is this mapping question any clearer?

Home Page Forums BizTalk 2004 – BizTalk 2010 is this mapping question any clearer?

Viewing 1 reply thread
  • Author
    Posts
    • #24073

      I have a source schema that can have 1-4 PID segments.  However, I need my output to create 4 output records regardless of how many PID’s there are.  How can I simulate more source iterations then there actually are? 

      source schema looks like:

      PID
        rec1desc
      /PID
      PID
        rec2desc
      /PID

      target looks like

      rec1
         tag1  (TAGS ARE HARDCODED)
         outputfield1
      /rec1
      rec2
         tag2  (TAGS ARE HARDCODED)
         outputfield2
      /rec2
      rec3
         tag3  (TAGS ARE HARDCODED)
         outputfield3
      /rec3
      rec4
         tag4  (TAGS ARE HARDCODED)
         outputfield4
      /rec4

      if input data looks like (notice only 2 records here)

      pid
         testing1
      /pid
      pid
         testing2
      /pid

      then I need output to look like this:(notice the first value in this .csv output was the hardcoded tag value)

      Description 1,testing1
      Description 2,testing2
      Description 3,
      Description 4,

      the final output file is positional by row so that is exactly why I need this many records generated.  even though there were only two records, the last two just have empty values.

    • #24075

      Hi Frank,

       

         I have a solution in mind for you, the only thing is that using your input data above, the target schema will not show the elements outputfield3 and outputfield4 (but still have Description 3 and Description 4 in the data).

         I have the schemas, map and XML files (for testing) in a zipped file but can’t post it here in the forums. If you are interested in it, go to my profile and you can download that zipped file from there and incorporate those artifacts in your own project…

       

          Daniel.

       

      • #24084

        Thank you for your response.  I have downloaded what I believe you have set up for me and will take a look at it and post a response regardless.  I sure appreciate you taking time on this.

         

        FC

      • #24085

        Great, this solution worked perfectly.  I had exactly this solution mapped with one glaring difference and that was not using the flattening value mapper. 

         

        Once again, I thank you for your help.

        FC

Viewing 1 reply thread
  • The forum ‘BizTalk 2004 – BizTalk 2010’ is closed to new topics and replies.