quickfix-developers

RE: [Quickfix-developers] Fix Log Reader

[Miller, O. <OM...@ri...>]

This can be done with some modification.  In C++ this is already
possible since the constructor for Message takes in a DataDictionary
which it can use to parse messages with repeating groups.  What we need
to do is wrap the data dictionary with a managed C++ class and allow it
to be passed into the .NET Message constructor, then the message can
parse properly.

--oren

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Kulseth [mailto:ro...@ri...]=20
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 8:25 AM
To: qui...@li...
Subject: [Quickfix-developers] Fix Log Reader

I am using C# trying to build an application that can read a FIX message
log and present it in a more readable format in order to debug certin
application level errors.  I have used the QuickFix.Message class to
parse simple messages, however any message with repeating groups throws
an invalid message exception.  I gather that the problem is that the
Message(string) constructor isn't able to handle parsing repeating
groups unless I somehow attach the Fix spec XML file or use some sort of
specialized parser.  Is this possible with QuickFix, or should I look
elsewhere?  Is the only option building my own parser?


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn
_______________________________________________
Quickfix-developers mailing list
Qui...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers

Re: [Quickfix-developers] Fix Log Reader

[Miller, O. <OM...@ri...>]

Yes, of course it can be done.  It's just harder.  :)

--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld


-----Original Message-----
From: Joerg Thoennes <Joe...@ma...>
To: Miller, Oren <OM...@ri...>
CC: Rob Kulseth <ro...@ri...>; =
qui...@li... =
<qui...@li...>
Sent: Mon Feb 02 04:12:27 2004
Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Fix Log Reader

Miller, Oren wrote:
> This can be done with some modification.  In C++ this is already
> possible since the constructor for Message takes in a DataDictionary
> which it can use to parse messages with repeating groups.  What we =
need
> to do is wrap the data dictionary with a managed C++ class and allow =
it
> to be passed into the .NET Message constructor, then the message can
> parse properly.

Oren, I think this should be added to the Java API in the same way. Or=20
is there already that possibility?

J=F6rg

> --oren
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Kulseth [mailto:ro...@ri...]=20
> Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 8:25 AM
> To: qui...@li...
> Subject: [Quickfix-developers] Fix Log Reader
>=20
> I am using C# trying to build an application that can read a FIX =
message
> log and present it in a more readable format in order to debug certin
> application level errors.  I have used the QuickFix.Message class to
> parse simple messages, however any message with repeating groups =
throws
> an invalid message exception.  I gather that the problem is that the
> Message(string) constructor isn't able to handle parsing repeating
> groups unless I somehow attach the Fix spec XML file or use some sort =
of
> specialized parser.  Is this possible with QuickFix, or should I look
> elsewhere?  Is the only option building my own parser?

Re: [Quickfix-developers] Fix Log Reader

[Joerg T. <Joe...@ma...>]

Miller, Oren wrote:
> Yes, of course it can be done.  It's just harder.  :)

Oren, what I actually wanted to ask you is "please, do not forget Java."
I am afraid I am still not fit enough to do it myself since I am still 
lacking time to spent on QuickFIX.  Is it possible to guess from .NET 
changes what to do for Java?

BTW, what are your plans for releasing 1.7?  Is it still possible to add 
some stuff; I think about the issue "Sending new message while resending 
  to INFINITY"?

Cheers, Jörg

RE: [Quickfix-developers] Fix Log Reader

[Miller, O. <OM...@ri...>]

I've already taken care of it.  It wasn't that bad it's just that JNI =
isn't nearly as easy to work with as managed C++.

We are going to be releasing version 1.7 in conjunction with a newly =
designed website being put together by Anne Lewis, a great designer over =
at ThoughtWorks.

A fix for that can still be added.  For now it will be one that simply =
solves the problem in the simplest manner which will be to just lock the =
session mutex during resends.  Future versions we may revisit some of =
the longer term solutions proposed such as adding a proper send queue.

--oren

-----Original Message-----
From: Joerg Thoennes [mailto:Joe...@ma...]=20
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 6:21 AM
To: Miller, Oren
Cc: ro...@ri...; qui...@li...
Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Fix Log Reader

Miller, Oren wrote:
> Yes, of course it can be done.  It's just harder.  :)

Oren, what I actually wanted to ask you is "please, do not forget Java."
I am afraid I am still not fit enough to do it myself since I am still=20
lacking time to spent on QuickFIX.  Is it possible to guess from .NET=20
changes what to do for Java?

BTW, what are your plans for releasing 1.7?  Is it still possible to add =

some stuff; I think about the issue "Sending new message while resending =

  to INFINITY"?

Cheers, J=F6rg

RE: [Quickfix-developers] Fix Log Reader

[James C. D. <jc...@co...>]

Joerg,
What are the specifics of the "Sending new message while resending to
INFINITY" issue? Id possible I would like to create an acceptance test =
for
it.

Jim
=20
James C. Downs
Connamara Systems, LLC
53 W. Jackson Blvd
Suite 1627
Chicago, IL 60604
312 - 282 - 7746
www.connamara.com

-----Original Message-----
From: qui...@li...
[mailto:qui...@li...] On Behalf Of
Miller, Oren
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 3:43 PM
To: Joerg Thoennes
Cc: ro...@ri...; qui...@li...
Subject: RE: [Quickfix-developers] Fix Log Reader

I've already taken care of it.  It wasn't that bad it's just that JNI =
isn't
nearly as easy to work with as managed C++.

We are going to be releasing version 1.7 in conjunction with a newly
designed website being put together by Anne Lewis, a great designer over =
at
ThoughtWorks.

A fix for that can still be added.  For now it will be one that simply
solves the problem in the simplest manner which will be to just lock the
session mutex during resends.  Future versions we may revisit some of =
the
longer term solutions proposed such as adding a proper send queue.

--oren

-----Original Message-----
From: Joerg Thoennes [mailto:Joe...@ma...]
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 6:21 AM
To: Miller, Oren
Cc: ro...@ri...; qui...@li...
Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] Fix Log Reader

Miller, Oren wrote:
> Yes, of course it can be done.  It's just harder.  :)

Oren, what I actually wanted to ask you is "please, do not forget Java."
I am afraid I am still not fit enough to do it myself since I am still
lacking time to spent on QuickFIX.  Is it possible to guess from .NET
changes what to do for Java?

BTW, what are your plans for releasing 1.7?  Is it still possible to add
some stuff; I think about the issue "Sending new message while resending
  to INFINITY"?

Cheers, J=F6rg


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on =
Open
Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity.
February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn
_______________________________________________
Quickfix-developers mailing list
Qui...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers

Re: [Quickfix-developers] Fix Log Reader

[Joerg T. <Joe...@ma...>]

Hi Jim,

thanks for offering your help!

> What are the specifics of the "Sending new message while resending to
> INFINITY" issue? Id possible I would like to create an acceptance test for
> it.

The ResendRequest FROM: nnn TO: 0 means INFINITY, that is "Please resend 
*all* messages starting from nnn"  That is you do not specify an exact 
message number in the TO: field. This may be helpful after a connection 
break down if you try to catch up.

What QuickFIX does is the following:

-> ResendRequest FROM: 42 TO: 0
<- Msg 42, PossDupFlag=Y
<- Msg 43, PossDupFlag=Y
...
<- Msg 50, PossDupFlag=Y

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
<- Msg 63, PossDupFlag=N
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

<- Msg 51, PossDupFlag=Y
...
<- Msg 62, PossDupFlag=Y


I.e. while resending old messages (PossDupFlag=Y), QuickFIX also sents 
*new* messages with much larger msg numbers.  This troubles some of our 
clients.  The FIX spec is not very clear about that situation.  The more 
robust solution IMHO would be to send *NEW* messages after all old 
messages have been resent.

Cheers, Jörg

Re: [Quickfix-developers] Fix Log Reader

[Joerg T. <Joe...@ma...>]

Miller, Oren wrote:
> This can be done with some modification.  In C++ this is already
> possible since the constructor for Message takes in a DataDictionary
> which it can use to parse messages with repeating groups.  What we need
> to do is wrap the data dictionary with a managed C++ class and allow it
> to be passed into the .NET Message constructor, then the message can
> parse properly.

Oren, I think this should be added to the Java API in the same way. Or 
is there already that possibility?

Jörg

> --oren
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Kulseth [mailto:ro...@ri...] 
> Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 8:25 AM
> To: qui...@li...
> Subject: [Quickfix-developers] Fix Log Reader
> 
> I am using C# trying to build an application that can read a FIX message
> log and present it in a more readable format in order to debug certin
> application level errors.  I have used the QuickFix.Message class to
> parse simple messages, however any message with repeating groups throws
> an invalid message exception.  I gather that the problem is that the
> Message(string) constructor isn't able to handle parsing repeating
> groups unless I somehow attach the Fix spec XML file or use some sort of
> specialized parser.  Is this possible with QuickFix, or should I look
> elsewhere?  Is the only option building my own parser?