I am receiving this error when trying to retrive an empty PNR / shell PNR where only passenger details are provided.
EndTransactionLLSRQ: ITINERARY REQUIRED TO COMPLETE TRANSACTION
I have read the documentation.
Creating a 'shell' PNR is not allowed unless there are active segments in the record. You can get around this by creating an OTH or Miscellaneous segment that contains text only and sends no message to any carriers. That API is called "MiscSegmentSellLLSRQ" and the documentation can be found at this link.
Related
There is a dev-network in my project which is including Accounts-sdk, Token-sdk. The project is about transfer of custom tokens between accounts of same node as well as different node. The network is suddenly not notarising the transition which was working for a long time. Now I am not able to transfer the tokens and I am able to transfer the token if I issue the fresh token and transfer. After two or three transactions of transfer the network is again not notarising the transaction.
Throwing
java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException: net.corda.core.flows.NotaryException: Unable to notarise transaction AD57C34EA40953561B90C5EB832336E4E42CD2C876CA5030C986B9EB50909AE7 : One or more input states or referenced states have already been used as input states in other transactions. Conflicting state count: 1, consumption details: today at 1:05:43 PM14BBC38DF7BDA1FD6CA8E97DB16967FBFC9B18AB95DCD7B1990892C206759FA3(1) -> StateConsumptionDetails(hashOfTransactionId=6190DA0ABAD95B767AB42351368A1D51FCCE164DD08D256F98E065F54B6EE789, type=INPUT_STATE). today at 1:05:43 PMTo find out if any of the conflicting transactions have been generated by this node you can use the hashLookup Corda shell command.] with root cause today at 1:05:43 PM net.corda.core.flows.NotaryException: Unable to notarise transaction AD57C34EA40953561B90C5EB832336E4E42CD2C876CA5030C986B9EB50909AE7 : One or more input states or referenced states have already been used as input states in other transactions. Conflicting state count: 1, consumption details: today at 1:05:43 PM14BBC38DF7BDA1FD6CA8E97DB16967FBFC9B18AB95DCD7B1990892C206759FA3(1) -> StateConsumptionDetails(hashOfTransactionId=6190DA0ABAD95B767AB42351368A1D51FCCE164DD08D256F98E065F54B6EE789, type=INPUT_STATE). today at 1:05:43 PMTo find out if any of the conflicting transactions have been generated by this node you can use the hashLookup Corda shell command.
I am not able to understand why the transfer of token is not been notarised.
Why the network went un-notarising the transfer tokens transaction?
how can I resolve the problem?
It looks like the transaction used to transfer the token is using an input reference that has already been consumed. You can see the transaction id and the output index that is creating the problem in the error description, which could be of some help to debug the issue.
While upgrading from Corda 3 to Corda 4, I have an issue commiting a State to our node's ledger with only one Party. A single Party is able to create a state, notarize it, but CANNOT commit to the Corda 4 ledger without asking for an external third party.
The error Corda 4 produces (which Corda 3 did not produce) is the following:
(1) java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: A flow session for each external participant to the transaction must be provided. If you wish to continue using this insecure API then specify a target platform version of less than 4 for your CorDapp.
More specific context: Using FinalityFlow without a session yields a 'session required for external parties' error and does not complete. Adding only a session (e.g. session = initiateFlow(PartyA) ) results in an error that 'local nodes should not be included.'
Is there a workaround regarding this solution? It's important (for our use case) that a single Party can create a State and modify the State information without the involvement of other parties. Other use cases (where multiple parties are included) stem from this use case. Any guidance is greatly appreciated.
I think the error message is pretty spot on here. Just change the way you call FinalityFlow during your issuance such that it doesn’t contain a flow session to itself i.e.
return subFlow(new FinalityFlow(signedTransaction));
Although you may get a deprecation warning, in which case, do the following
return subFlow(FinalityFlow(stx, emptyList()))
i am getting this error in corda 4 Flow sessions were not provided for the following transaction participants I don't want this participant to sign my transaction then why I got this error?
I have two parties defined in my state class and I want only one of them of to sign the transaction, and I didn't created the flow session for the other party.
Please help to resolve this.
In Corda 4, you are required to pass FinalityFlow a list of sessions that includes all of the transaction's participants, so that the transaction can be distributed accordingly.
Just because someone is in this list of participants, it does not make them a required signer. The required signers are determined by the public keys listed on the transaction's commands.
I have a pipeline that is working for a file receive location. This pipeline accepts a csv file and maps it to an XML.
I'm now trying to setup a new email receive location using the same port, pipeline and pipeline settings.
Shouldn't biztalk ignore everything but the attachment if I set the body part index equal to 2? And then it should place the attachment in the pipeline just like with the file location, then the pipeline would output an XML file.
Error:
Microsoft.XLANGs.Core.PersistenceException: Exception occurred when persisting state to the database. ---> Microsoft.BizTalk.XLANGs.BTXEngine.PersistenceItemException: A batch item failed persistence Item-ID 72fbeba9-6bfe-48e0-a0e6-ca5bbd191aa1 OperationType MAIO_CommitBatch Status -1061151998 ErrorInfo The published message could not be routed because no subscribers were found. . ---> Microsoft.BizTalk.XLANGs.BTXEngine.PublishMessageException: Failed to publish (send) a message in the batch. This is usually because there is no one expecting to receive this message. The error was The published message could not be routed because no subscribers were found. with status -1061151998
Pop3 properties:
PipelineConfigurations:
I tried stopping the orchestration and the send port and test both locations.
Testing the email location I got the same error with an email with a .csv attachment.
Testing the file location the data didn't reach the database, but the csv was processed because I could see it in the information logs.
This leads me to the conclusion that the problem is related with the mime decoding and whatever my pipeline is outputing from the email body parts.
Also after researching for a while all solutions seem to point to the necessity of having a pipeline exclusively for email since I need to say which part of the multibody part to decode. I was hoping there was a solution that would allow me to reuse the pipeline I use for the file location.
As #Dijkgraaf mentioned:
It is not failing in the pipeline. It is failing due to there being no Orchestration or Send Port that is expecting the message the Receive Port has published to message box.
That means that the receive worked, that the message has passed the pipeline, and is published in the Messagebox, but there is no matching subscription.
Check for routing failures in the BizTalk management console to find out why. It may be that the message type is not waht you expected, or that one more published properties are not set correctly.
See the suspended message and check which body part is the CSV file. Your config says its it should be the 3rd message BodyPart = 2.
Within my BizTalk 2010 solution I have the following orchestration that’s is started by the receipt of a courier update message. It them makes a couple of call to AX's WCF AIF via two solicit-response ports, a Find request and an Update request.
For this application we are meeting audit requirements through use of the tracking database to store the message body. We are able to link to this from references provided in BAM when we use the TPE. The result for the customer is nice, they get a web portal from which they can view BAM data of message timings etc. but they can also click a link to pull up a copy of the message payloads from the tracking db. Although this works well and makes use of out-of-box functionality for payload storage it has led to relatively complex jobs for the archiving of the tracking db (but that's another story!).
My problem relates to continuation. I have created the following Tracking Profile:
I have associated the first of the orchestration's two solicit response ports with the continuation RcvToOdx based on the interchange Id and this works, I get the following single record written to the Completed activity table:
So, in this case we can assume that an entry was first written on receipt in the inbound message, with the TimeReceivedIntoBts column populated by the physical file receive port. The FindRequestToAx column was then populated by the physical WCF send port. Because this was bound to the RcvToOdx continuation Id and used the same interchange Id and the previously mentioned file receive message, the update was made to the same activity. Notification of the resulting response was also updated to the same activity record - into the FindResponseFromAx column.
My problem is that I would also like BAM to record a timestamp for the subsequent UpdateRequestToAx. Because this request will have the same interchange Id as the previous messages I would expect to be able to solve this problem by simply binding the AxUpdate send port (both send and receive parts of it) to the same continuation id, as seen in the following screen grab:
I also map the UpdateRequestToAx milestone to the physical Ax_TrackAndTraceUpdate_SendPort (Send) and the OrchestrationCompleted milestone to Ax_TrackAndTraceUpdate_SendPort (Receive)
Unfortunately, when I try this I get the following result:
Two problems can be seen from the above db screen grab:
1. Date for the update send port was inserted into a new activity record
2. The record was never completed
I was surprised by this because I'd thought since they update port was enlisted to use the same continuation, and the single InterchangeId was being used by all ports for the continuation Id then all the data milestones would be applied to a single activity.
In looking for a solution to this problem I came across the following post on Stack Overflow suggesting that the continuation must be closed from the BAM API: BAM Continuation issue with TPE. So, I tried this by calling the following method from an expression shape in my orchestration:
public static void EndBAMContinuation(string continuationId)
{
OrchestrationEventStream.EndActivity(CARRIER_ORDER_ACTIVITY_NAME, continuationId);
}
I can be sure the method was called ok because I wrapped the call with a log entry from the CAT framework which I could see in debug view:
I checked the RcvToOdx{867… continuation Id against the non-closed activity and confirmed they matched:
This would suggest that perhaps the request to end the continuation is being processed before the milestone of the received message from the UpdateAx call?
When I query the Relationsips tables I get the following results:
Could anyone please advise why the UpdateToAx activity is not being completed?
I realise that I may be able to solve the problem using only the BAM API but I really want to exhaust any possibility of the TPE being fit for purpose first since the TPE is widely used in other BizTalk solutions of the organisation.
To solve this problem I created a 2nd continuation in the TPE.
"RcvToOdx" continuation for the Find and "OdxToUpdate" continuation for the update - source is InterchangeId on the initial receive port - UPS_TrackAndTrace (same as for other "RcvToOdx" continuation), dest Id is the InterchangeId mapped to update send port.