Author |
Topic: QuickFix Dictionary is incompatible with SecurityList (3 messages, Page 1 of 1) |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Moderators: VPfau | |||||
DThemistokleo Posts: 4 Joined: Sep 29, 2016 |
Request:
8=FIX.4.49=12335=x34=249=DThemistokleo52=20170125-15:18:08.12856=OEC_TEST58=ESH7320=security:1:1485357486556559=012051=112052=410=075 Response: 8=FIX.4.49=62035=y34=249=OEC_TEST52=20170125-15:18:0856=DThemistokleo320=security:1:1485357486556322=OECFIX:636207213026392702:826560=0146=255=ES461=FXXXXS200=201703228=50207=CME107=E-Mini S&P15=USD126=20170317-21:29:00.000341=00010101-23:00:00.000344=00010101-22:00:00.000345=00010101-22:00:00.000969=0.2512054=Indices12055=012059=ESH712063=212071=031643=21645=52251644=111645=47501644=1255=ES461=FXXXXS228=50207=CME107=E-Mini S&P15=USD341=00010101-23:00:00.000344=00010101-22:00:00.000345=00010101-22:00:00.00012054=Indices12055=012063=212071=031643=21645=52251644=111645=47501644=1210=129 QuickFix rejects this message: The Tag appears more than once, field=1645 The response is correct, although I am not sure why it is responding with multiple instruments even though I specify a max of '1' instrument to be returned. I know this is a XML dictionary issue, but I have tried every way possible and it still does not correctly identify the margin fields. I have added this group definition to the SecurityList message on the same level as 'NoUnderlyings': <group name="NoMarginAmt" required="N"> <field name="MarginAmt" required="Y" /> <field name="MarginAmtType" required="Y" /> </group> And these fields in the field section of the data dictionary. <field number="1643" name="NoMarginAmt" type="NUMINGROUP" /> <field number="1644" name="MarginAmtType" type="INT"> <value enum="11" description="INITIAL_MARGIN" /> <value enum="12" description="LIQUIDATING_MARGIN" /> </field> <field number="1645" name="MarginAmt" type="FLOAT" /> What am I missing? |
||||
JHelfert Posts: 1 Joined: Dec 15, 2017 |
I am having this same issue. Any suggestions?
|
||||
ABandali Posts: 13 Joined: May 23, 2023 |
Any update on this issue?? I am facing the same.
|
||||