quickfix-developers Mailing List for QuickFIX (Page 302)
Brought to you by:
orenmnero
Menu
▾
▴
quickfix-developers — QuickFIX developers forum
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2001 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2002 |
Jan
|
Feb
(5) |
Mar
(16) |
Apr
(15) |
May
(17) |
Jun
(33) |
Jul
(35) |
Aug
(34) |
Sep
(19) |
Oct
(40) |
Nov
(51) |
Dec
(43) |
| 2003 |
Jan
(45) |
Feb
(79) |
Mar
(124) |
Apr
(121) |
May
(132) |
Jun
(77) |
Jul
(110) |
Aug
(57) |
Sep
(48) |
Oct
(83) |
Nov
(60) |
Dec
(40) |
| 2004 |
Jan
(67) |
Feb
(72) |
Mar
(74) |
Apr
(87) |
May
(70) |
Jun
(96) |
Jul
(75) |
Aug
(147) |
Sep
(128) |
Oct
(83) |
Nov
(67) |
Dec
(42) |
| 2005 |
Jan
(110) |
Feb
(84) |
Mar
(68) |
Apr
(55) |
May
(51) |
Jun
(192) |
Jul
(111) |
Aug
(100) |
Sep
(79) |
Oct
(127) |
Nov
(73) |
Dec
(112) |
| 2006 |
Jan
(95) |
Feb
(120) |
Mar
(138) |
Apr
(127) |
May
(124) |
Jun
(97) |
Jul
(103) |
Aug
(88) |
Sep
(138) |
Oct
(91) |
Nov
(112) |
Dec
(57) |
| 2007 |
Jan
(55) |
Feb
(35) |
Mar
(56) |
Apr
(16) |
May
(20) |
Jun
(77) |
Jul
(43) |
Aug
(47) |
Sep
(29) |
Oct
(54) |
Nov
(39) |
Dec
(40) |
| 2008 |
Jan
(69) |
Feb
(79) |
Mar
(122) |
Apr
(106) |
May
(114) |
Jun
(76) |
Jul
(83) |
Aug
(71) |
Sep
(53) |
Oct
(75) |
Nov
(54) |
Dec
(43) |
| 2009 |
Jan
(32) |
Feb
(31) |
Mar
(64) |
Apr
(48) |
May
(38) |
Jun
(43) |
Jul
(35) |
Aug
(15) |
Sep
(52) |
Oct
(62) |
Nov
(62) |
Dec
(21) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(44) |
Feb
(10) |
Mar
(47) |
Apr
(22) |
May
(5) |
Jun
(54) |
Jul
(19) |
Aug
(54) |
Sep
(16) |
Oct
(15) |
Nov
(7) |
Dec
(8) |
| 2011 |
Jan
(18) |
Feb
(9) |
Mar
(5) |
Apr
(5) |
May
(41) |
Jun
(40) |
Jul
(29) |
Aug
(17) |
Sep
(12) |
Oct
(23) |
Nov
(22) |
Dec
(11) |
| 2012 |
Jan
(8) |
Feb
(24) |
Mar
(5) |
Apr
(5) |
May
(6) |
Jun
(5) |
Jul
(5) |
Aug
(5) |
Sep
(2) |
Oct
(9) |
Nov
(2) |
Dec
(18) |
| 2013 |
Jan
(25) |
Feb
(16) |
Mar
(8) |
Apr
(2) |
May
(16) |
Jun
(17) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
(13) |
Sep
(3) |
Oct
(4) |
Nov
(1) |
Dec
|
| 2014 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
|
Mar
(22) |
Apr
(9) |
May
(3) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(5) |
Aug
(11) |
Sep
(18) |
Oct
(4) |
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(3) |
| 2015 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(3) |
May
(4) |
Jun
(37) |
Jul
|
Aug
(4) |
Sep
(6) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(2) |
| 2016 |
Jan
(9) |
Feb
(3) |
Mar
(7) |
Apr
(1) |
May
(8) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(7) |
Oct
(3) |
Nov
(16) |
Dec
|
| 2017 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
(15) |
Mar
(2) |
Apr
(12) |
May
(4) |
Jun
(7) |
Jul
(5) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(23) |
Dec
(8) |
| 2018 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
(4) |
Mar
(2) |
Apr
(8) |
May
(3) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2019 |
Jan
|
Feb
(1) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(1) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
(5) |
Nov
(3) |
Dec
|
| 2020 |
Jan
|
Feb
(4) |
Mar
(3) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(12) |
Aug
(5) |
Sep
(3) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
(1) |
| 2021 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(1) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(2) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2022 |
Jan
|
Feb
(1) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2025 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(1) |
May
(1) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: <OM...@th...> - 2002-09-04 12:15:02
|
Joerg, I recently started working on the linux JNI port. I put together a Makefile.am using a sample that was kindly supplied by Alex Hornby. We originally thought that gcc had problems with exceptions within shared objects. Alex's example showed that this is not necessarily the case. I have so far compiled the JNI code under linux and have created a libquickfix_jni.so file, however I think there are still some linking issues that need to be resolved. I would be happy to send out what I have so far (Alex, are you also interested?), and we can perhaps collaborate on completing the port. --oren |---------+-----------------------------------------------> | | Joerg Thoennes | | | <Joe...@ma...> | | | Sent by: | | | qui...@li...ur| | | ceforge.net | | | | | | | | | 09/04/2002 03:29 AM | | | Please respond to Joerg.Thoennes | | | | |---------+-----------------------------------------------> >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: qui...@li..., | | qui...@li... | | cc: | | Subject: [Quickfix-developers] JNI library for Linux | >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| Hello, we are developing exchange connectivity software running on linux server machines. The next interface to incorporate is a FIX interface. Now we are evaluating the QuickFIX engine and it seems to meet our needs very closely except for one point: the Linux integration. We would like to use QuickFIX on Linux from a Java application. The Java interface for QuickFIX is currently available only for Windows. To get the Java interface running on Linux, we need 1. The libquickfix.a as a shared object library. The documentation says that for Linux only a statically linked version is available. Please, could anybody point out more details why this is the case? Perhaps this problem could be solved with a newer compiler, e.g. GCC 3.0? 2. There is no appropriate Makefile.am to build the libquickfix_jni.so for Linux. Could anybody tell us how to change the Makefile.am (and the C++ sources for the JNI interface)? If we can resolve these points with the help from this list, we could get a working Java FIX application for Linux. Can anyone help? Thanks in advance. -- Joerg Thoennes http://macd.com Tel.: +49 (0)241 44597-24 Macdonald Associates GmbH Fax : +49 (0)241 44597-10 Lothringer Str. 52, D-52070 Aachen ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 _______________________________________________ Quickfix-developers mailing list Qui...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers |
|
From: Joerg T. <Joe...@ma...> - 2002-09-04 08:29:14
|
Hello,
we are developing exchange connectivity software running on linux server
machines. The next interface to incorporate is a FIX interface.
Now we are evaluating the QuickFIX engine and it seems to meet our needs
very closely except for one point: the Linux integration.
We would like to use QuickFIX on Linux from a Java application. The Java
interface for QuickFIX is currently available only for Windows.
To get the Java interface running on Linux, we need
1. The libquickfix.a as a shared object library. The documentation says
that for Linux only a statically linked version is available. Please,
could anybody point out more details why this is the case? Perhaps
this problem could be solved with a newer compiler, e.g. GCC 3.0?
2. There is no appropriate Makefile.am to build the libquickfix_jni.so
for Linux. Could anybody tell us how to change the Makefile.am (and
the C++ sources for the JNI interface)?
If we can resolve these points with the help from this list, we could
get a working Java FIX application for Linux.
Can anyone help?
Thanks in advance.
--
Joerg Thoennes
http://macd.com
Tel.: +49 (0)241 44597-24 Macdonald Associates GmbH
Fax : +49 (0)241 44597-10 Lothringer Str. 52, D-52070 Aachen
|
|
From: Pasquale d'A. <pas...@ga...> - 2002-08-29 14:35:55
|
Hello. I'm developing an initiator trading application using QuickFIX library, release 1.1.0 first, then 1.2.1. I have a problem on implementing normal termination of a message exchange session. When using the method Session::send() to send a logout, QuickFIX, on receiving logout from the FIX counterpart, checks the flag 'Session::m_sentLogout', finds it at false and sends another logout message. On the other hand, I can't send logout using the method Session::generateLogout(), that sets the above specified flag to true, because this method is private. I believe I have not understood the correct method to start a normal exchange of logout messages, in the intentions of QuickFIX developers. Thanks, P. d'Aloise ------------------------------------ Pasquale d'Aloise pas...@ga... GATE Tecnologie Informatiche S.S. 17 - Loc. Nunziatella 86170 ISERNIA - Italy Tel. 0039-0865-451890 Isernia Ita |
|
From: <sb...@ab...> - 2002-08-23 22:44:55
|
From a visual inspection it looks much better. That was fast! :) How does your code generator handle repeating groups (I'm assuming you generate some message-related code from these XML files)? Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: OM...@th... Date: Friday, August 23, 2002 4:44 pm Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Incorrect group information in FIX4*.xml files? > > I examined the parser and the FIX40 specs and made a one line > change that I > believe fixes both problems (they were related). Take a look at > this file > and let me know how it looks. > > (See attached file: FIX40.xml) > > --oren > > > |---------+-----------------------------------------------> > | | OM...@th... | > | | Sent by: | > | | qui...@li...ur| > | | ceforge.net | > | | | > | | | > | | 08/23/2002 03:35 PM | > | | | > |---------+-----------------------------------------------> > >---------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------------------------| > | > | > | To: sb...@ab... > | > | cc: qui...@li..., > | > | qui...@li... > | > | Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Incorrect group > information in FIX4*.xml files? | > >---------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------------------------| > > > > > > Oh, another thing, > > I just realized that for FIX 4.3 they completely changed the Fiximate > format. The old ones are xml while the new one is html. They look > absolutely nothing alike. 4.3 is also the only one you can > download as a > ZIP (as opposed to hunting and pecking for individual files). > This being > the case I'm most inclined to write a Fiximate parser for 4.3, and > justimprove the old parser for the earlier versions. Since the > older versions > aren't going to change, it probably isn't worth it writing a whole new > parser that can't be used for future versions. Thoughts? > > --oren > > > > |---------+-----------------------------------------------> > | | <sb...@ab...> | > | | Sent by: | > | | qui...@li...ur| > | | ceforge.net | > | | | > | | | > | | 08/23/2002 02:28 PM | > | | | > |---------+-----------------------------------------------> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------| > > | > | > | To: OM...@th... > | > | cc: <qui...@li...> > | > | Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Incorrect group > informationin FIX4*.xml files? | > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------| > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: OM...@th... > > Yeah, it looks like this is a parser error. We create these XML > > specs off of the original specs, and the way messages and fields are > > represented is very inconsistent all throughout. > > Hi Oren, > > Yes, I understand the challenges in parsing those documents. I don't > know why the FIX Technical Committee doesn't publish the raw FIX > messagedefinitions as XML files. It would make many software > developers' lives > much easier. > > Did you consider parsing the "Fiximate" HTML pages instead? They > may be > more consistent in structure and they are available for 4.0 > through 4.3. > > I also noticed that some of the message definitions in the XML > files do > not have all the fields described in the specification. In particular, > the ListStatus message (in the FIX4.0 XML file) seems to stop at > ClOrdIDalthough there are several more fields after that one. This > may be a > related problem to the previous one (?). > > Steve > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old > cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! > https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 > _______________________________________________ > Quickfix-developers mailing list > Qui...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old > cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! > https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 > _______________________________________________ > Quickfix-developers mailing list > Qui...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers > > > > |
|
From: <OM...@th...> - 2002-08-23 21:44:53
|
I examined the parser and the FIX40 specs and made a one line change that I believe fixes both problems (they were related). Take a look at this file and let me know how it looks. (See attached file: FIX40.xml) --oren |---------+-----------------------------------------------> | | OM...@th... | | | Sent by: | | | qui...@li...ur| | | ceforge.net | | | | | | | | | 08/23/2002 03:35 PM | | | | |---------+-----------------------------------------------> >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: sb...@ab... | | cc: qui...@li..., | | qui...@li... | | Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Incorrect group information in FIX4*.xml files? | >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| Oh, another thing, I just realized that for FIX 4.3 they completely changed the Fiximate format. The old ones are xml while the new one is html. They look absolutely nothing alike. 4.3 is also the only one you can download as a ZIP (as opposed to hunting and pecking for individual files). This being the case I'm most inclined to write a Fiximate parser for 4.3, and just improve the old parser for the earlier versions. Since the older versions aren't going to change, it probably isn't worth it writing a whole new parser that can't be used for future versions. Thoughts? --oren |---------+-----------------------------------------------> | | <sb...@ab...> | | | Sent by: | | | qui...@li...ur| | | ceforge.net | | | | | | | | | 08/23/2002 02:28 PM | | | | |---------+-----------------------------------------------> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: OM...@th... | | cc: <qui...@li...> | | Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Incorrect group information in FIX4*.xml files? | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| ----- Original Message ----- From: OM...@th... > Yeah, it looks like this is a parser error. We create these XML > specs off of the original specs, and the way messages and fields are > represented is very inconsistent all throughout. Hi Oren, Yes, I understand the challenges in parsing those documents. I don't know why the FIX Technical Committee doesn't publish the raw FIX message definitions as XML files. It would make many software developers' lives much easier. Did you consider parsing the "Fiximate" HTML pages instead? They may be more consistent in structure and they are available for 4.0 through 4.3. I also noticed that some of the message definitions in the XML files do not have all the fields described in the specification. In particular, the ListStatus message (in the FIX4.0 XML file) seems to stop at ClOrdID although there are several more fields after that one. This may be a related problem to the previous one (?). Steve ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 _______________________________________________ Quickfix-developers mailing list Qui...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 _______________________________________________ Quickfix-developers mailing list Qui...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers |
|
From: <OM...@th...> - 2002-08-23 20:35:46
|
Oh, another thing, I just realized that for FIX 4.3 they completely changed the Fiximate format. The old ones are xml while the new one is html. They look absolutely nothing alike. 4.3 is also the only one you can download as a ZIP (as opposed to hunting and pecking for individual files). This being the case I'm most inclined to write a Fiximate parser for 4.3, and just improve the old parser for the earlier versions. Since the older versions aren't going to change, it probably isn't worth it writing a whole new parser that can't be used for future versions. Thoughts? --oren |---------+-----------------------------------------------> | | <sb...@ab...> | | | Sent by: | | | qui...@li...ur| | | ceforge.net | | | | | | | | | 08/23/2002 02:28 PM | | | | |---------+-----------------------------------------------> >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: OM...@th... | | cc: <qui...@li...> | | Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Incorrect group information in FIX4*.xml files? | >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| ----- Original Message ----- From: OM...@th... > Yeah, it looks like this is a parser error. We create these XML > specs off of the original specs, and the way messages and fields are > represented is very inconsistent all throughout. Hi Oren, Yes, I understand the challenges in parsing those documents. I don't know why the FIX Technical Committee doesn't publish the raw FIX message definitions as XML files. It would make many software developers' lives much easier. Did you consider parsing the "Fiximate" HTML pages instead? They may be more consistent in structure and they are available for 4.0 through 4.3. I also noticed that some of the message definitions in the XML files do not have all the fields described in the specification. In particular, the ListStatus message (in the FIX4.0 XML file) seems to stop at ClOrdID although there are several more fields after that one. This may be a related problem to the previous one (?). Steve ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 _______________________________________________ Quickfix-developers mailing list Qui...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers |
|
From: <OM...@th...> - 2002-08-23 20:09:37
|
Steve, Fiximate is a strong possibility but it has some problems. We actually originally intended on using it. It suffers first of all from the problem of being spread accross many htmlish xml files. This makes things a little challenging but not insurmountable. Unfortunately, their listing of fields (http://www.fixprotocol.org/specification/xml/fiximate-40/fixtable.xml) is badly formatted and incomplete. All versions of fiximate suffer from this problem except it seems for 4.3. 4.3 has it's own issues however with the introduction of something they call component blocks. These are commonly used sets of fields that they list with links instead of directly within messages. For examples in execution report (http://www.fixprotocol.org/specification/xml/fiximate-43/) they reference many such component blocks. It seems to me that a smarter parser that can traverse links would be required. I think a good first approach would be to write a preprocessor that will iterate the files, and produce one concatenated xml file with the component blocks filled in. I think once we have that, writing a relatively simple xsl transform will be possible. By the way, do you how the fiximate files are created? I'd hate to go through all this trouble only to find out that it suffers from similar problems. (the problems with the fields definitions suggests this may be the case) --oren <sb...@ab...> To: OM...@th... 08/23/2002 02:28 cc: <qui...@li...> PM Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Incorrect group information in FIX4*.xml files? ----- Original Message ----- From: OM...@th... > Yeah, it looks like this is a parser error. We create these XML > specs off of the original specs, and the way messages and fields are > represented is very inconsistent all throughout. Hi Oren, Yes, I understand the challenges in parsing those documents. I don't know why the FIX Technical Committee doesn't publish the raw FIX message definitions as XML files. It would make many software developers' lives much easier. Did you consider parsing the "Fiximate" HTML pages instead? They may be more consistent in structure and they are available for 4.0 through 4.3. I also noticed that some of the message definitions in the XML files do not have all the fields described in the specification. In particular, the ListStatus message (in the FIX4.0 XML file) seems to stop at ClOrdID although there are several more fields after that one. This may be a related problem to the previous one (?). Steve |
|
From: <sb...@ab...> - 2002-08-23 19:28:24
|
----- Original Message ----- From: OM...@th... > Yeah, it looks like this is a parser error. We create these XML > specs off of the original specs, and the way messages and fields are > represented is very inconsistent all throughout. Hi Oren, Yes, I understand the challenges in parsing those documents. I don't know why the FIX Technical Committee doesn't publish the raw FIX message definitions as XML files. It would make many software developers' lives much easier. Did you consider parsing the "Fiximate" HTML pages instead? They may be more consistent in structure and they are available for 4.0 through 4.3. I also noticed that some of the message definitions in the XML files do not have all the fields described in the specification. In particular, the ListStatus message (in the FIX4.0 XML file) seems to stop at ClOrdID although there are several more fields after that one. This may be a related problem to the previous one (?). Steve |
|
From: <OM...@th...> - 2002-08-23 17:18:55
|
Steve, Yeah, it looks like this is a parser error. We create these XML specs off of the original specs, and the way messages and fields are represented is very inconsistent all throughout. FIX40 in particular was published as a word document (not even in HTML like 4.1 and 4.2). Most of these parsing problems have been found and eliminated, but they do show up occasionally. The required field should always be an 'N' or a 'Y'. It looks like the names of the fields that follow are somehow being interpreted as the required flag from the original document. This is something we will fix. Unfortunately for FIX4.3 they took 2 steps backward by not only publishing as a word document, but splitting it up into 7 seperate documents that all refer to each other. That make automatically parsing it painfull to say the least! Now if only the fix protocol organization would generate their HTML and Word docs off of our XML format.... --oren |---------+-----------------------------------------------> | | <sb...@ab...> | | | Sent by: | | | qui...@li...ur| | | ceforge.net | | | | | | | | | 08/23/2002 10:10 AM | | | | |---------+-----------------------------------------------> >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: qui...@li... | | cc: | | Subject: [Quickfix-developers] Incorrect group information in FIX4*.xml files? | >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| Hello, I am trying to use the FIX4*.xml files to generate some code. It appears that the group-related information is incorrect in the XML files. For example, in FIX40.xml the MiscFeeAmt and MiscFeeType "required" attributes contain fields that are unrelated to the group. I'm assuming the "required" attribute is intended to relate the fields to the NoMiscFees. Is that true or am I missing something? Regards, Steve Bate ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 _______________________________________________ Quickfix-developers mailing list Qui...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers |
|
From: <OM...@th...> - 2002-08-23 17:18:08
|
Quentin, I am unable to duplicate this over here. I am wondering if QuickFIX is rejecting some other message that you are not seeing. Can your provide more information such as what you are connecting to and where in your code you are printing these messages out? Unfortunately FIX4.0 doesn't have as many fields as 4.2 has for determining what message is being rejected. Even adding the field to the message is a proprietary extension. --oren |---------+-----------------------------------------------> | | que...@bn... | | | Sent by: | | | qui...@li...ur| | | ceforge.net | | | | | | | | | 08/22/2002 10:35 AM | | | | |---------+-----------------------------------------------> >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: qui...@li... | | cc: | | Subject: [Quickfix-developers] quickfix-developers ResendRequest | >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| Hello, I am using QuickFix 1.2.0 for one of my application. That work well. But I have some trouble with the ResendRequest When my Quickfix engine receive: 8=FIX.4.09=7335=249=EPTSERVEUR56=BEFSERVEUR34=952=20020822-13:47:027=116=99999910=190 The reply is that the tag 34 is missing: 8=FIX.4.09=9335=334=949=BEFSERVEUR52=20020822-15:11:3456=EPTSERVEUR45=958=Required tag missing (34)10=056 But the tag 34 is not missing ! Thanks if you can give me your advice, Cheers, Quentin. This message and any attachments (the "message") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. --------------------------------------------- Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le "message") sont etablis a l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous recevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir immediatement l'expediteur. Toute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute diffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf autorisation expresse. L'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS (et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, dans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 _______________________________________________ Quickfix-developers mailing list Qui...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers |
|
From: <sb...@ab...> - 2002-08-23 15:10:44
|
Hello, I am trying to use the FIX4*.xml files to generate some code. It appears that the group-related information is incorrect in the XML files. For example, in FIX40.xml the MiscFeeAmt and MiscFeeType "required" attributes contain fields that are unrelated to the group. I'm assuming the "required" attribute is intended to relate the fields to the NoMiscFees. Is that true or am I missing something? Regards, Steve Bate |
|
From: <que...@bn...> - 2002-08-22 15:32:42
|
Hello,
I am using QuickFix 1.2.0 for one of my application. That work well.
But I have some trouble with the ResendRequest
When my Quickfix engine receive:
8=FIX.4.09=7335=249=EPTSERVEUR56=BEFSERVEUR34=952=20020822-13:47:027=116=99999910=190
The reply is that the tag 34 is missing:
8=FIX.4.09=9335=334=949=BEFSERVEUR52=20020822-15:11:3456=EPTSERVEUR45=958=Required
tag missing (34)10=056
But the tag 34 is not missing !
Thanks if you can give me your advice,
Cheers,
Quentin.
This message and any attachments (the "message") is
intended solely for the addressees and is confidential.
If you receive this message in error, please delete it and
immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with
its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole
or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet
can not guarantee the integrity of this message.
BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not
therefore be liable for the message if modified.
---------------------------------------------
Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le
"message") sont etablis a l'intention exclusive de ses
destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous recevez ce
message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir
immediatement l'expediteur. Toute utilisation de ce
message non conforme a sa destination, toute diffusion
ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf
autorisation expresse. L'internet ne permettant pas
d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS (et ses
filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce
message, dans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie.
|
|
From: <OM...@th...> - 2002-08-22 01:11:14
|
Version 1.2.1, is now available from http://quickfix.thoughtworks.com. This is a minor release. Notes are below. 1.2.1 ----- config.h no longer included from Utility.h. This was causing problems when people wanted to build quickfix application without autotools. More robust detection of dropped/bad sockets. One of our users ran into a problem with this during certification with the CME. He has confirmed that it works correctly now. Closing acceptors now works in all situations. Mutex locking in session is a little smarter, making it easier to syncrhonize applications. code is now auto formatted with astyle. This makes it easier for people to contribute code without having to worry as much about conforming to coding standards. --oren |
|
From: <JDD...@th...> - 2002-08-15 16:07:07
|
Unix QuickFIX depends on the autotools set (automake, autoconf, and libtool) to accomplish its job. Writing a Unix QuickFIX application will require either utilizing these tools or substituting for them in certain ways. For example, the config.h that is produced by configure in the initial compile and install of the library is sufficient for compiling derived applications, so you do not technically need to use autoconf to produce it. Similarly, the approaches libtool uses to link applications can be duplicated by directly using the shell commands it produces. You would do well to read up on these tools. http://www.gnu.org/directory/Software_development/Program_build_automation/autoconf.html http://www.gnu.org/directory/Software_development/Program_build_automation/automake.html http://www.gnu.org/directory/Software_Libraries/libtool.html There is also a free online book http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/ Hope all this helps John Duncan Collaborative Development Group Thoughtworks, Inc +1 (312) 953 6286 "saw" <s....@gm...> To: <JDD...@th...> cc: <qui...@li...> 08/15/2002 10:03 Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] config.h missing ? AM Hello, seems the answer i sent yesterday was beamed away. Lets try again : Thanks John for your quick answer. In fact I compiled and installed quickfix itself without any problems. AWhat I try to compile now is a few lines of test code which only includes the quickfix headers : #include "quickfix/include/FileStore.h" #include "quickfix/include/SocketInitiator.h" #include "quickfix/include/SessionSettings.h" #include <stdio.h> int main() { printf("foo\n"); return 1; } Trying to compile this it ends up in error messages about missing config.h file. What configure script do you ment to run ? I cant see the forrest for the trees. kind regards ----- Original Message ----- From: <JDD...@th...> To: <s....@gm...> Cc: <qui...@li...> Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 11:44 PM Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] config.h missing ? > > It looks like you didn't do the './configure; make' thing. You need to run > configure. > > John Duncan > Collaborative Development Group > Thoughtworks, Inc > +1 (312) 953 6286 > > > > s....@gm... > Sent by: To: qui...@li... > qui...@li...ur cc: > ceforge.net Subject: [Quickfix-developers] config.h missing ? > > > 08/14/2002 04:27 PM > > > > > > > Hello quickfix list, > > i compiled quickfix successfully. but when i tried to compile > some code i always get : > > quicktest.cpp:4: config.h: No such file or directory > In file included from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Mutex.h:54, > from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Application.h:56, > from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Session.h:63, > from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Initiator.h:59, > from > /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/SocketInitiator.h:58, > from quicktest.cpp:9: > /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Utility.h:64: config.h: No such file or > directory > make: *** [quicktest.o] Error 1 > > > as you can easily see that i dont have much clue about C/C++, i hope > someone > can help me out of this little mess. > and sorry in advance for bothering you with this newbie questions :) > > -- > GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet. > http://www.gmx.net > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by: Dice - The leading online job board > for high-tech professionals. Search and apply for tech jobs today! > http://seeker.dice.com/seeker.epl?rel_code=31 > _______________________________________________ > Quickfix-developers mailing list > Qui...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by: Dice - The leading online job board > for high-tech professionals. Search and apply for tech jobs today! > http://seeker.dice.com/seeker.epl?rel_code=31 > _______________________________________________ > Quickfix-developers mailing list > Qui...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers > |
|
From: saw <s....@gm...> - 2002-08-15 15:04:02
|
Hello,
seems the answer i sent yesterday was beamed away. Lets try again :
Thanks John for your quick answer. In fact I compiled and installed quickfix
itself without any problems.
AWhat I try to compile now is a few lines of test code which only includes
the quickfix headers :
#include "quickfix/include/FileStore.h"
#include "quickfix/include/SocketInitiator.h"
#include "quickfix/include/SessionSettings.h"
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
printf("foo\n");
return 1;
}
Trying to compile this it ends up in error messages about missing config.h
file.
What configure script do you ment to run ? I cant see the forrest for the
trees.
kind regards
----- Original Message -----
From: <JDD...@th...>
To: <s....@gm...>
Cc: <qui...@li...>
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 11:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] config.h missing ?
>
> It looks like you didn't do the './configure; make' thing. You need to run
> configure.
>
> John Duncan
> Collaborative Development Group
> Thoughtworks, Inc
> +1 (312) 953 6286
>
>
>
> s....@gm...
> Sent by: To:
qui...@li...
> qui...@li...ur cc:
> ceforge.net Subject:
[Quickfix-developers] config.h missing ?
>
>
> 08/14/2002 04:27 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hello quickfix list,
>
> i compiled quickfix successfully. but when i tried to compile
> some code i always get :
>
> quicktest.cpp:4: config.h: No such file or directory
> In file included from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Mutex.h:54,
> from
/usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Application.h:56,
> from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Session.h:63,
> from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Initiator.h:59,
> from
> /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/SocketInitiator.h:58,
> from quicktest.cpp:9:
> /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Utility.h:64: config.h: No such file
or
> directory
> make: *** [quicktest.o] Error 1
>
>
> as you can easily see that i dont have much clue about C/C++, i hope
> someone
> can help me out of this little mess.
> and sorry in advance for bothering you with this newbie questions :)
>
> --
> GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet.
> http://www.gmx.net
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by: Dice - The leading online job board
> for high-tech professionals. Search and apply for tech jobs today!
> http://seeker.dice.com/seeker.epl?rel_code=31
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfix-developers mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by: Dice - The leading online job board
> for high-tech professionals. Search and apply for tech jobs today!
> http://seeker.dice.com/seeker.epl?rel_code=31
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfix-developers mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers
>
|
|
From: <s....@gm...> - 2002-08-14 22:31:49
|
Thanks for your fast answer, John.
I dont see the point. which configure should i run ? quickfix is already
installed fine. (./configure && make && make install - which was not showing up
any errors)
what i do now is just a few lines of code like :
#include "quickfix/include/FileStore.h"
#include "quickfix/include/SocketInitiator.h"
#include "quickfix/include/SessionSettings.h"
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
printf("foo\n");
return 1;
}
and trying to compile this shows the error.
i tried it on a solaris and on a linux machine - same for both.
thanks in advance
--
GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet.
http://www.gmx.net
|
|
From: <JDD...@th...> - 2002-08-14 21:46:30
|
It looks like you didn't do the './configure; make' thing. You need to run
configure.
John Duncan
Collaborative Development Group
Thoughtworks, Inc
+1 (312) 953 6286
s....@gm...
Sent by: To: qui...@li...
qui...@li...ur cc:
ceforge.net Subject: [Quickfix-developers] config.h missing ?
08/14/2002 04:27 PM
Hello quickfix list,
i compiled quickfix successfully. but when i tried to compile
some code i always get :
quicktest.cpp:4: config.h: No such file or directory
In file included from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Mutex.h:54,
from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Application.h:56,
from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Session.h:63,
from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Initiator.h:59,
from
/usr/local/include/quickfix/include/SocketInitiator.h:58,
from quicktest.cpp:9:
/usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Utility.h:64: config.h: No such file or
directory
make: *** [quicktest.o] Error 1
as you can easily see that i dont have much clue about C/C++, i hope
someone
can help me out of this little mess.
and sorry in advance for bothering you with this newbie questions :)
--
GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet.
http://www.gmx.net
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by: Dice - The leading online job board
for high-tech professionals. Search and apply for tech jobs today!
http://seeker.dice.com/seeker.epl?rel_code=31
_______________________________________________
Quickfix-developers mailing list
Qui...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers
|
|
From: <s....@gm...> - 2002-08-14 21:27:43
|
Hello quickfix list,
i compiled quickfix successfully. but when i tried to compile
some code i always get :
quicktest.cpp:4: config.h: No such file or directory
In file included from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Mutex.h:54,
from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Application.h:56,
from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Session.h:63,
from /usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Initiator.h:59,
from
/usr/local/include/quickfix/include/SocketInitiator.h:58,
from quicktest.cpp:9:
/usr/local/include/quickfix/include/Utility.h:64: config.h: No such file or
directory
make: *** [quicktest.o] Error 1
as you can easily see that i dont have much clue about C/C++, i hope someone
can help me out of this little mess.
and sorry in advance for bothering you with this newbie questions :)
--
GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet.
http://www.gmx.net
|
|
From: <OM...@th...> - 2002-08-12 14:39:06
|
Pramod,
Very helpful. It looks like SunGuard is not generating this message qu=
ite
correctly. If you look at the logon they are sending, it contains a
repeating group as such:
384=3D92=0135=3DA=01385=3DR=0135=3DA=01385=3DS=0135=3D0=01385=3DR=0135=3D=
0=01385=3DS=0135=3D1=01385=3DR=01...
Field 384 is the begining of the repeating group saying that there are =
92
repeating instances. The message than goes on to list the message type=
s
the application supports and their directions. The problem is that the=
y
are using field 35 (MsgType) to convey the supported message types wher=
as
the FIX spec requires that field 372 (RefMsgType) be used. QuickFIX is=
therefore rejecting the message as invalid. You might want to write to=
sunguard and let them know that in future versions they may want to sta=
rt
using field 372 in accordance with the spec (or you can probably just
forward this to them)
In the meantime, QuickFIX can support receiving these messages. All yo=
u
need to do is modify the XML data dictionary that QuickFIX uses for
SunGuard connections to reflect their proprietary variation of this
message. In FIX42.xml you can simply change the following section:
<group number=3D"384" name=3D"NoMsgTypes">
<field number=3D"372" name=3D"RefMsgType" required=3D"N" />
<field number=3D"385" name=3D"MsgDirection" required=3D"N" />
</group>
to look like this:
<group number=3D"384" name=3D"NoMsgTypes">
<field number=3D"35" name=3D"MsgType" required=3D"N" />
<field number=3D"385" name=3D"MsgDirection" required=3D"N" />
</group>
I hope this resolves your QuickFIX<->SunGuard connectivity issues while=
using long logon messages. Give my best to the folks at SunGuard.
--oren
|---------+----------------------------------->
| | "Pramod.S.Warrier" |
| | @THOUGHTWORKS_COM |
| | Sent by: |
| | pramod@THOUGHTWORKS_COM |
| | |
| | |
| | 08/12/2002 09:14 AM |
| | |
|---------+----------------------------------->
>--------------------------------------------------------------------=
----------------------------------------------------------|
| =
|
| To: OM...@th... =
|
| cc: PJS...@Th..., quickfix-developers@lis=
ts.sourceforge.net, |
| qui...@li... =
|
| Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Problem inSendingandReci=
evingmessagesusingQuickFIX |
>--------------------------------------------------------------------=
----------------------------------------------------------|
Hi,
I have attached the log file that was generated by the Sun=
Gard
Acceptor that I am using. In the log file, the logon message sent by
them contains the list of message types that are accepted by the
SunGard Engine.
Thanks and Regards,
Pramod.
OM...@th... wrote:
>
> Ah ok. There is no reason that I can think of that QuickFIX should h=
ave
a
> problem with those messages, but adding an explicit test case will te=
ll
us
> for sure. Is it possible for you to send us the message that Sunguar=
d is
> generating for the long logon? If so we can plug that message straigh=
t
into
> our test suite and make sure that we are supporting it properly.
>
> --oren
>2002-08-12 13:20:22.654 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> SUNGARD FIX Engine vers=
ion
4.5 - SunGard 2002 Copyright (c)
2002-08-12 13:20:22.654 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> Expires on 2002-12-31
2002-08-12 13:20:22.724 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # The setup parameters f=
or
this session :
2002-08-12 13:20:22.724 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> #
---------------------------------------
2002-08-12 13:20:22.734 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # MODE =3D STORE_AND_FOR=
WARD
2002-08-12 13:20:22.734 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # SESSION_ID =3D
ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET
2002-08-12 13:20:22.734 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # SENDER_COMP_ID =3D ACC=
EPTOR
2002-08-12 13:20:22.734 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # TARGET_COMP_ID =3D QFT=
ARGET
2002-08-12 13:20:22.734 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # FIX_VERSION =3D FIX.4.=
2
2002-08-12 13:20:22.734 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # LOG_FILE_LEVEL =3D 3
2002-08-12 13:20:22.734 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # LOG_AUTO_FLUSH =3D 1
2002-08-12 13:20:22.744 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # PTP_LATENCY =3D 5
2002-08-12 13:20:22.744 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # PTP_TIME_OUT =3D 50
2002-08-12 13:20:22.744 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # PTP_CONNECTION =3D TCP=
Server
2002-08-12 13:20:22.744 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # TCP_PORT =3D 9000
2002-08-12 13:20:22.744 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # ON_UNKNOWN_REJECT =3D =
CLOSE
2002-08-12 13:20:22.754 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # STORAGE_TYPE =3D FILE
2002-08-12 13:20:22.754 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # RMI_HOST =3D 127.0.0.1=
2002-08-12 13:20:22.754 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # RMI_PORT =3D 9999
2002-08-12 13:20:22.754 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # OPERATOR_LOG_BUFFER =3D=
0
2002-08-12 13:20:22.754 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # OPERATOR_LOG_REFRESH =3D=
0
2002-08-12 13:20:22.754 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # MSG_TYPES_SUPPORT_SEND=
=3D
ALL
2002-08-12 13:20:22.754 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # MSG_TYPES_SUPPORT_RECE=
IVE
=3D ALL
2002-08-12 13:20:22.754 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # SET_CMD =3D set
2002-08-12 13:20:22.754 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # HEARTBT_INT =3D 60
2002-08-12 13:20:22.754 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # RESTORE_TIMEOUT =3D 10=
2002-08-12 13:20:22.764 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # POST_LOGIN_TIMEOUT =3D=
10
2002-08-12 13:20:22.764 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # IN_SYNC_TIMEOUT =3D 25=
2002-08-12 13:20:22.764 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # IN_EOD_TIMEOUT =3D 10
2002-08-12 13:20:22.774 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # ENCRYPT_METHOD =3D 0
2002-08-12 13:20:22.774 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # ENC_FILE_NAME =3D
ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET_logon.txt
2002-08-12 13:20:22.774 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # IN_SEQ_NUM_NAME =3D
ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET_IN
2002-08-12 13:20:22.774 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # OUT_SEQ_NUM_NAME =3D
ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET_OUT
2002-08-12 13:20:22.784 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # WORK_DIRECTORY =3D .
\Acceptor\
2002-08-12 13:20:22.784 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # OUTGOING_DBS_NAME =3D
ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET_OUT
2002-08-12 13:20:22.784 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # HEARTBT_LATENCY =3D 5
2002-08-12 13:20:22.794 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # LOGON_INITIATOR =3D tr=
ue
2002-08-12 13:20:22.794 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # LAST_EOD_PERFORMED_NAM=
E =3D
ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET_LAST_EOD_PERFORMED
2002-08-12 13:20:22.794 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # IN_EOD_NAME =3D
ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET_IN_EOD
2002-08-12 13:20:22.794 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # EOD_SENT_NAME =3D
ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET_EOD_SENT
2002-08-12 13:20:22.794 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # EOD_RECEIVED_NAME =3D
ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET_EOD_RECEIVED
2002-08-12 13:20:22.794 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # RECONNECT_COUNT =3D 3
2002-08-12 13:20:22.794 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # SUPPORT_ROLE =3D true
2002-08-12 13:20:22.794 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> # End of the setup
parameters for this session.
2002-08-12 13:20:22.794 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> #
---------------------------------------------
2002-08-12 13:20:22.854 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> FIX formatter created
[FixFormatter version: FIX.4.2]
2002-08-12 13:20:22.944 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> PTP connection created
[TCP/IP-Server(null:9000)]
2002-08-12 13:20:23.115 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> Encryption Factory creat=
ed
[No Encryption [0]]
2002-08-12 13:20:23.155 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> Registering RMI service
Operator/FIXSession/ACCEPTOR/QFTARGET ...
2002-08-12 13:20:23.155 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> RMI service
Operator/FIXSession/ACCEPTOR/QFTARGET is ready.
2002-08-12 13:20:23.175 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> FIX Engine ACCEPTOR_QFTA=
RGET
created successfully.
2002-08-12 13:20:23.205 -1- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> Clear PTP: cleared PTP
incoming queue, stopped outgoing queue dispatcher and cleared outgoing =
PTP
queue.
2002-08-12 13:20:23.205 -0- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> FIX Engine started...
2002-08-12 13:20:24.597 -2- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> APPL request to open
connection.
2002-08-12 13:20:24.617 -1- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> Fix state changed from
Closed to InConnect. Reason: API REQUEST [0] Open
2002-08-12 13:20:24.627 -1- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> Clear PTP: cleared PTP
incoming queue, stopped outgoing queue dispatcher and cleared outgoing =
PTP
queue.
2002-08-12 13:20:24.627 -1- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> Trying to open PTP
communication.
2002-08-12 13:20:24.647 -2- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> API state changed from:
CLOSED to: CONNECTING
2002-08-12 13:20:24.897 -1- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> Fix state changed from
InConnect to InLogin. Reason: PARTNER REQUEST [1] Opened PTP connectio=
n
successfully
2002-08-12 13:20:24.917 -3- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> Received message from PT=
P
with sequence number greater than expected. 8=3DFIX.4.2=019=3D67=0135=3D=
A=0134=3D2=01
49=3DQFTARGET=0152=3D20020812-13:20:14=0156=3DACCEPTOR=0198=3D0=01108=3D=
60=0110=3D224=01
2002-08-12 13:20:24.967 -1- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> sent Login message in
response to Login received. 35=3DA=0149=3DACCEPTOR=0156=3DQFTARGET=0134=
=3D1=01
52=3D20020812-07:50:24.927=0198=3D0=01108=3D60=01384=3D92=0135=3DA=0138=
5=3DR=0135=3DA=01385=3DS=0135=3D0=01
385=3DR=0135=3D0=01385=3DS=0135=3D1=01385=3DR=0135=3D1=01385=3DS=0135=3D=
2=01385=3DR=0135=3D2=01385=3DS=0135=3D3=01385=3DR=01
35=3D3=01385=3DS=0135=3D4=01385=3DR=0135=3D4=01385=3DS=0135=3D5=01385=3D=
R=0135=3D5=01385=3DS=0135=3D6=01385=3DS=0135=3D7=01
385=3DS=0135=3D8=01385=3DS=0135=3D9=01385=3DS=0135=3DB=01385=3DS=0135=3D=
C=01385=3DS=0135=3DD=01385=3DS=0135=3DE=01385=3DS=01
35=3DF=01385=3DS=0135=3DG=01385=3DS=0135=3DH=01385=3DS=0135=3DJ=01385=3D=
S=0135=3DK=01385=3DS=0135=3DL=01385=3DS=0135=3DM=01
385=3DS=0135=3DN=01385=3DS=0135=3DP=01385=3DS=0135=3DQ=01385=3DS=0135=3D=
R=01385=3DS=0135=3DS=01385=3DS=0135=3DT=01385=3DS=01
35=3DV=01385=3DS=0135=3DW=01385=3DS=0135=3DX=01385=3DS=0135=3DY=01385=3D=
S=0135=3DZ=01385=3DS=0135=3Da=01385=3DS=0135=3Db=01
385=3DS=0135=3Dc=01385=3DS=0135=3Dd=01385=3DS=0135=3De=01385=3DS=0135=3D=
f=01385=3DS=0135=3Dg=01385=3DS=0135=3Dh=01385=3DS=01
35=3Di=01385=3DS=0135=3Dj=01385=3DS=0135=3Dk=01385=3DS=0135=3Dl=01385=3D=
S=0135=3Dm=01385=3DS=0135=3D6=01385=3DR=0135=3D7=01
385=3DR=0135=3D8=01385=3DR=0135=3D9=01385=3DR=0135=3DB=01385=3DR=0135=3D=
C=01385=3DR=0135=3DD=01385=3DR=0135=3DE=01385=3DR=01
35=3DF=01385=3DR=0135=3DG=01385=3DR=0135=3DH=01385=3DR=0135=3DJ=01385=3D=
R=0135=3DK=01385=3DR=0135=3DL=01385=3DR=0135=3DM=01
385=3DR=0135=3DN=01385=3DR=0135=3DP=01385=3DR=0135=3DQ=01385=3DR=0135=3D=
R=01385=3DR=0135=3DS=01385=3DR=0135=3DT=01385=3DR=01
35=3DV=01385=3DR=0135=3DW=01385=3DR=0135=3DX=01385=3DR=0135=3DY=01385=3D=
R=0135=3DZ=01385=3DR=0135=3Da=01385=3DR=0135=3Db=01
385=3DR=0135=3Dc=01385=3DR=0135=3Dd=01385=3DR=0135=3De=01385=3DR=0135=3D=
f=01385=3DR=0135=3Dg=01385=3DR=0135=3Dh=01385=3DR=01
35=3Di=01385=3DR=0135=3Dj=01385=3DR=0135=3Dk=01385=3DR=0135=3Dl=01385=3D=
R=0135=3Dm=01385=3DR=01
2002-08-12 13:20:24.977 -1- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> Fix state changed from
InLogin to PostLogin. Reason: PARTNER REQUEST [1] Received logon messa=
ge
2002-08-12 13:20:24.987 -1- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> saved message received o=
n
incoming PTP queue for later use.
2002-08-12 13:20:25.007 -1- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> sent ResendRequest messa=
ge.
35=3D2=0149=3DACCEPTOR=0156=3DQFTARGET=0134=3D2=0152=3D20020812-07:50:2=
4.987=017=3D1=0116=3D1=01
2002-08-12 13:20:25.007 -1- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> Starting Restore Timer u=
ntil
sequence number 1 is received.
2002-08-12 13:20:25.518 -1- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> Fix state changed from
PostLogin to InConnect. Reason: COMMUNICATION PROBLEM [6] PTP
communication closed while in an open communication state.
2002-08-12 13:20:25.518 -1- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> Stopped RestoreState tim=
er.
2002-08-12 13:20:25.628 -1- ACCEPTOR_QFTARGET> Clear PTP: cleared PTP
incoming queue, stopped outgoing queue dispatcher and cleared outgoing =
PTP
queue.
(See attached file: pwarrier.vcf)
=
|
|
From: Pramod.S.Warrier <pwa...@in...> - 2002-08-12 14:14:48
|
Hi, I have attached the log file that was generated by the SunGard Acceptor that I am using. In the log file, the logon message sent by them contains the list of message types that are accepted by the SunGard Engine. Thanks and Regards, Pramod. OM...@th... wrote: > > Ah ok. There is no reason that I can think of that QuickFIX should have a > problem with those messages, but adding an explicit test case will tell us > for sure. Is it possible for you to send us the message that Sunguard is > generating for the long logon? If so we can plug that message straight into > our test suite and make sure that we are supporting it properly. > > --oren > |
|
From: <OM...@th...> - 2002-08-12 13:09:00
|
Ah ok. There is no reason that I can think of that QuickFIX should have a
problem with those messages, but adding an explicit test case will tell us
for sure. Is it possible for you to send us the message that Sunguard is
generating for the long logon? If so we can plug that message straight into
our test suite and make sure that we are supporting it properly.
--oren
|---------+----------------------------------->
| | "Pramod.S.Warrier" |
| | @THOUGHTWORKS_COM |
| | Sent by: |
| | pramod@THOUGHTWORKS_COM |
| | |
| | |
| | 08/10/2002 12:23 AM |
| | |
|---------+----------------------------------->
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| |
| To: OM...@th... |
| cc: PJS...@Th..., qui...@li..., |
| qui...@li... |
| Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Problem in SendingandRecievingmessagesusingQuickFIX |
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Hi,
I have got the reply from the SunGard support team regarding
the long
logon message. Following are the lines from mail that i received from
them.
"As for the long logon message. You can find its definition in
the
FIX
4.2 logon message definition. It is not mentioned as "long" logon, but
it contains an optional list of message types that are supported. When
using these optional fields, you get a logon message. When you don't,
the logon message is short."
I hope your query has been solved and I would really like to
know if
this could be the problem in communicating between the SunGard and
QuickFix Engine? Doesn't the QuickFix support Logon message with
optional fields included ?
Thanks and Regards,
Pramod.
OM...@th... wrote:
>
> Hmmm. I have to say I do not know what they are refering to, and I don't
> see that terminology anywhere in the spec. Is it possible you can get
some
> clarification from SunGuard on what that is? If you could also provide a
> sample of such a message that would be extremely useful as well.
>
> --oren
>(See attached file: pwarrier.vcf)
|
|
From: Pramod.S.Warrier <pwa...@in...> - 2002-08-10 05:23:20
|
Hi, I have got the reply from the SunGard support team regarding the long logon message. Following are the lines from mail that i received from them. "As for the long logon message. You can find its definition in the FIX 4.2 logon message definition. It is not mentioned as "long" logon, but it contains an optional list of message types that are supported. When using these optional fields, you get a logon message. When you don't, the logon message is short." I hope your query has been solved and I would really like to know if this could be the problem in communicating between the SunGard and QuickFix Engine? Doesn't the QuickFix support Logon message with optional fields included ? Thanks and Regards, Pramod. OM...@th... wrote: > > Hmmm. I have to say I do not know what they are refering to, and I don't > see that terminology anywhere in the spec. Is it possible you can get some > clarification from SunGuard on what that is? If you could also provide a > sample of such a message that would be extremely useful as well. > > --oren > |
|
From: <OM...@th...> - 2002-08-08 19:32:50
|
Version 1.2.0, is now available from http://quickfix.thoughtworks.com. The biggest addition to this version is that we now have a .NET API. Also the documentation now covers how to write applications in java and .NET (using C# for examples). Release notes are below. 1.2.0 ----- First release of .NET API for QuickFIX. The API is mostly a direct port of the JAVA API, future versions well attempt to refine this API to use more .NET specific constructs. QuickFIX applications can now be written in C# or VB.NET or any other CLR language. Documentation covers all API's, C++, Java, and .NET New example application executor. Executor example is implemented in C++, Java and C# for side by side comparison. Fixed bug where the session time range was not calculated correctly when minutes or seconds were involved. (.i.e., is that start time was set to 12:30:00, the 30 would cause problems, wheras 12:00:00 would be fine). Resend requests with EndSeqNo set to 0 (>=FIX 4.2) or 999999 (<=FIX 4.1) are now supported. Possible duplicate messages with a sequence number that is too low will no longer be forwarded to the application callback. FIX Specification parser modified so it will now capture some fields that it was missing. The FIX42.xml file in particular is more complete. Made Java API more consistant with C++ API. --oren |
|
From: <OM...@th...> - 2002-08-07 12:12:21
|
Hmmm. I have to say I do not know what they are refering to, and I don't see that terminology anywhere in the spec. Is it possible you can get some clarification from SunGuard on what that is? If you could also provide a sample of such a message that would be extremely useful as well. --oren |---------+-----------------------------------------------> | | "Pramod.S.Warrier" | | | <pwa...@in...> | | | Sent by: | | | qui...@li...ur| | | ceforge.net | | | | | | | | | 08/07/2002 04:45 AM | | | | |---------+-----------------------------------------------> >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: OM...@th... | | cc: PJS...@Th..., qui...@li..., | | qui...@li... | | Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Problem in Sending | | andRecievingmessagesusingQuickFIX | >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| Hi, The communication problem of SunGard FIX Engine and QuickFix is solved using a configuration option of SunGard Engine. According to SunGard support, QuickFix (client) is not able to accept long logon message. I'm not clear on this. Following are the lines from their mail : It seems that your FIX client cannot accept long logon messages, and stops communication because of that --- even though long logon messages are part of the FIX 4.2 protocol. To suppress the long logon message, add SUPPORT_ROLE=N to the configuration file. Can anyone help me with these long logon messages? Thanks and Regards, Pramod. (See attached file: pwarrier.vcf) |
|
From: Pramod.S.Warrier <pwa...@in...> - 2002-08-07 09:46:12
|
Hi,
The communication problem of SunGard FIX Engine and QuickFix is solved using a configuration option of SunGard Engine. According to
SunGard support, QuickFix (client) is not able to accept long logon message. I'm not clear on this. Following are the lines from their
mail :
It seems that your FIX client cannot accept long logon messages, and stops communication because of that --- even though long logon
messages are part of the FIX 4.2 protocol.
To suppress the long logon message, add SUPPORT_ROLE=N to the configuration file.
Can anyone help me with these long logon messages?
Thanks and Regards,
Pramod.
|
98 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
