Transferring large payloads, on the order of tens or hundreds of megabytes, between a FTP server and a local file system, in either direction, requires selection of appropriate features of the Batch FTP and Batch Local File eWays, and tuning certain timing parameters.
Default timing parameter values result in timeout exceptions when transferring large payloads.
The Batch FTP eWay and the Batch Local File eWas are typically used to receive the entire payload before writing it out. This results in attempts to allocate memory many time the size of the payload being transferred and, for large files, causes memory exhaustion and application server failures.
Discussion in the attached document points out which timing parameters need to be tuned to facilitate transfer of large payloads. It also presents sample Java code that uses facilities of the Batch FTP and Batch Local File for streaming payload between the FTP server and the local file systems without using excessive amount of memory.
The material covered in the document was prepared using Java CAPS projects developed and tested in Java CAPS 5.1.0, exported, imported into Java CAPS Release 6 and tested again. It is expected that the code will work in all versions of Java CAPS from 5.1.0 up.
By default, the Sun SeeBeyond Integration Server domain uses a single log to log all events, whether arising out of execution of the Integration Server or arising out of execution of Java CAPS solutions deployed to it. This log is named server.log and is kept in the <JavaVACPInstallRoot>/logicalhost/is/domains/<domainroot>/logs directory.
This note discusses how the Integration Server can be configured to deliver all or selected events to an additional log handler and how XML-formatted event information can be obtained. This note also presents some ideas on multiple logging destinations and notification.
The writing of this note, and the underlying development and configuration work, were prompted by repeated questions about logging in Java CAPS, in particular how it could be made to behave like it used to in the non-J2EE versions of the SeeBeyond EAI products. For these readers who are still waiting for the answer they like – there will be no such answer coming. It is not possible to configure logging for ‘your interface’ separately from logging for all other ‘interfaces’ since there is no notion of ‘your interface’ as a separate component in Java CAPS. There is no way to collect logging information pertaining to a specific project or deployment in such a way that all relevant information is collected, no information is lost and no information on unrelated components is included.
In Java CAPS 5.1 the Sun SeeBeyond Integration Server is a modified version of the Sun Application Server 8.0 Platform Edition. As such a number of things that can be done with that application server can be done with the Sun SeeBeyond Integration Server. Most notably, the Sun SeeBeyond Integration Server uses the java.util.logging API for logging. Integration Server logging can be manipulated from the command line, using the isadmin tool, from a Web-based GUI and, also, programmatically.
This note discusses how IS logging can be manipulated programmatically using Java Collaboration Definitions. This note applies to the Sun SeeBeyond Integration Server included in Java CAPS 5.1.
In Java CAPS 5.1 the Sun SeeBeyond Integration Server is a modified version of the Sun Application Server 8.0 Platform Edition. As such a number of things that can be done with that application server can be done with the Sun SeeBeyond Integration Server. Most notably, it can be managed at runtime using the isadmin tool much the same way as the Sun Application Server 8.0 PE can be managed using the asadmin tool.
This note discusses how the isadmin tool can be used to manage runtime logging of the Sun SeeBeyond Integration Server. This note applies to the Sun SeeBeyond Integration Server included in Java CAPS 5.1.
This example implements a part of the ELS functionality dealing with linking a number of related messages until all are collected or a time period elapses, whichever is the sooner, a counted and timed correlation pattern, or an aggregator pattern with a timer.
Unlike the implementation from Example 2, on which it is heavily based, this implementation will correlate a varying number of messages, statically set at design time, or as many as it receives within a given time period expressed as a static duration. Thus the same implementation can be used to correlate 2, 3, 10 or 30 messages, by modifying the value of a single business process attribute, over a statically configured time period. By obtaining the value of the business process attribute which controls the message count or which controls duration, from the environment or the initial message, one will change the static implementation into a dynamic counted and timed correlation solution.
This example implements a part of the ELS functionality dealing with linking a number of related messages, a counted correlation pattern, or an aggregator pattern.
Unlike the simple implementation from Example 1, this implementation will correlate a varying number of messages, statically set at design time. Thus the same implementation can be used to correlate 2, 3, 10 or 30 messages, by modifying the value of a single business process attribute. By obtaining the value of the business process attribute, which controls the message count, from the environment or the initial message, one will change the static implementation into a dynamic counted correlation solution.
Correlations are probably the single least understood area of eInsight functionality. The example discussed in the attached document implements one of the “Event Linking and Sequencing” patterns, present in e*Gate 4.5 and eGate SRE, that is alleged to have been lost in ICAN and Java CAPS. In as much as implementing ELS in eInsight 5.1 using correlation requires some development, rather then just configuration, one could argue that it was lost. In as much as implementing ELS in eInsight 5.1 is possible and relatively simple, one could also argue the opposite.
The example discussed in the document, and illustrated with the Java CAPS 5.1.3 project export, implements a part of the ELS functionality dealing with linking a specific number of related messages, a counted correlation pattern, or an aggregator pattern.
By default Java CAPS uses the Java Message Service infrastructure as its underlying messaging layer. Occasionally there is a requirement or a temptation to develop synchronous service, for example invoked as web services or as HTTP Request/Response services, that invoke some back-end component over JMS. In request/response scenarios the response must be delivered by the component which received the request, a JCD or a BP. If the request is passed to the nback-end infrastructure through a JMS Queue or Topic there arises an issue of getting the response back to the same instance of the JCD or a BP that sent the original request. The attached extract, JMS RequestReply, from an early draft of the “Java CAPS Basics – Implementing Common EAI Patterns“, discusses and illustrates how the JMS RequestReply() method of the JMS OTD can be used to implement this kind of functionality.
This note introduces the use of the Java Properties file, some locations where such a file can be put, a method to use a properties file residing in an arbitrary location without hardcoding the location, and the most basic method of access to the properties in the properties file.
This note walks through an example of configuring Java CAPS 5.1 through adding a custom property to system properties. Java collaboration developed in Note 1 is used to retrieve the value of the new property.