Why no interface mapping?

[Former Member]

Hi Xier,

Secnario as following:

1. JDBC sender send message to BPM.

2. BPM call Sync ABAP Proxy

3. BPM get proxy response

4. BPM use JDBC receiver write data back to DB.

So we need to define interface Determination for step 1.

we input Inbound Interface, but the interface mapping is optional, which show "Not Specified" in Receiver determination.

My question is why here don't need to input interface mapping, this interface mapping should transform JDBC sender interface structure to BPM's abstract interface structure. Why it's not mandatory?

[former_member185845]

there is no need to create Interface mapping for step 1.

Since the outbound Mi reflects the Sender MI,

next will be creating Abstract, prob you will copy the same MI but change it to Abstract.

hence there is not need for any conversion

Hovever if there is structure conversion from MI(Outbound) to Abstract MI then you require Interface mapping.

Regards

chandra dasari

Yash tech

[Shabarish_Nair]

<i>1. JDBC sender send message to BPM.

2. BPM call Sync ABAP Proxy</i>

>>

assuem JDBC sender has MT say JDBCSender1_MT and you use a MI called JDBCSender1_MI_Out. Now for BPM you want the message from sender JDBC, So say you have a absract interface JDBCBPM_MI_Abs. This interface can be made to refer MT JDBCSender1_MT. So to send data from JDBCSender1_MI_Out -> JDBCBPM_MI_Abs you dont need a mapping since both the MI contain the same MT.

Hope you have your doubt clarified.

[Former Member]

Hello,

<i>JDBC sender interface structure to BPM's abstract interface</i>

Both the interfaces uses the same Message Type. So it says optional.

Regards,

Sumit

[santhosh_kumarv]

Hi,

Since the Message type of both the Inbound Interface and the Abstract Interface are same it is not mandatory to do mapping explecitly.

Regards

Santhosh