quickfix-developers

Re: [Quickfix-developers] Verbose logging/debugging

[James W. <wi...@ra...>]

 Hello Dave,

   Currently I am using the default settings for CheckLatency.
The incoming/outgoing message logs show the machine's clocks to
be within 1 second of each other.

   I am using a data dictionary, but I have not added all of the
counterparty's user-defined fields to it yet, and in fact there
are two fields that were included in the Logon message that they
sent which are not in their current documentation.  However, I
have ValidateUserDefinedFields set to N.

   In reply to Oren's comments in a separate note: according to
the counterparty's logfiles, *my* end is the one dropping the
connection, not theirs.  I'm trying to figure out how to get QF
to tell me precisely *why* it is dropping the connection.  Here
is the content of the event file:

20051209-02:48:30 : Created session
20051209-02:48:30 : Connecting to XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX on port XXXXX
20051209-02:48:30 : Connection succeeded
20051209-02:48:30 : Initiated logon request
20051209-02:48:31 : Dropped Connection

Here is the logon message I send out (substituting | for SOH):

8=FIX.4.2|9=65|35=A|34=1|49=OurCompID|52=20051209-02:48:30.946|56=TheirCompID|98=0|108=30|10=121|

Here is what I get back:

8=FIX.4.2|9=0088|35=A|34=000001|43=N|52=20051209-02:48:31|49=TheirCompID|56=OurCompID|98=0|108=30|6179=0|6247=prod|10=252|

   Within a second of receiving this, QuickFIX apparently closes
the connection.  Their logfiles show no session-level message to
say what the gripe was, and my logfiles don't tell me either.  I
thought it might have something to do with tags 6179 and 6247
but as I've said, I have validation on user defined fields turned
off; Oren says it applies to both application and administrative,
and I trust him on that.  BTW, we are working off QuickFIX 1.9.4
right now.  We have not upgraded to the latest, and have no plan
to do so until early next year unless it is absolutely necessary.
Too many other irons in the fire right now.

thanks,
Jim

> Hi Jim,
> 
> A couple of questions?
> 
> Have you got CheckLatency set?  ...and is there a difference in the
> clocks between the two machines running the FIX engines?
> 
> Are you using a DataDictionary?
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Dave

Re: [Quickfix-developers] Verbose logging/debugging

[Oren M. <or...@qu...>]

I ran it through and didn't see any problems.  Since the message has 
been changed, I cannot verify that the length and checksum fields were 
calculated correctly however.  Is it possible for you to run the system 
through a debugger?

--oren

James Wiggs wrote:

>QuickFIX Documentation: http://www.quickfixengine.org/quickfix/doc/html/index.html
>QuickFIX Support: http://www.quickfixengine.org/services.html
>
>
> Hello Dave,
>
>   Currently I am using the default settings for CheckLatency.
>The incoming/outgoing message logs show the machine's clocks to
>be within 1 second of each other.
>
>   I am using a data dictionary, but I have not added all of the
>counterparty's user-defined fields to it yet, and in fact there
>are two fields that were included in the Logon message that they
>sent which are not in their current documentation.  However, I
>have ValidateUserDefinedFields set to N.
>
>   In reply to Oren's comments in a separate note: according to
>the counterparty's logfiles, *my* end is the one dropping the
>connection, not theirs.  I'm trying to figure out how to get QF
>to tell me precisely *why* it is dropping the connection.  Here
>is the content of the event file:
>
>20051209-02:48:30 : Created session
>20051209-02:48:30 : Connecting to XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX on port XXXXX
>20051209-02:48:30 : Connection succeeded
>20051209-02:48:30 : Initiated logon request
>20051209-02:48:31 : Dropped Connection
>
>Here is the logon message I send out (substituting | for SOH):
>
>8=FIX.4.2|9=65|35=A|34=1|49=OurCompID|52=20051209-02:48:30.946|56=TheirCompID|98=0|108=30|10=121|
>
>Here is what I get back:
>
>8=FIX.4.2|9=0088|35=A|34=000001|43=N|52=20051209-02:48:31|49=TheirCompID|56=OurCompID|98=0|108=30|6179=0|6247=prod|10=252|
>
>   Within a second of receiving this, QuickFIX apparently closes
>the connection.  Their logfiles show no session-level message to
>say what the gripe was, and my logfiles don't tell me either.  I
>thought it might have something to do with tags 6179 and 6247
>but as I've said, I have validation on user defined fields turned
>off; Oren says it applies to both application and administrative,
>and I trust him on that.  BTW, we are working off QuickFIX 1.9.4
>right now.  We have not upgraded to the latest, and have no plan
>to do so until early next year unless it is absolutely necessary.
>Too many other irons in the fire right now.
>
>thanks,
>Jim
>
>  
>
>>Hi Jim,
>>
>>A couple of questions?
>>
>>Have you got CheckLatency set?  ...and is there a difference in the
>>clocks between the two machines running the FIX engines?
>>
>>Are you using a DataDictionary?
>>
>>Cheers
>>
>>Dave
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
>for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
>searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
>_______________________________________________
>Quickfix-developers mailing list
>Qui...@li...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers
>
>
>  
>

Re: [Quickfix-developers] Verbose logging/debugging

[James W. <wi...@ra...>]

 Oren,

   This problem has been dealt with; the issue was definitely those
two 6XXX tags.  They configured the account not to send the 6000-tags
and voila!  Good connection!  I'm still trying to figure out why the
"ValidateUserDefinedFields=N" in my configuration file didn't prevent
this from happening, however, we have a working connection and I can
move forward with my other testing and development work.  Thanks to
all for the assistance on this one.

best,
Jim

On Fri, 2005-12-09 at 15:16 -0600, Oren Miller wrote:
> I ran it through and didn't see any problems.  Since the message has 
> been changed, I cannot verify that the length and checksum fields were 
> calculated correctly however.  Is it possible for you to run the system 
> through a debugger?
> 
> --oren
> 
> James Wiggs wrote:
> 
> >QuickFIX Documentation: http://www.quickfixengine.org/quickfix/doc/html/index.html
> >QuickFIX Support: http://www.quickfixengine.org/services.html
> >
> >
> > Hello Dave,
> >
> >   Currently I am using the default settings for CheckLatency.
> >The incoming/outgoing message logs show the machine's clocks to
> >be within 1 second of each other.
> >
> >   I am using a data dictionary, but I have not added all of the
> >counterparty's user-defined fields to it yet, and in fact there
> >are two fields that were included in the Logon message that they
> >sent which are not in their current documentation.  However, I
> >have ValidateUserDefinedFields set to N.
> >
> >   In reply to Oren's comments in a separate note: according to
> >the counterparty's logfiles, *my* end is the one dropping the
> >connection, not theirs.  I'm trying to figure out how to get QF
> >to tell me precisely *why* it is dropping the connection.  Here
> >is the content of the event file:
> >
> >20051209-02:48:30 : Created session
> >20051209-02:48:30 : Connecting to XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX on port XXXXX
> >20051209-02:48:30 : Connection succeeded
> >20051209-02:48:30 : Initiated logon request
> >20051209-02:48:31 : Dropped Connection
> >
> >Here is the logon message I send out (substituting | for SOH):
> >
> >8=FIX.4.2|9=65|35=A|34=1|49=OurCompID|52=20051209-02:48:30.946|56=TheirCompID|98=0|108=30|10=121|
> >
> >Here is what I get back:
> >
> >8=FIX.4.2|9=0088|35=A|34=000001|43=N|52=20051209-02:48:31|49=TheirCompID|56=OurCompID|98=0|108=30|6179=0|6247=prod|10=252|
> >
> >   Within a second of receiving this, QuickFIX apparently closes
> >the connection.  Their logfiles show no session-level message to
> >say what the gripe was, and my logfiles don't tell me either.  I
> >thought it might have something to do with tags 6179 and 6247
> >but as I've said, I have validation on user defined fields turned
> >off; Oren says it applies to both application and administrative,
> >and I trust him on that.  BTW, we are working off QuickFIX 1.9.4
> >right now.  We have not upgraded to the latest, and have no plan
> >to do so until early next year unless it is absolutely necessary.
> >Too many other irons in the fire right now.
> >
> >thanks,
> >Jim
> >
> >  
> >
> >>Hi Jim,
> >>
> >>A couple of questions?
> >>
> >>Have you got CheckLatency set?  ...and is there a difference in the
> >>clocks between the two machines running the FIX engines?
> >>
> >>Are you using a DataDictionary?
> >>
> >>Cheers
> >>
> >>Dave
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >-------------------------------------------------------
> >This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
> >for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
> >searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
> >http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
> >_______________________________________________
> >Quickfix-developers mailing list
> >Qui...@li...
> >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> 

Re: [Quickfix-developers] Verbose logging/debugging

[James W. <wi...@wi...>]

   Answered my own question.  It appears that ValidateUserDefinedFields
is not actually honored in 1.9.4, which is what we're using.  I bit the
bullet and upgraded to 1.10.2, and the gripes about the 6000 tags went
away.

regards,
Jim

On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 19:51 -0500, James Wiggs wrote:
> QuickFIX Documentation: http://www.quickfixengine.org/quickfix/doc/html/index.html
> QuickFIX Support: http://www.quickfixengine.org/services.html
> 
> 
>  Oren,
> 
>    This problem has been dealt with; the issue was definitely those
> two 6XXX tags.  They configured the account not to send the 6000-tags
> and voila!  Good connection!  I'm still trying to figure out why the
> "ValidateUserDefinedFields=N" in my configuration file didn't prevent
> this from happening, however, we have a working connection and I can
> move forward with my other testing and development work.  Thanks to
> all for the assistance on this one.
> 
> best,
> Jim
> 
> On Fri, 2005-12-09 at 15:16 -0600, Oren Miller wrote:
> > I ran it through and didn't see any problems.  Since the message has 
> > been changed, I cannot verify that the length and checksum fields were 
> > calculated correctly however.  Is it possible for you to run the system 
> > through a debugger?
> > 
> > --oren
> > 
> > James Wiggs wrote:
> > 
> > >QuickFIX Documentation: http://www.quickfixengine.org/quickfix/doc/html/index.html
> > >QuickFIX Support: http://www.quickfixengine.org/services.html
> > >
> > >
> > > Hello Dave,
> > >
> > >   Currently I am using the default settings for CheckLatency.
> > >The incoming/outgoing message logs show the machine's clocks to
> > >be within 1 second of each other.
> > >
> > >   I am using a data dictionary, but I have not added all of the
> > >counterparty's user-defined fields to it yet, and in fact there
> > >are two fields that were included in the Logon message that they
> > >sent which are not in their current documentation.  However, I
> > >have ValidateUserDefinedFields set to N.
> > >
> > >   In reply to Oren's comments in a separate note: according to
> > >the counterparty's logfiles, *my* end is the one dropping the
> > >connection, not theirs.  I'm trying to figure out how to get QF
> > >to tell me precisely *why* it is dropping the connection.  Here
> > >is the content of the event file:
> > >
> > >20051209-02:48:30 : Created session
> > >20051209-02:48:30 : Connecting to XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX on port XXXXX
> > >20051209-02:48:30 : Connection succeeded
> > >20051209-02:48:30 : Initiated logon request
> > >20051209-02:48:31 : Dropped Connection
> > >
> > >Here is the logon message I send out (substituting | for SOH):
> > >
> > >8=FIX.4.2|9=65|35=A|34=1|49=OurCompID|52=20051209-02:48:30.946|56=TheirCompID|98=0|108=30|10=121|
> > >
> > >Here is what I get back:
> > >
> > >8=FIX.4.2|9=0088|35=A|34=000001|43=N|52=20051209-02:48:31|49=TheirCompID|56=OurCompID|98=0|108=30|6179=0|6247=prod|10=252|
> > >
> > >   Within a second of receiving this, QuickFIX apparently closes
> > >the connection.  Their logfiles show no session-level message to
> > >say what the gripe was, and my logfiles don't tell me either.  I
> > >thought it might have something to do with tags 6179 and 6247
> > >but as I've said, I have validation on user defined fields turned
> > >off; Oren says it applies to both application and administrative,
> > >and I trust him on that.  BTW, we are working off QuickFIX 1.9.4
> > >right now.  We have not upgraded to the latest, and have no plan
> > >to do so until early next year unless it is absolutely necessary.
> > >Too many other irons in the fire right now.
> > >
> > >thanks,
> > >Jim
> > >
> > >  
> > >
> > >>Hi Jim,
> > >>
> > >>A couple of questions?
> > >>
> > >>Have you got CheckLatency set?  ...and is there a difference in the
> > >>clocks between the two machines running the FIX engines?
> > >>
> > >>Are you using a DataDictionary?
> > >>
> > >>Cheers
> > >>
> > >>Dave
> > >>    
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >-------------------------------------------------------
> > >This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
> > >for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
> > >searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
> > >http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >Quickfix-developers mailing list
> > >Qui...@li...
> > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers
> > >
> > >
> > >  
> > >
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
> for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
> searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfix-developers mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers
>