quickfixj-users — General mailing list for QuickFIX/J topics.

Re: [Quickfixj-users] QF Code generator creating invalid ORDER arrays

[Philip W. <Phi...@fl...>]

Seems like a good idea to me. Personally I can’t see a reason for opting in/out either except if you thought it’d be a breaking change

Best regards,

Philip Whitehouse
FIX Messaging Technical Lead
FlexTrade Ltd EMEA

> On 30 Mar 2019, at 19:24, Andrew Munn <an...@nm...> wrote:
> 
> What do you think about throwing some exception during code generation if
> any fields differ only by capitalization? You could override it, of
> course.

Re: [Quickfixj-users] QF Code generator creating invalid ORDER arrays

[Andrew M. <an...@nm...>]

I figured it out.  I think this error was because a vendor supplied a 
dictionary and it had some capitalization inconsistency in the dictionary.  
In some places they used "IOIId" and elsewhere "IOIID" or something like 
that.

What do you think about throwing some exception during code generation if 
any fields differ only by capitalization? You could override it, of 
course.


On Tue, 26 Feb 2019, Christoph John wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> hmm, that looks strange. What does the dictionary for that group look like?
> 
> Cheers,
> Chris.
> 
> On 11/02/2019 18:15, Andrew Munn wrote:
> 
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
> 
> 
> I'm seeing generated code generated like this:
> 
> public static class NoUnderlyings extends Group {
> 		static final long serialVersionUID = 20050617;
> 		private static final int[] ORDER = {311, 312, 974, 998 998, 1423 1423, 1424 1424, 1425 1425, 1437, 1441, 1453, 1454, 1455, 1456, 1459, 
> 1460, 20121, 944, 0};
> 
> Notice that some fields are dupes with no commas between.
> 
> -- 
> Christoph John
> Software Engineering
> T +49 241 557080-28
> chr...@ma...
> 
> MACD GmbH
> Oppenhoffallee 103
> 52066 Aachen, Germany
> www.macd.com
> 
> Amtsgericht Aachen: HRB 8151 
> Ust.-Id: DE 813021663
> Gesch?ftsf?hrer: George Macdonald
> 
> 

Re: [Quickfixj-users] setting up sources for development

[Yoandy P. V. <yoa...@gm...>]

Ya can use too the sping-boot starter with maven, work very fine >

 <dependency>
<groupId>io.allune</groupId>
<artifactId>quickfixj-spring-boot-starter</artifactId>
<version>2.2.0</version>
</dependency>

El mar., 26 mar. 2019 a las 11:39, Ross Yakulis (<
ros...@em...>) escribió:

> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J> Support:
> http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
> I use IntelliJ with out issues.
>
> On Mar 26, 2019, at 8:34 AM, Diana Susca <dia...@gm...> wrote:
>
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
> Hi
>
> I'm trying to create a development environment for quickfixj on eclipse. I
> cloned the repository, downloaded the sources, and ran the command:
>
> mvn clean package -Dmaven.javadoc.skip=true -DskipTests -PskipBundlePlugin
>
> just as suggested on the website. This part worked without any errors.
>
> Afterwards, I try to import the projects in eclipse. The projects are
> identified as maven projects and added to the workspace, but when
> compiling, after the import, it shows the error:
> Could not find artifact
> org.quickfixj:quickfixj-codegenerator:jar:2.2.0-SNAPSHOT
> Which does not allow quickfixj-core to build, which in turn does not allow
> any other projects to compile, since they all depend on the core project.
>
> I have tried a suggestion I found on the net, to run
> mvn eclipse:eclipse to help build the eclipse projects but by the time it
> reaches the core engine project, it throws the same error:
> [ERROR] Plugin org.quickfixj:quickfixj-codegenerator:2.2.0-SNAPSHOT or one
> of its dependencies could not be resolved: Could not find artifact
> org.quickfixj:quickfixj-codegenerator:jar:2.2.0-SNAPSHOT -> [Help 1]
>
> Can someone help me with the setup, please?
>
> Any help is greatly appreciated!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>
>
>
> NOTICE: This communication may contain information that is privileged or
> confidential. It may be read and used solely by the intended recipient(s),
> and any review, use or distribution by others is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If
> you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from disclosing,
> copying, distributing or using any of this information. If you received
> this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and
> destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. No
> assurance is given that this e-mail or any attachments are free of viruses
> or other harmful code.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>


-- 
*Yoandy Pérez Villazón, Ing, MSc.*
Desarrollador Java / Mobile
CEO SACAViX

Re: [Quickfixj-users] setting up sources for development

[Ross Y. <ros...@em...>]

I use IntelliJ with out issues.

> On Mar 26, 2019, at 8:34 AM, Diana Susca <dia...@gm...> wrote:
> 
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
> 
> 
> Hi
> 
> I'm trying to create a development environment for quickfixj on eclipse. I cloned the repository, downloaded the sources, and ran the command:
> mvn clean package -Dmaven.javadoc.skip=true -DskipTests -PskipBundlePlugin
> just as suggested on the website. This part worked without any errors.
> 
> Afterwards, I try to import the projects in eclipse. The projects are identified as maven projects and added to the workspace, but when compiling, after the import, it shows the error:
> Could not find artifact org.quickfixj:quickfixj-codegenerator:jar:2.2.0-SNAPSHOT
> Which does not allow quickfixj-core to build, which in turn does not allow any other projects to compile, since they all depend on the core project.
> 
> I have tried a suggestion I found on the net, to run  
> mvn eclipse:eclipse to help build the eclipse projects but by the time it reaches the core engine project, it throws the same error:
> [ERROR] Plugin org.quickfixj:quickfixj-codegenerator:2.2.0-SNAPSHOT or one of its dependencies could not be resolved: Could not find artifact org.quickfixj:quickfixj-codegenerator:jar:2.2.0-SNAPSHOT -> [Help 1]
> 
> Can someone help me with the setup, please?
> 
> Any help is greatly appreciated!
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users


-- 
NOTICE: This communication may contain information that is privileged or 
confidential. It may be read and used solely by the intended recipient(s), 
and any review, use or distribution by others is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If 
you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from disclosing, 
copying, distributing or using any of this information. If you received 
this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and 
destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. No 
assurance is given that this e-mail or any attachments are free of viruses 
or other harmful code.

[Quickfixj-users] setting up sources for development

[Diana S. <dia...@gm...>]

Hi

I'm trying to create a development environment for quickfixj on eclipse. I
cloned the repository, downloaded the sources, and ran the command:

mvn clean package -Dmaven.javadoc.skip=true -DskipTests -PskipBundlePlugin

just as suggested on the website. This part worked without any errors.

Afterwards, I try to import the projects in eclipse. The projects are
identified as maven projects and added to the workspace, but when
compiling, after the import, it shows the error:
Could not find artifact
org.quickfixj:quickfixj-codegenerator:jar:2.2.0-SNAPSHOT
Which does not allow quickfixj-core to build, which in turn does not allow
any other projects to compile, since they all depend on the core project.

I have tried a suggestion I found on the net, to run
mvn eclipse:eclipse to help build the eclipse projects but by the time it
reaches the core engine project, it throws the same error:
[ERROR] Plugin org.quickfixj:quickfixj-codegenerator:2.2.0-SNAPSHOT or one
of its dependencies could not be resolved: Could not find artifact
org.quickfixj:quickfixj-codegenerator:jar:2.2.0-SNAPSHOT -> [Help 1]

Can someone help me with the setup, please?

Any help is greatly appreciated!

[Quickfixj-users] Session validation settings have no effect for FIXT unless AppDataDictionary is set explicitly

[Ilya K. <kur...@gm...>]

Hello! I ran into some interesting behavior with quickfixj 2 today. My
question is if it's intentionally designed this way? And, if yes, if
someone could explain the reasoning behind it?

The behavior I see is that all the session validation settings:

   - Session.SETTING_VALIDATE_FIELDS_HAVE_VALUES
   ("ValidateFieldsHaveValues")
   - Session.SETTING_VALIDATE_FIELDS_OUT_OF_ORDER
   ("ValidateFieldsOutOfOrder")
   - Session.SETTING_VALIDATE_UNORDERED_GROUP_FIELDS
   ("ValidateUnorderedGroupFields")
   - Session.SETTING_VALIDATE_USER_DEFINED_FIELDS
   ("ValidateUserDefinedFields")
   - Session.SETTING_ALLOW_UNKNOWN_MSG_FIELDS ("AllowUnknownMsgFields")

have exactly no effect on the validation of FIXT application messages
unless one also explicitly sets "AppDataDictionary" option
(Session.SETTING_APP_DATA_DICTIONARY).
I observe this behavior in tests, but the code in
DefaultSessionFactory#processFixtDataDictionaries looks rather unambiguous
too (
https://github.com/quickfix-j/quickfixj/blob/QFJ_RELEASE_2_1_1/quickfixj-core/src/main/java/quickfix/DefaultSessionFactory.java#L283).
It looks like DefaultSessionFactory#createDataDictionary (the only place
using those Validate* and AllowUnknownMsgFields settings) is called to
create app dictionary IIF AppDataDictionary is present.

Is this behavior intentional?

Re: [Quickfixj-users] Intermittently we receive the "Required Tag Missing" error for existing fields

[<mic...@ba...>]

Unfortunately we cannot reproduce this issue in any of our test/development environments at all (regardless of the load, verifying corner case scenarios and etc). However we have seen about 5 such cases in production. It's a very tiny percentage of all cancel messages that had exactly the same format, (i.e. they did have the 447 tag), and that were parsed without any issue.  On a surface we see symptoms of a typical concurrency issue, which probably was caused by our approach how we use QuickFix.

Thanks
Michael

>Re: [Quickfixj-users] Intermittently we receive the "Required Tag Missing" error for existing fields
>From: Robert Nicholson <robert.nicholson@gm...> - 2019-03-08 14:41:48
>Attachments: Message as HTML
>
>Cancel messages aren't always required to be fully complete.
>
>By just debug the validation or put an exception break point on the specific exception and test until you can reproduce it.
>
>Depending on what you are doing on startup with the messages you'll want to check that your configuration settings are the same as when you have a live session. This isn't always the case
>depending on whether you are manually processing messages or not.

This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this e-mail or its attachments.
Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free. The Barclays Group does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications by any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses. Replies to this e-mail may be monitored by the Barclays Group for operational or business reasons.
Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its attachments that does not relate to the business of the Barclays Group is personal to the sender and is not given or endorsed by the Barclays Group.
Barclays Services Limited provides support and administrative services across Barclays group. Barclays Services Limited is an appointed representative of Barclays Bank UK plc, Barclays Bank plc and Clydesdale Financial Services Limited. Barclays Bank UK plc and Barclays Bank plc are authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority. Clydesdale Financial Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

Re: [Quickfixj-users] Intermittently we receive the "Required Tag Missing" error for existing fields

[<mic...@ba...>]

Thank you Colin and Grant for your points, they give me some ideas for my further investigation.



Michael



>I don't think I've ever seen a body field in the header, or vice-versa,

>which is what the docs say it's for.



>Of course, I always create custom builds, so if that did happen, I'd just

>fix it in the DD and regenerate.



>On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 11:38 AM Colin DuPlantis colin@...<mailto:colin@...> wrote:



>> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/

>> QuickFIX/J <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J><http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J%3E>; Support:

>> http://www.quickfixj.org/support/

>>

>>

>> Ah, that makes sense, thanks for the clarification.

>>

>> I'm surprised you haven't seen a fields-out-of-order scenario, though. It

>> seems to me to be the exception rather than the rule.

>> On 3/8/19 9:08 AM, Grant Birchmeier wrote:

>>

>> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/

>> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/

>>

>>

>> 447 is PartyIDSource, which is in the NoParties group, so actually it is.

>> (In the standard dictionary anyway.)

>>

>> However, you're right that my comment was not quite germane, as Michael's

>> "Required tag missing" error message would not have come from a repeating

>> group thing.

>>

>> I guess I jumped at it because in the past I've seen people wrongly

>> suggest "ValidateFieldsOutOfOrder" for repeating group issues.  In truth,

>> that setting is to compensate for a very specific kind of misbehavior

>> (which I've never myself seen) but its name is a bit of a misnomer.

>>

>> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 10:55 AM Colin DuPlantis <colin@...>

>> wrote:

>>

>>> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/

>>> QuickFIX/J <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J><http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J%3E>; Support:

>>> http://www.quickfixj.org/support/

>>>

>>>

>>> 447 isn't part of a repeating group

>>> On 3/8/19 8:10 AM, Grant Birchmeier wrote:

>>>

>>> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/

>>> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/

>>>

>>>

>>> NOOOO.  "ValidateFieldsOutOfOrder" will not fix repeating group issues.

>>>

>>> From the docs:

>>> *If set to N, fields that are out of order (i.e. body fields in the

>>> header, or header fields in the body) will not be rejected. *

>>>

>>>

>>> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 8:35 AM Colin DuPlantis <colin@...>

>> wrote:

>>>

>>>> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/

>>>> QuickFIX/J <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J><http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J%3E>; Support:

>>> http://www.quickfixj.org/support/

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> The issue might be with the tags being out-of-order. There's another

>>>> setting, something like, "validateOutOfOrder", that you should set to false

>>>> in this scenario.

>>> On 3/8/19 3:00 AM, michael.efis--- via Quickfixj-users wrote:

>>>>

>>>> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/

>>>> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Hi

>>>>

>>>> Could you advise on the following issue, please?

>>>>

>>>> We receive intermittent "Required Tag Missing" error while parsing

>>>> incoming fix messages, even though the missing field is present in the

>>>> message. For example in the following message the tag 447 is present on the

>>>> message, and yet sometimes we receive "Required Tag Missing, field=447"

>>>> while parsing it.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> 8=FIX.4.4|9=284|35=F|49=TEST_49|56=TEST_56|34=420|52=20190302-07:31:57.079|115=TEST3|116=TEST_116|11=TEST_11|41=TEST_41|55=TEST_55|48=TEST_48|22=4|54=2|60=20190302-07:31:56.933|38=TEST_38|207=TEST_207|454=3|455=TEST_455_1|456=TEST_456_1|455=TEST_455_2|456=TEST_456_2|455=TEST_455_3|456=TEST_456_3|453=1|448=TEST_448|447=D|452=3|10=XXX|

>>>>

>>>> This issue has been observed with cancel messages and it normally

>>>> happens after application startup. We do use a data dictionary, and 99.8%

>>>> of the time such cancellation messages work fine. We use quick fix version

>>>> 1.5.3. (quickfixj-core-1.5.3.jar and quickfixj-msg-fix44-1.5.3.jar)

>>>>

>>>> Are there any know issues with intermittent "Required tag missing"

>>>> errors?

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>>> I'd also created the  https://www.quickfixj.org/jira/browse/QFJ-971 JIRA

>>>> for this question as I was not sure if it falls into the "help" or "error"

>>>> category.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Many thanks and Kind Regards

>>>>

>>>> Michael


This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this e-mail or its attachments.
Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free. The Barclays Group does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications by any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses. Replies to this e-mail may be monitored by the Barclays Group for operational or business reasons.
Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its attachments that does not relate to the business of the Barclays Group is personal to the sender and is not given or endorsed by the Barclays Group.
Barclays Services Limited provides support and administrative services across Barclays group. Barclays Services Limited is an appointed representative of Barclays Bank UK plc, Barclays Bank plc and Clydesdale Financial Services Limited. Barclays Bank UK plc and Barclays Bank plc are authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority. Clydesdale Financial Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

Re: [Quickfixj-users] Intermittently we receive the "Required Tag Missing" error for existing fields

[Grant B. <gbi...@co...>]

I don't think I've ever seen a body field in the header, or vice-versa,
which is what the docs say it's for.

Of course, I always create custom builds, so if that did happen, I'd just
fix it in the DD and regenerate.

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 11:38 AM Colin DuPlantis <co...@ma...>
wrote:

> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J> Support:
> http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
> Ah, that makes sense, thanks for the clarification.
>
> I'm surprised you haven't seen a fields-out-of-order scenario, though. It
> seems to me to be the exception rather than the rule.
> On 3/8/19 9:08 AM, Grant Birchmeier wrote:
>
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
> 447 is PartyIDSource, which is in the NoParties group, so actually it is.
> (In the standard dictionary anyway.)
>
> However, you're right that my comment was not quite germane, as Michael's
> "Required tag missing" error message would not have come from a repeating
> group thing.
>
> I guess I jumped at it because in the past I've seen people wrongly
> suggest "ValidateFieldsOutOfOrder" for repeating group issues.  In truth,
> that setting is to compensate for a very specific kind of misbehavior
> (which I've never myself seen) but its name is a bit of a misnomer.
>
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 10:55 AM Colin DuPlantis <co...@ma...>
> wrote:
>
>> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
>> QuickFIX/J <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J> Support:
>> http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>>
>>
>> 447 isn't part of a repeating group
>> On 3/8/19 8:10 AM, Grant Birchmeier wrote:
>>
>> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
>> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>>
>>
>> NOOOO.  "ValidateFieldsOutOfOrder" will not fix repeating group issues.
>>
>> From the docs:
>> *If set to N, fields that are out of order (i.e. body fields in the
>> header, or header fields in the body) will not be rejected. *
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 8:35 AM Colin DuPlantis <co...@ma...>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
>>> QuickFIX/J <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J> Support:
>>> http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>>>
>>>
>>> The issue might be with the tags being out-of-order. There's another
>>> setting, something like, "validateOutOfOrder", that you should set to false
>>> in this scenario.
>>> On 3/8/19 3:00 AM, michael.efis--- via Quickfixj-users wrote:
>>>
>>> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
>>> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Could you advise on the following issue, please?
>>>
>>> We receive intermittent "Required Tag Missing" error while parsing
>>> incoming fix messages, even though the missing field is present in the
>>> message. For example in the following message the tag 447 is present on the
>>> message, and yet sometimes we receive “Required Tag Missing, field=447”
>>> while parsing it.
>>>
>>>
>>> 8=FIX.4.4|9=284|35=F|49=TEST_49|56=TEST_56|34=420|52=20190302-07:31:57.079|115=TEST3|116=TEST_116|11=TEST_11|41=TEST_41|55=TEST_55|48=TEST_48|22=4|54=2|60=20190302-07:31:56.933|38=TEST_38|207=TEST_207|454=3|455=TEST_455_1|456=TEST_456_1|455=TEST_455_2|456=TEST_456_2|455=TEST_455_3|456=TEST_456_3|453=1|448=TEST_448|447=D|452=3|10=XXX|
>>>
>>> This issue has been observed with cancel messages and it normally
>>> happens after application startup. We do use a data dictionary, and 99.8%
>>> of the time such cancellation messages work fine. We use quick fix version
>>> 1.5.3. (quickfixj-core-1.5.3.jar and quickfixj-msg-fix44-1.5.3.jar)
>>>
>>> Are there any know issues with intermittent “Required tag missing”
>>> errors?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I’d also created the  https://www.quickfixj.org/jira/browse/QFJ-971 JIRA
>>> for this question as I was not sure if it falls into the “help” or “error”
>>> category.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Many thanks and Kind Regards
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for
>>> the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under
>>> applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this e-mail
>>> in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system
>>> and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this e-mail or
>>> its attachments.
>>>
>>> Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free.
>>> The Barclays Group does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from
>>> unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications
>>> by any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses. Replies to
>>> this e-mail may be monitored by the Barclays Group for operational or
>>> business reasons.
>>>
>>> Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its attachments that
>>> does not relate to the business of the Barclays Group is personal to the
>>> sender and is not given or endorsed by the Barclays Group.
>>>
>>> Barclays Services Limited provides support and administrative services
>>> across Barclays group. Barclays Services Limited is an appointed
>>> representative of Barclays Bank UK plc, Barclays Bank plc and Clydesdale
>>> Financial Services Limited. Barclays Bank UK plc and Barclays Bank plc are
>>> authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the
>>> Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority.
>>> Clydesdale Financial Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the
>>> Financial Conduct Authority..
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Quickfixj-users mailing lis...@li...://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>>>
>>> --
>>> Colin DuPlantis
>>> Chief Architect, Marketcetera
>>> Download, Run, Trade
>>> 888.868.4884https://www.marketcetera.com
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Quickfixj-users mailing list
>>> Qui...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Grant Birchmeier
>> *Connamara Systems, LLC*
>> *Made-To-Measure Trading Solutions.*
>> Exactly what you need. No more. No less.
>> http://connamara.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Quickfixj-users mailing lis...@li...://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>>
>> --
>> Colin DuPlantis
>> Chief Architect, Marketcetera
>> Download, Run, Trade
>> 888.868.4884https://www.marketcetera.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Quickfixj-users mailing list
>> Qui...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>>
>
>
> --
> Grant Birchmeier
> *Connamara Systems, LLC*
> *Made-To-Measure Trading Solutions.*
> Exactly what you need. No more. No less.
> http://connamara.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing lis...@li...://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>
> --
> Colin DuPlantis
> Chief Architect, Marketcetera
> Download, Run, Trade
> 888.868.4884https://www.marketcetera.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>


-- 
Grant Birchmeier
*Connamara Systems, LLC*
*Made-To-Measure Trading Solutions.*
Exactly what you need. No more. No less.
http://connamara.com

Re: [Quickfixj-users] Intermittently we receive the "Required Tag Missing" error for existing fields

[Colin D. <co...@ma...>]

Ah, that makes sense, thanks for the clarification.

I'm surprised you haven't seen a fields-out-of-order scenario, though. 
It seems to me to be the exception rather than the rule.

On 3/8/19 9:08 AM, Grant Birchmeier wrote:
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
>
> 447 is PartyIDSource, which is in the NoParties group, so actually it 
> is.  (In the standard dictionary anyway.)
>
> However, you're right that my comment was not quite germane, as 
> Michael's "Required tag missing" error message would not have come 
> from a repeating group thing.
>
> I guess I jumped at it because in the past I've seen people wrongly 
> suggest "ValidateFieldsOutOfOrder" for repeating group issues.  In 
> truth, that setting is to compensate for a very specific kind of 
> misbehavior (which I've never myself seen) but its name is a bit of a 
> misnomer.
>
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 10:55 AM Colin DuPlantis 
> <co...@ma... <mailto:co...@ma...>> wrote:
>
>     QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
>     QuickFIX/J <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J>
>     Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
>     447 isn't part of a repeating group
>
>     On 3/8/19 8:10 AM, Grant Birchmeier wrote:
>>     QuickFIX/J Documentation:http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
>>     QuickFIX/J Support:http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>>
>>
>>
>>     NOOOO. "ValidateFieldsOutOfOrder" will not fix repeating group
>>     issues.
>>
>>     From the docs:
>>     /If set to N, fields that are out of order (i.e. body fields in
>>     the header, or header fields in the body) will not be rejected. /
>>     /
>>     /
>>     //
>>
>>     On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 8:35 AM Colin DuPlantis
>>     <co...@ma... <mailto:co...@ma...>> wrote:
>>
>>         QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
>>         QuickFIX/J
>>         <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J> Support:
>>         http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>>
>>
>>         The issue might be with the tags being out-of-order. There's
>>         another setting, something like, "validateOutOfOrder", that
>>         you should set to false in this scenario.
>>
>>         On 3/8/19 3:00 AM, michael.efis--- via Quickfixj-users wrote:
>>>         QuickFIX/J Documentation:http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
>>>         QuickFIX/J Support:http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>         Hi
>>>
>>>         Could you advise on the following issue, please?
>>>
>>>         We receive intermittent "Required Tag Missing" error while
>>>         parsing incoming fix messages, even though the missing field
>>>         is present in the message. For example in the following
>>>         message the tag 447 is present on the message, and yet
>>>         sometimes we receive “Required Tag Missing, field=447” while
>>>         parsing it.
>>>
>>>         8=FIX.4.4|9=284|35=F|49=TEST_49|56=TEST_56|34=420|52=20190302-07:31:57.079|115=TEST3|116=TEST_116|11=TEST_11|41=TEST_41|55=TEST_55|48=TEST_48|22=4|54=2|60=20190302-07:31:56.933|38=TEST_38|207=TEST_207|454=3|455=TEST_455_1|456=TEST_456_1|455=TEST_455_2|456=TEST_456_2|455=TEST_455_3|456=TEST_456_3|453=1|448=TEST_448|447=D|452=3|10=XXX|
>>>
>>>         This issue has been observed with cancel messages and it
>>>         normally happens after application startup. We do use a data
>>>         dictionary, and 99.8% of the time such cancellation messages
>>>         work fine. We use quick fix version 1.5.3.
>>>         (quickfixj-core-1.5.3.jar and quickfixj-msg-fix44-1.5.3.jar)
>>>
>>>         Are there any know issues with intermittent “Required tag
>>>         missing” errors?
>>>
>>>         I’d also created the
>>>         https://www.quickfixj.org/jira/browse/QFJ-971 JIRA for this
>>>         question as I was not sure if it falls into the “help” or
>>>         “error” category.
>>>
>>>         Many thanks and Kind Regards
>>>
>>>         Michael
>>>
>>>         This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and
>>>         intended solely for the addressee and may also be privileged
>>>         or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are
>>>         not the addressee, or have received this e-mail in error,
>>>         please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your
>>>         system and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any
>>>         part of this e-mail or its attachments.
>>>
>>>         Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or
>>>         virus-free. The Barclays Group does not accept
>>>         responsibility for any loss arising from unauthorised access
>>>         to, or interference with, any Internet communications by any
>>>         third party, or from the transmission of any viruses.
>>>         Replies to this e-mail may be monitored by the Barclays
>>>         Group for operational or business reasons.
>>>
>>>         Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its
>>>         attachments that does not relate to the business of the
>>>         Barclays Group is personal to the sender and is not given or
>>>         endorsed by the Barclays Group.
>>>
>>>         Barclays Services Limited provides support and
>>>         administrative services across Barclays group. Barclays
>>>         Services Limited is an appointed representative of Barclays
>>>         Bank UK plc, Barclays Bank plc and Clydesdale Financial
>>>         Services Limited. Barclays Bank UK plc and Barclays Bank plc
>>>         are authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and
>>>         regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the
>>>         Prudential Regulation Authority. Clydesdale Financial
>>>         Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the
>>>         Financial Conduct Authority..
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Quickfixj-users mailing list
>>>         Qui...@li...  <mailto:Qui...@li...>
>>>         https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>>
>>         -- 
>>         Colin DuPlantis
>>         Chief Architect, Marketcetera
>>         Download, Run, Trade
>>         888.868.4884
>>         https://www.marketcetera.com
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Quickfixj-users mailing list
>>         Qui...@li...
>>         <mailto:Qui...@li...>
>>         https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>>
>>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Grant Birchmeier
>>     *Connamara Systems, LLC*
>>     *Made-To-Measure Trading Solutions.*
>>     Exactly what you need. No more. No less.*
>>     *
>>     http://connamara.com
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Quickfixj-users mailing list
>>     Qui...@li...  <mailto:Qui...@li...>
>>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>
>     -- 
>     Colin DuPlantis
>     Chief Architect, Marketcetera
>     Download, Run, Trade
>     888.868.4884
>     https://www.marketcetera.com
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Quickfixj-users mailing list
>     Qui...@li...
>     <mailto:Qui...@li...>
>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>
>
>
> -- 
> Grant Birchmeier
> *Connamara Systems, LLC*
> *Made-To-Measure Trading Solutions.*
> Exactly what you need. No more. No less.*
> *
> http://connamara.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users

-- 
Colin DuPlantis
Chief Architect, Marketcetera
Download, Run, Trade
888.868.4884
https://www.marketcetera.com

Re: [Quickfixj-users] Intermittently we receive the "Required Tag Missing" error for existing fields

[Grant B. <gbi...@co...>]

447 is PartyIDSource, which is in the NoParties group, so actually it is.
(In the standard dictionary anyway.)

However, you're right that my comment was not quite germane, as Michael's
"Required tag missing" error message would not have come from a repeating
group thing.

I guess I jumped at it because in the past I've seen people wrongly suggest
"ValidateFieldsOutOfOrder" for repeating group issues.  In truth, that
setting is to compensate for a very specific kind of misbehavior (which
I've never myself seen) but its name is a bit of a misnomer.

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 10:55 AM Colin DuPlantis <co...@ma...>
wrote:

> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J> Support:
> http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
> 447 isn't part of a repeating group
> On 3/8/19 8:10 AM, Grant Birchmeier wrote:
>
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
> NOOOO.  "ValidateFieldsOutOfOrder" will not fix repeating group issues.
>
> From the docs:
> *If set to N, fields that are out of order (i.e. body fields in the
> header, or header fields in the body) will not be rejected. *
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 8:35 AM Colin DuPlantis <co...@ma...>
> wrote:
>
>> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
>> QuickFIX/J <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J> Support:
>> http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>>
>>
>> The issue might be with the tags being out-of-order. There's another
>> setting, something like, "validateOutOfOrder", that you should set to false
>> in this scenario.
>> On 3/8/19 3:00 AM, michael.efis--- via Quickfixj-users wrote:
>>
>> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
>> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Could you advise on the following issue, please?
>>
>> We receive intermittent "Required Tag Missing" error while parsing
>> incoming fix messages, even though the missing field is present in the
>> message. For example in the following message the tag 447 is present on the
>> message, and yet sometimes we receive “Required Tag Missing, field=447”
>> while parsing it.
>>
>>
>> 8=FIX.4.4|9=284|35=F|49=TEST_49|56=TEST_56|34=420|52=20190302-07:31:57.079|115=TEST3|116=TEST_116|11=TEST_11|41=TEST_41|55=TEST_55|48=TEST_48|22=4|54=2|60=20190302-07:31:56.933|38=TEST_38|207=TEST_207|454=3|455=TEST_455_1|456=TEST_456_1|455=TEST_455_2|456=TEST_456_2|455=TEST_455_3|456=TEST_456_3|453=1|448=TEST_448|447=D|452=3|10=XXX|
>>
>> This issue has been observed with cancel messages and it normally happens
>> after application startup. We do use a data dictionary, and 99.8% of the
>> time such cancellation messages work fine. We use quick fix version 1.5.3.
>> (quickfixj-core-1.5.3.jar and quickfixj-msg-fix44-1.5.3.jar)
>>
>> Are there any know issues with intermittent “Required tag missing”
>> errors?
>>
>>
>>
>> I’d also created the  https://www.quickfixj.org/jira/browse/QFJ-971 JIRA
>> for this question as I was not sure if it falls into the “help” or “error”
>> category.
>>
>>
>>
>> Many thanks and Kind Regards
>>
>> Michael
>>
>> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for
>> the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under
>> applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this e-mail
>> in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system
>> and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this e-mail or
>> its attachments.
>>
>> Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free.
>> The Barclays Group does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from
>> unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications
>> by any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses. Replies to
>> this e-mail may be monitored by the Barclays Group for operational or
>> business reasons.
>>
>> Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its attachments that
>> does not relate to the business of the Barclays Group is personal to the
>> sender and is not given or endorsed by the Barclays Group.
>>
>> Barclays Services Limited provides support and administrative services
>> across Barclays group. Barclays Services Limited is an appointed
>> representative of Barclays Bank UK plc, Barclays Bank plc and Clydesdale
>> Financial Services Limited. Barclays Bank UK plc and Barclays Bank plc are
>> authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the
>> Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority.
>> Clydesdale Financial Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the
>> Financial Conduct Authority..
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Quickfixj-users mailing lis...@li...://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>>
>> --
>> Colin DuPlantis
>> Chief Architect, Marketcetera
>> Download, Run, Trade
>> 888.868.4884https://www.marketcetera.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Quickfixj-users mailing list
>> Qui...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>>
>
>
> --
> Grant Birchmeier
> *Connamara Systems, LLC*
> *Made-To-Measure Trading Solutions.*
> Exactly what you need. No more. No less.
> http://connamara.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing lis...@li...://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>
> --
> Colin DuPlantis
> Chief Architect, Marketcetera
> Download, Run, Trade
> 888.868.4884https://www.marketcetera.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>


-- 
Grant Birchmeier
*Connamara Systems, LLC*
*Made-To-Measure Trading Solutions.*
Exactly what you need. No more. No less.
http://connamara.com

Re: [Quickfixj-users] Intermittently we receive the "Required Tag Missing" error for existing fields

[Colin D. <co...@ma...>]

447 isn't part of a repeating group

On 3/8/19 8:10 AM, Grant Birchmeier wrote:
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
>
> NOOOO. "ValidateFieldsOutOfOrder" will not fix repeating group issues.
>
> From the docs:
> /If set to N, fields that are out of order (i.e. body fields in the 
> header, or header fields in the body) will not be rejected. /
> /
> /
> //
>
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 8:35 AM Colin DuPlantis <co...@ma... 
> <mailto:co...@ma...>> wrote:
>
>     QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
>     QuickFIX/J <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J>
>     Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
>     The issue might be with the tags being out-of-order. There's
>     another setting, something like, "validateOutOfOrder", that you
>     should set to false in this scenario.
>
>     On 3/8/19 3:00 AM, michael.efis--- via Quickfixj-users wrote:
>>     QuickFIX/J Documentation:http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
>>     QuickFIX/J Support:http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>>
>>
>>
>>     Hi
>>
>>     Could you advise on the following issue, please?
>>
>>     We receive intermittent "Required Tag Missing" error while
>>     parsing incoming fix messages, even though the missing field is
>>     present in the message. For example in the following message the
>>     tag 447 is present on the message, and yet sometimes we receive
>>     “Required Tag Missing, field=447” while parsing it.
>>
>>     8=FIX.4.4|9=284|35=F|49=TEST_49|56=TEST_56|34=420|52=20190302-07:31:57.079|115=TEST3|116=TEST_116|11=TEST_11|41=TEST_41|55=TEST_55|48=TEST_48|22=4|54=2|60=20190302-07:31:56.933|38=TEST_38|207=TEST_207|454=3|455=TEST_455_1|456=TEST_456_1|455=TEST_455_2|456=TEST_456_2|455=TEST_455_3|456=TEST_456_3|453=1|448=TEST_448|447=D|452=3|10=XXX|
>>
>>     This issue has been observed with cancel messages and it normally
>>     happens after application startup. We do use a data dictionary,
>>     and 99.8% of the time such cancellation messages work fine. We
>>     use quick fix version 1.5.3. (quickfixj-core-1.5.3.jar and
>>     quickfixj-msg-fix44-1.5.3.jar)
>>
>>     Are there any know issues with intermittent “Required tag
>>     missing” errors?
>>
>>     I’d also created the
>>     https://www.quickfixj.org/jira/browse/QFJ-971 JIRA for this
>>     question as I was not sure if it falls into the “help” or “error”
>>     category.
>>
>>     Many thanks and Kind Regards
>>
>>     Michael
>>
>>     This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended
>>     solely for the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt
>>     from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the
>>     addressee, or have received this e-mail in error, please notify
>>     the sender immediately, delete it from your system and do not
>>     copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this e-mail or
>>     its attachments.
>>
>>     Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or
>>     virus-free. The Barclays Group does not accept responsibility for
>>     any loss arising from unauthorised access to, or interference
>>     with, any Internet communications by any third party, or from the
>>     transmission of any viruses. Replies to this e-mail may be
>>     monitored by the Barclays Group for operational or business reasons.
>>
>>     Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its
>>     attachments that does not relate to the business of the Barclays
>>     Group is personal to the sender and is not given or endorsed by
>>     the Barclays Group.
>>
>>     Barclays Services Limited provides support and administrative
>>     services across Barclays group. Barclays Services Limited is an
>>     appointed representative of Barclays Bank UK plc, Barclays Bank
>>     plc and Clydesdale Financial Services Limited. Barclays Bank UK
>>     plc and Barclays Bank plc are authorised by the Prudential
>>     Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct
>>     Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority. Clydesdale
>>     Financial Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the
>>     Financial Conduct Authority..
>>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Quickfixj-users mailing list
>>     Qui...@li...  <mailto:Qui...@li...>
>>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>
>     -- 
>     Colin DuPlantis
>     Chief Architect, Marketcetera
>     Download, Run, Trade
>     888.868.4884
>     https://www.marketcetera.com
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Quickfixj-users mailing list
>     Qui...@li...
>     <mailto:Qui...@li...>
>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>
>
>
> -- 
> Grant Birchmeier
> *Connamara Systems, LLC*
> *Made-To-Measure Trading Solutions.*
> Exactly what you need. No more. No less.*
> *
> http://connamara.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users

-- 
Colin DuPlantis
Chief Architect, Marketcetera
Download, Run, Trade
888.868.4884
https://www.marketcetera.com

Re: [Quickfixj-users] Intermittently we receive the "Required Tag Missing" error for existing fields

[Grant B. <gbi...@co...>]

NOOOO.  "ValidateFieldsOutOfOrder" will not fix repeating group issues.

>From the docs:
*If set to N, fields that are out of order (i.e. body fields in the header,
or header fields in the body) will not be rejected. *


On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 8:35 AM Colin DuPlantis <co...@ma...>
wrote:

> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J> Support:
> http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
> The issue might be with the tags being out-of-order. There's another
> setting, something like, "validateOutOfOrder", that you should set to false
> in this scenario.
> On 3/8/19 3:00 AM, michael.efis--- via Quickfixj-users wrote:
>
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
> Hi
>
> Could you advise on the following issue, please?
>
> We receive intermittent "Required Tag Missing" error while parsing
> incoming fix messages, even though the missing field is present in the
> message. For example in the following message the tag 447 is present on the
> message, and yet sometimes we receive “Required Tag Missing, field=447”
> while parsing it.
>
>
> 8=FIX.4.4|9=284|35=F|49=TEST_49|56=TEST_56|34=420|52=20190302-07:31:57.079|115=TEST3|116=TEST_116|11=TEST_11|41=TEST_41|55=TEST_55|48=TEST_48|22=4|54=2|60=20190302-07:31:56.933|38=TEST_38|207=TEST_207|454=3|455=TEST_455_1|456=TEST_456_1|455=TEST_455_2|456=TEST_456_2|455=TEST_455_3|456=TEST_456_3|453=1|448=TEST_448|447=D|452=3|10=XXX|
>
> This issue has been observed with cancel messages and it normally happens
> after application startup. We do use a data dictionary, and 99.8% of the
> time such cancellation messages work fine. We use quick fix version 1.5.3.
> (quickfixj-core-1.5.3.jar and quickfixj-msg-fix44-1.5.3.jar)
>
> Are there any know issues with intermittent “Required tag missing” errors?
>
>
>
>
> I’d also created the  https://www.quickfixj.org/jira/browse/QFJ-971 JIRA
> for this question as I was not sure if it falls into the “help” or “error”
> category.
>
>
>
> Many thanks and Kind Regards
>
> Michael
>
> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for
> the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this e-mail
> in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system
> and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this e-mail or
> its attachments.
>
> Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free. The
> Barclays Group does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from
> unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications
> by any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses. Replies to
> this e-mail may be monitored by the Barclays Group for operational or
> business reasons.
>
> Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its attachments that
> does not relate to the business of the Barclays Group is personal to the
> sender and is not given or endorsed by the Barclays Group.
>
> Barclays Services Limited provides support and administrative services
> across Barclays group. Barclays Services Limited is an appointed
> representative of Barclays Bank UK plc, Barclays Bank plc and Clydesdale
> Financial Services Limited. Barclays Bank UK plc and Barclays Bank plc are
> authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the
> Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority.
> Clydesdale Financial Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the
> Financial Conduct Authority..
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing lis...@li...://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>
> --
> Colin DuPlantis
> Chief Architect, Marketcetera
> Download, Run, Trade
> 888.868.4884https://www.marketcetera.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>


-- 
Grant Birchmeier
*Connamara Systems, LLC*
*Made-To-Measure Trading Solutions.*
Exactly what you need. No more. No less.
http://connamara.com

Re: [Quickfixj-users] Intermittently we receive the "Required Tag Missing" error for existing fields

[Grant B. <gbi...@co...>]

Michael,

If you're *really* sure that 447 should be optional, then simply go into
your Data Dictionary XML file, find the "F" message definition, and change
required="Y" to required="N".

But first, I'd probably double-check with your counterparty's docs.

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 5:13 AM michael.efis--- via Quickfixj-users <
qui...@li...> wrote:

> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/QuickFIX/J> Support:
> http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
> Hi
>
> Could you advise on the following issue, please?
>
> We receive intermittent "Required Tag Missing" error while parsing
> incoming fix messages, even though the missing field is present in the
> message. For example in the following message the tag 447 is present on the
> message, and yet sometimes we receive “Required Tag Missing, field=447”
> while parsing it.
>
>
> 8=FIX.4.4|9=284|35=F|49=TEST_49|56=TEST_56|34=420|52=20190302-07:31:57.079|115=TEST3|116=TEST_116|11=TEST_11|41=TEST_41|55=TEST_55|48=TEST_48|22=4|54=2|60=20190302-07:31:56.933|38=TEST_38|207=TEST_207|454=3|455=TEST_455_1|456=TEST_456_1|455=TEST_455_2|456=TEST_456_2|455=TEST_455_3|456=TEST_456_3|453=1|448=TEST_448|447=D|452=3|10=XXX|
>
> This issue has been observed with cancel messages and it normally happens
> after application startup. We do use a data dictionary, and 99.8% of the
> time such cancellation messages work fine. We use quick fix version 1.5.3.
> (quickfixj-core-1.5.3.jar and quickfixj-msg-fix44-1.5.3.jar)
>
> Are there any know issues with intermittent “Required tag missing” errors?
>
>
>
>
> I’d also created the  https://www.quickfixj.org/jira/browse/QFJ-971 JIRA
> for this question as I was not sure if it falls into the “help” or “error”
> category.
>
>
>
> Many thanks and Kind Regards
>
> Michael
>
> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for
> the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this e-mail
> in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system
> and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this e-mail or
> its attachments.
>
> Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free. The
> Barclays Group does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from
> unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications
> by any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses. Replies to
> this e-mail may be monitored by the Barclays Group for operational or
> business reasons.
>
> Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its attachments that
> does not relate to the business of the Barclays Group is personal to the
> sender and is not given or endorsed by the Barclays Group.
>
> Barclays Services Limited provides support and administrative services
> across Barclays group. Barclays Services Limited is an appointed
> representative of Barclays Bank UK plc, Barclays Bank plc and Clydesdale
> Financial Services Limited. Barclays Bank UK plc and Barclays Bank plc are
> authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the
> Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority.
> Clydesdale Financial Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the
> Financial Conduct Authority..
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
>


-- 
Grant Birchmeier
*Connamara Systems, LLC*
*Made-To-Measure Trading Solutions.*
Exactly what you need. No more. No less.
http://connamara.com

Re: [Quickfixj-users] Intermittently we receive the "Required Tag Missing" error for existing fields

[Robert N. <rob...@gm...>]

Cancel messages aren’t always required to be fully complete.

By just debug the validation or put an exception break point on the specific exception and test until you can reproduce it.

Depending on what you are doing on startup with the messages you’ll want to check that your configuration settings are the same as when you have a live session. This isn’t always the case depending on whether you are manually processing messages or not.

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 5:00 AM, michael.efis--- via Quickfixj-users <qui...@li...> wrote:
> 
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/ <http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/>
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/ <http://www.quickfixj.org/support/>
> 
> 
> Hi 
> Could you advise on the following issue, please?
> We receive intermittent "Required Tag Missing" error while parsing incoming fix messages, even though the missing field is present in the message. For example in the following message the tag 447 is present on the message, and yet sometimes we receive “Required Tag Missing, field=447” while parsing it.
> 8=FIX.4.4|9=284|35=F|49=TEST_49|56=TEST_56|34=420|52=20190302-07:31:57.079|115=TEST3|116=TEST_116|11=TEST_11|41=TEST_41|55=TEST_55|48=TEST_48|22=4|54=2|60=20190302-07:31:56.933|38=TEST_38|207=TEST_207|454=3|455=TEST_455_1|456=TEST_456_1|455=TEST_455_2|456=TEST_456_2|455=TEST_455_3|456=TEST_456_3|453=1|448=TEST_448|447=D|452=3|10=XXX|
> This issue has been observed with cancel messages and it normally happens after application startup. We do use a data dictionary, and 99.8% of the time such cancellation messages work fine. We use quick fix version 1.5.3. (quickfixj-core-1.5.3.jar and quickfixj-msg-fix44-1.5.3.jar)
> Are there any know issues with intermittent “Required tag missing” errors?   
>  
> I’d also created the  https://www.quickfixj.org/jira/browse/QFJ-971 <https://www.quickfixj.org/jira/browse/QFJ-971> JIRA for this question as I was not sure if it falls into the “help” or “error” category.
>  
> Many thanks and Kind Regards
> Michael
> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this e-mail or its attachments.
> 
> Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free. The Barclays Group does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications by any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses. Replies to this e-mail may be monitored by the Barclays Group for operational or business reasons.
> 
> Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its attachments that does not relate to the business of the Barclays Group is personal to the sender and is not given or endorsed by the Barclays Group.
> 
> Barclays Services Limited provides support and administrative services across Barclays group. Barclays Services Limited is an appointed representative of Barclays Bank UK plc, Barclays Bank plc and Clydesdale Financial Services Limited. Barclays Bank UK plc and Barclays Bank plc are authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority. Clydesdale Financial Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority..
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li... <mailto:Qui...@li...>
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users>

Re: [Quickfixj-users] Intermittently we receive the "Required Tag Missing" error for existing fields

[Colin D. <co...@ma...>]

The issue might be with the tags being out-of-order. There's another 
setting, something like, "validateOutOfOrder", that you should set to 
false in this scenario.

On 3/8/19 3:00 AM, michael.efis--- via Quickfixj-users wrote:
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
>
> Hi
>
> Could you advise on the following issue, please?
>
> We receive intermittent "Required Tag Missing" error while parsing 
> incoming fix messages, even though the missing field is present in the 
> message. For example in the following message the tag 447 is present 
> on the message, and yet sometimes we receive “Required Tag Missing, 
> field=447” while parsing it.
>
> 8=FIX.4.4|9=284|35=F|49=TEST_49|56=TEST_56|34=420|52=20190302-07:31:57.079|115=TEST3|116=TEST_116|11=TEST_11|41=TEST_41|55=TEST_55|48=TEST_48|22=4|54=2|60=20190302-07:31:56.933|38=TEST_38|207=TEST_207|454=3|455=TEST_455_1|456=TEST_456_1|455=TEST_455_2|456=TEST_456_2|455=TEST_455_3|456=TEST_456_3|453=1|448=TEST_448|447=D|452=3|10=XXX|
>
> This issue has been observed with cancel messages and it normally 
> happens after application startup. We do use a data dictionary, and 
> 99.8% of the time such cancellation messages work fine. We use quick 
> fix version 1.5.3. (quickfixj-core-1.5.3.jar and 
> quickfixj-msg-fix44-1.5.3.jar)
>
> Are there any know issues with intermittent “Required tag missing” 
> errors?
>
> I’d also created the https://www.quickfixj.org/jira/browse/QFJ-971 
> JIRA for this question as I was not sure if it falls into the “help” 
> or “error” category.
>
> Many thanks and Kind Regards
>
> Michael
>
> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely 
> for the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure 
> under applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received 
> this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it 
> from your system and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any 
> part of this e-mail or its attachments.
>
> Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free. 
> The Barclays Group does not accept responsibility for any loss arising 
> from unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet 
> communications by any third party, or from the transmission of any 
> viruses. Replies to this e-mail may be monitored by the Barclays Group 
> for operational or business reasons.
>
> Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its attachments 
> that does not relate to the business of the Barclays Group is personal 
> to the sender and is not given or endorsed by the Barclays Group.
>
> Barclays Services Limited provides support and administrative services 
> across Barclays group. Barclays Services Limited is an appointed 
> representative of Barclays Bank UK plc, Barclays Bank plc and 
> Clydesdale Financial Services Limited. Barclays Bank UK plc and 
> Barclays Bank plc are authorised by the Prudential Regulation 
> Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the 
> Prudential Regulation Authority. Clydesdale Financial Services Limited 
> is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority..
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users

-- 
Colin DuPlantis
Chief Architect, Marketcetera
Download, Run, Trade
888.868.4884
https://www.marketcetera.com

[Quickfixj-users] Intermittently we receive the "Required Tag Missing" error for existing fields

[<mic...@ba...>]

Hi
Could you advise on the following issue, please?
We receive intermittent "Required Tag Missing" error while parsing incoming fix messages, even though the missing field is present in the message. For example in the following message the tag 447 is present on the message, and yet sometimes we receive "Required Tag Missing, field=447" while parsing it.
8=FIX.4.4|9=284|35=F|49=TEST_49|56=TEST_56|34=420|52=20190302-07:31:57.079|115=TEST3|116=TEST_116|11=TEST_11|41=TEST_41|55=TEST_55|48=TEST_48|22=4|54=2|60=20190302-07:31:56.933|38=TEST_38|207=TEST_207|454=3|455=TEST_455_1|456=TEST_456_1|455=TEST_455_2|456=TEST_456_2|455=TEST_455_3|456=TEST_456_3|453=1|448=TEST_448|447=D|452=3|10=XXX|
This issue has been observed with cancel messages and it normally happens after application startup. We do use a data dictionary, and 99.8% of the time such cancellation messages work fine. We use quick fix version 1.5.3. (quickfixj-core-1.5.3.jar and quickfixj-msg-fix44-1.5.3.jar)
Are there any know issues with intermittent "Required tag missing" errors?

I'd also created the  https://www.quickfixj.org/jira/browse/QFJ-971 JIRA for this question as I was not sure if it falls into the "help" or "error" category.

Many thanks and Kind Regards
Michael

This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this e-mail or its attachments.
Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free. The Barclays Group does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications by any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses. Replies to this e-mail may be monitored by the Barclays Group for operational or business reasons.
Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its attachments that does not relate to the business of the Barclays Group is personal to the sender and is not given or endorsed by the Barclays Group.
Barclays Services Limited provides support and administrative services across Barclays group. Barclays Services Limited is an appointed representative of Barclays Bank UK plc, Barclays Bank plc and Clydesdale Financial Services Limited. Barclays Bank UK plc and Barclays Bank plc are authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority. Clydesdale Financial Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

Re: [Quickfixj-users] QFJ 2.1.1 mvn build error on windows

[Christoph J. <chr...@ma...>]

I guess they can be ignored. But could surely be improved. ;)

Chris.


On 08/02/2019 15:43, Andrew Munn wrote:
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
> Seeing these error messages on windows.  Probably they can be
> ignored?
>
> [INFO] --- maven-assembly-plugin:3.1.0:single (sources-assembly) @ quickfixj-distribution ---
> [INFO] Reading assembly descriptor: src/main/assembly/src.xml
> [ERROR] OS=Windows and the assembly descriptor contains a *nix-specific root-relative-reference (starting with slash) /
> [INFO] Building zip: C:\java\org.quickfixj-2.1.1\org.quickfixj-2.1.1\quickfixj-distribution\target\org.quickfixj-2.1.1-src.zip
> [INFO]
> [INFO] --- maven-assembly-plugin:3.1.0:single (bin-assembly) @ quickfixj-distribution ---
> [INFO] Reading assembly descriptor: src/main/assembly/distribution.xml
> [ERROR] OS=Windows and the assembly descriptor contains a *nix-specific root-relative-reference (starting with slash) /
> [ERROR] OS=Windows and the assembly descriptor contains a *nix-specific root-relative-reference (starting with slash) /
> [ERROR] OS=Windows and the assembly descriptor contains a *nix-specific root-relative-reference (starting with slash) /etc
> [ERROR] OS=Windows and the assembly descriptor contains a *nix-specific root-relative-reference (starting with slash) /doc
> [ERROR] OS=Windows and the assembly descriptor contains a *nix-specific root-relative-reference (starting with slash) /doc/api
>

-- 
Christoph John
Software Engineering
T +49 241 557080-28
chr...@ma...

MACD GmbH
Oppenhoffallee 103
52066 Aachen, Germany
www.macd.com

Amtsgericht Aachen: HRB 8151
Ust.-Id: DE 813021663
Geschäftsführer: George Macdonald

Re: [Quickfixj-users] building only FIX 5.0

[Christoph J. <chr...@ma...>]

You could also try specifying "-PskipBundlePlugin" which will not call the bundle plugin. If you 
need OSGi bundles then rather not use that option.

Cheers,
Chris.
|
|
On 06/02/2019 16:37, Andrew Munn wrote:
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
> I'm currently build like this:
>
> mvn -DskipTests -Dmaven.javadoc.skip=true clean install
>
> what can I pass to maven so only the 5.0 stuff is built?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users

-- 
Christoph John
Software Engineering
T +49 241 557080-28
chr...@ma...

MACD GmbH
Oppenhoffallee 103
52066 Aachen, Germany
www.macd.com

Amtsgericht Aachen: HRB 8151
Ust.-Id: DE 813021663
Geschäftsführer: George Macdonald

Re: [Quickfixj-users] How do the FIX 5.0 Service Packs work?

[Christoph J. <chr...@ma...>]

I think this is due to the fact that the quickfix.field classes are generated with the most recent 
dictionary, i.e. fix50sp2.
I do not know of a way to only build fix50sp2.

Chris.

On 08/02/2019 22:58, Andrew Munn wrote:
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
> Are service packs cumulative?  Do I need to build 5.0 and 5.0SP1 to use
> 5.0SP2?
>
> I see that changes to the file FIX50SP2.modified.xml can cause errors like
> this in fix50sp1:
>
> [ERROR]
> /C:/java/qf/quickfixj-core/target/generated-sources/quickfix/fix50sp1/component/QuotSetGrp.java:[741,39]
> cannot find symbol
>    symbol:   class UnderlyingUnitOfMeasure
>    location: package quickfix.field
>
> I only plan to use fix50sp2.  Can I skip building fix50sp1?
>
> Thanks
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users

-- 
Christoph John
Software Engineering
T +49 241 557080-28
chr...@ma...

MACD GmbH
Oppenhoffallee 103
52066 Aachen, Germany
www.macd.com

Amtsgericht Aachen: HRB 8151
Ust.-Id: DE 813021663
Geschäftsführer: George Macdonald

Re: [Quickfixj-users] QF Code generator creating invalid ORDER arrays

[Christoph J. <chr...@ma...>]

Hi,

hmm, that looks strange. What does the dictionary for that group look like?

Cheers,
Chris.

On 11/02/2019 18:15, Andrew Munn wrote:
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
>
>
> I'm seeing generated code generated like this:
>
> public static class NoUnderlyings extends Group {
> 		static final long serialVersionUID = 20050617;
> 		private static final int[] ORDER = {311, 312, 974, 998 998, 1423 1423, 1424 1424, 1425 1425, 1437, 1441, 1453, 1454, 1455, 1456, 1459,
> 1460, 20121, 944, 0};
>
> Notice that some fields are dupes with no commas between.
>
-- 
Christoph John
Software Engineering
T +49 241 557080-28
chr...@ma...

MACD GmbH
Oppenhoffallee 103
52066 Aachen, Germany
www.macd.com

Amtsgericht Aachen: HRB 8151
Ust.-Id: DE 813021663
Geschäftsführer: George Macdonald

Re: [Quickfixj-users] printing FIX msgs w/nested repeating groups?

[Ross Y. <ros...@em...>]

Here is what I do:

     			initiator.start();
			List<Session> sessions = initiator.getManagedSessions();
			session = sessions.get(0);



	private void logMessage(Message message) {
		String str = message.toXML(session.getDataDictionary());
		String s = "<!\\[CDATA\\[";
		str = str.replaceAll(s, "");
		str = str.replaceAll("]]>", "");
		str = str.replaceAll("<he", "  <he");
		str = str.replaceAll("</he", "  </he");
		str = str.replaceAll("<bo", "  <bo");
		str = str.replaceAll("</bo", "  </bo");
		str = str.replaceAll("<tr", "  <tr");
		str = str.replaceAll("</tr", "  </tr");
		str = str.replaceAll("<fi", "     <fi");
		log.info(str);
	}


> On Feb 20, 2019, at 3:01 PM, Andrew Munn <an...@nm...> wrote:
> 
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
> 
> 
> Is there any example Java code that will pretty print a QFJ Message 
> including all nested repeating groups, according to a provided 
> DataDictionary?
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users


-- 
NOTICE: This communication may contain information that is privileged or 
confidential. It may be read and used solely by the intended recipient(s), 
and any review, use or distribution by others is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If 
you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from disclosing, 
copying, distributing or using any of this information. If you received 
this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and 
destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. No 
assurance is given that this e-mail or any attachments are free of viruses 
or other harmful code.

[Quickfixj-users] printing FIX msgs w/nested repeating groups?

[Andrew M. <an...@nm...>]

Is there any example Java code that will pretty print a QFJ Message 
including all nested repeating groups, according to a provided 
DataDictionary?

Re: [Quickfixj-users] message validation ignored in message.fromString()

[Andrew M. <an...@nm...>]

Thanks for noticing the dictionaries.

I just looked in the source (should have done that first) and the validate 
boolean passed to message.fromString(...) is just for validating the 
checksum.  DataDictionary.validate(message) does the real validation.

On Wed, 20 Feb 2019, philip wrote:

> 1. Your dictionaries are the wrong way round. This is your first problem.
> 
> FIXT1.1 is a Transport layer / aka Session Data Dictionary
> FIX50SP2 is an Application Data Dictionary
> 
> 2. Much of the time the validation just sets the exception field on the
> message. This is kind of a hangover from QuickFixC++ and IMO terrible design.
> 
> It's worth doing:
> 
> if (message.getException() != null) {
>   throw message.getException();
> }
> 
> - Philip
> 
> On 2019-02-20 19:33, Andrew Munn wrote:
> > QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> > QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > It looks like the validation boolean on message.fromString is ignored.  I
> > have to validate a 2nd time to see the exception.
> > 
> > sessionDictionary = new DataDictionary("c:\\java\\FIX50SP2.modified.xml");
> > appDictionary = new DataDictionary("c:\\java\\FIXT11.xml");
> > // message.fromString: validation=true
> > message.fromString(m4, sessionDictionary, appDictionary, true); //passes
> > appDictionary.validate(message); // fails
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Quickfixj-users mailing list
> > Qui...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users
> 

Re: [Quickfixj-users] message validation ignored in message.fromString()

[philip <ph...@wh...>]

1. Your dictionaries are the wrong way round. This is your first 
problem.

FIXT1.1 is a Transport layer / aka Session Data Dictionary
FIX50SP2 is an Application Data Dictionary

2. Much of the time the validation just sets the exception field on the 
message. This is kind of a hangover from QuickFixC++ and IMO terrible 
design.

It's worth doing:

if (message.getException() != null) {
   throw message.getException();
}

- Philip

On 2019-02-20 19:33, Andrew Munn wrote:
> QuickFIX/J Documentation: http://www.quickfixj.org/documentation/
> QuickFIX/J Support: http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
> 
> 
> 
> It looks like the validation boolean on message.fromString is ignored.  
> I
> have to validate a 2nd time to see the exception.
> 
> sessionDictionary = new 
> DataDictionary("c:\\java\\FIX50SP2.modified.xml");
> appDictionary = new DataDictionary("c:\\java\\FIXT11.xml");
> // message.fromString: validation=true
> message.fromString(m4, sessionDictionary, appDictionary, true); 
> //passes
> appDictionary.validate(message); // fails
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Quickfixj-users mailing list
> Qui...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfixj-users