Yes, you are correct. RSSL_UPMF_DO_NOT_CONFLATE is equivalent to RespMsg::DoNotFilterFlag in RFA C++.

The code that I used to set the RSSL_UPMF_DO_NOT_CONFLATE flag in UPA C is:

updateMsg.flags |= RSSL_UPMF_DO_NOT_CONFLATE;

I have also tested with the ADH and the ADS is 2.6.11.L1. The rmdstestclient can get the RSSL_UPMF_DO_NOT_CONFLATE flag properly from ADS.

<updateMsg domainType="RSSL_DMT_MARKET_PRICE" streamId="5" containerType="RSSL_DT_FIELD_LIST" flags="0x98 (RSSL_UPMF_HAS_MSG_KEY|RSSL_UPMF_HAS_SEQ_NUM|RSSL_UPMF_DO_NOT_CONFLATE)" updateType="0 (RDM_UPD_EVENT_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED)" seqNum="0" dataSize="38">
    <key  flags="0x7 (RSSL_MKF_HAS_SERVICE_ID|RSSL_MKF_HAS_NAME|RSSL_MKF_HAS_NAME_TYPE)"  serviceId="4512" name="IBM.N" nameType="1"/>
</updateMsg>

TRDPRC_1             : REAL           2   : [12 1/2]
BID                  : REAL           2   : [1.03]
ASK                  : REAL           2   : [1.07]
ACVOL_1              : REAL           5   : [100000.00]
NETCHNG_1            : REAL           3   : [2.15]
ASK_TIME             : TIME           3   : [13:39:51:000]

@billpinsky

I have tested with ADH 3.2.1.L1 and ADS 3.2.1.L1. The consumer application can retrieve the update message with the RSSL_UPMF_DO_NOT_CONFLATE flag properly.

The provider published the following update message to ADH.

<!-- End Message (Channel IPC descriptor = 196) -->
<!-- Outgoing Message (Channel IPC descriptor = 196) -->
<!-- Time: 16:11:13:862 -->
<!-- rwfMajorVer="14" rwfMinorVer="1" -->
<updateMsg domainType="RSSL_DMT_MARKET_PRICE" streamId="1034" containerType="RSSL_DT_FIELD
_LIST" flags="0x80 (RSSL_UPMF_DO_NOT_CONFLATE)" updateType="0 (RDM_UPD_EVENT_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED)" dataSize="38">
    <dataBody>
        <fieldList flags="0x8 (RSSL_FLF_HAS_STANDARD_DATA)">
            <fieldEntry fieldId="6" data="1719"/>
            <fieldEntry fieldId="22" data="0C6B"/>
            <fieldEntry fieldId="25" data="0C6F"/>
            <fieldEntry fieldId="32" data="0C00 9896 80"/>
            <fieldEntry fieldId="11" data="0C00 D7"/>
            <fieldEntry fieldId="267" data="100B 0D"/>
        </fieldList>
    </dataBody>
</updateMsg>

The consumer application got this update from ADS.

<!-- Incoming Message (Channel IPC descriptor = 184) -->
<!-- Time: 16:11:13:946 -->
<!-- rwfMajorVer="14" rwfMinorVer="1" -->
<updateMsg domainType="RSSL_DMT_MARKET_PRICE" streamId="6" containerType="RSSL_DT_FIELD_LIST" flags="0x90 (RSSL_UPMF_HAS_SEQ_NUM|RSSL_UPMF_DO_NOT_CONFLATE)" updateType="0 (RDM_UPD_EVENT_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED)" seqNum="0" dataSize="38">
    <dataBody>
        <fieldList flags="0x8 (RSSL_FLF_HAS_STANDARD_DATA)">
            <fieldEntry fieldId="6" data="1719"/>
            <fieldEntry fieldId="22" data="0C6B"/>
            <fieldEntry fieldId="25" data="0C6F"/>
            <fieldEntry fieldId="32" data="0C00 9896 80"/>
            <fieldEntry fieldId="11" data="0C00 D7"/>
            <fieldEntry fieldId="267" data="100B 0D"/>
        </fieldList>
    </dataBody>
</updateMsg>

The update message's flag is 0x90 (RSSL_UPMF_HAS_SEQ_NUM|RSSL_UPMF_DO_NOT_CONFLATE). Please verify the version of ADH and ADS.

The version of the ADH and the ADS is 2.6.11 load L1

Thanks. The respnse you posted is what I had hoped to receive. My thinking is that there is some internal flag that needs to be set that I am failing to do. I also have an RFA C++ version of the code that sets the RSSL_UPMF_DO_NOT_CONFLATE flag using this same ADH and ADS, but it does so by using the RFA API's rfa::message::RespMsg::DoNotFilterFlag. Is this the equivalent of what I am doing in setting the updateMsg flag value to RSSL_UPMF_DO_NOT_CONFLATE or do I need to set some other flag in order to view the results correctly in the rmdstestclient?