized version of FIX. I have created a special XML file for validation of these messages, and two out of the three I have to handle get received and cracked properly. The third doesn't seem to get into the application at all. I have overridden both fromAdmin and fromApp and put logging statements in both. For the other messages I see the log message in fromAdmin, and then fromApp, however for this message I see the log of the message being received that looks like: <20030401-00:11:05, FIX.4.2:US->THEM, incoming> (field=data*field=data*etc...) but neither the fromAdmin or fromApp methods get called, and no other message is logged (such as rejecting due to missing or invalid fields which I have seen when I had the XML messed up, so I don't think that is the problem, but I guess it is possible. I have been over the XML with a fine toothed comb though so I doubt it.) The application then goes into an infinite loop where QuickFIX claims that the next message had a sequence number that was too high and re requests the message that it just dropped, which it drops again. Lather rinse repeat until the processor explodes. The message that I receive contains fields out of order, and fields which print with fieldnum=NOREF, so I suspect it is a problem handling the crappy message from the other vendor, but since QuickFIX receives it they claim that it is my problem to fix. I have set: ValidateFieldsOutOfOrder=N ValidateFieldsHaveValues=N in the config file with no change in behavior. Any thoughts on a cure for this problem. Thanks, - -Nick -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE+iN3hR42/Somtp0QRArTAAJwLsxraN8FpGlAnH3AJsJP/wl9UoQCggqIV IzUOnThR+n1roiPuSAgmBvE= |