We heavily use the BizTalk Deployment Framework to aid in the deployment of simple to complex BizTalk solutions. One of the greatest benefits is the ability to run custom deployment tasks and scripts. In previous blogs we have shown how to run a custom post deployment scripts in BTDF, today, we will show how custom scripts can be used to conditionally import a binding file during BTDF deployment.
Tom Babiec wrote a great blog a few months back on inserting multiple parent child tables in a single stored procedure. We use this technique a lot in our data integration work, and it’s proven to be very robust in many contexts. The SQL procedure outlined in that blog is useful not just for BizTalk, but generally speaking for ADO.NET and other applications trying to load multiple rows into SQL Server for multiple parent child tables. However, when dealing with larger datasets (and as the table grows), we’ve noticed some degradation in performance. In some cases, we were seeing variances of 30 seconds to 10+ minutes for loading the same exact data set on the same database. We tried a few different options, including forcing a recompile of the stored procedure between each load
, but this did not solve…
The Tallan Integration Practice heavily utilizes Azure Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) virtual machines for quickly setting up isolated environments for prototypes and BizTalk development environments. However, with so many virtual machines it is often difficult to remember to shut them off when not needed. With Azure‘s Automation features, we can setup a scheduled job to shut down non mission critical VM’s, saving on hosting costs.
MSDN provides an example of INSERTing large data into SQL Server, leveraging the WCF-SQL adapter’s built in FILESTREAM capabilities. However, it’s also possible to leverage the transaction enlisted by the WCF adapter in a custom pipeline to pull FILESTREAM data out of SQL Server more efficiently than the more common SELECT … FOR XML query which simply grabs the FILESTREAM content and stuffs it into an XML node in the resulting document.
Imagine, for example, you had a large document of some sort (XML, Flat File, etc.) to store in SQL Server that BizTalk would need to process from a FILESTREAM table defined like so:
The tradeoff here is losing the typed XML data in favor of more efficient storage and access to larger file objects (especially when the data will, on average, be large). This can make a vast difference if you have…
There are a few good resources out there for setting up a clustered Master Secret Server out there:
Clustering the Master Secret Server (MSDN)
Installation of SSO on a SQL Failover Cluster
However, I faced some issues recently setting all of this up, getting the following errors (in the event log and the configuration log):
Creation of Adapter FILE Configuration Store entries failed. (BizTalk config log)
Could not import a DTC transaction. Please check that MSDTC is configured correctly for remote operation. See the event log (on computer EntSSOClusterResource) (BizTalk config log)
d:\bt\127854\private\source\setup\btscfg\btscfg.cpp(2213): FAILED hr = c0002a25 (BizTalk Config log)
Failed to initialize the needed name objects. Error Specifics: hr = 0x80004005, com\complus\dtc\dtc\msdtcprx\src\dtcinit.cpp:575, CmdLine: “C:\Program Files\Common Files\Enterprise Single Sign-On\ENTSSO.exe”, Pid: 172 (Event log)
Could not import a DTC transaction. Please check that MSDTC is configured correctly for remote operation. See documentation for details. Error Code: 0x80070057, The parameter is…
With the ESB Toolkit, BizTalk provides an excellent framework for handling exceptions that occur throughout the ESB. There are many built in facilities that are as simple as checking off a box to route failed messages to the portal, and within orchestrations you can easily build ESB Exception messages in catch blocks and route them to the portal as well.
However, these only apply if a message actually makes it to a pipeline or orchestration. For WCF SQL Polling receive locations, it’s possible that no message will ever make it to the pipeline – for example, if the procedure causes an exception to occur (perhaps by a developer intentionally using THROW or RAISERROR), the adapter will write the exception to the event log without providing a message for any pipeline or orchestration processing. Checking “suspend message on failure” doesn’t offer any…
This month we are happy to announce new versions of a few of our products adding additional features and capabilities.
First, we have updated our T-Connect EDI Database to support the full ANSI X12 EDI 837 transaction set. This includes full support for Institutional, Professional, and Dental transaction sets. The EDI Database Toolkit is our proprietary set of databases constructed to store and archive EDI messages and is included in our EDI Accelerator package, or can be purchased as a standalone product.
We have a new version of our T-Connect HIPAA EDI Accelerator available. The EDI Accelerator is our flagship product allowing for rapid deployment of a complete end to end EDI intake and storage solution based on the Microsoft BizTalk Server platform.
The T-Connect EDI Viewer has been updated with backwards compatibility for the EDI ANSI Version 4 (004010). The EDI…
I was working on a message flow that involved routing the response from a Request-Response send port directly to another send port. The ultimate send port had failed message routing turned on so that messages would get properly routed by the ESB ToolKit to the EsbExceptionDb for further analysis or processing. In this particular case, the send port was an SFTP port with a misconfigured username/password combination, which would result in failed messages. However, when the message failed I’d get the following exception in the EventLog:
Value cannot be null.
Parameter name: guid
Method: Microsoft.BizTalk.Message.Interop.IBaseMessage Execute(Microsoft.BizTalk.Component.Interop.IPipelineContext, Microsoft.BizTalk.Message.Interop.IBaseMessage)
Error Source: Microsoft.Practices.ESB.ExceptionHandling
Error TargetSite: System.String GetApplication(ServiceType, System.String, System.String, System.String, System.String)
Error StackTrace: at Microsoft.Practices.ESB.ExceptionHandling.Utility.GetApplication(ServiceType serviceType, String mgmtDBServer, String mgmtDBName, String guid, String serviceName)
at Microsoft.Practices.ESB.ExceptionHandling.PipelineComponents.ProcessFault.WriteHeaderFailedMessageRouting(XmlTextWriter writer, IBaseMessage pInMsg, Object& portName)
at Microsoft.Practices.ESB.ExceptionHandling.PipelineComponents.ProcessFault.WriteHeader(XmlTextWriter writer, XmlTextReader reader, FaultSource faultSource, IBaseMessage pInMsg, Object& portName)
at Microsoft.Practices.ESB.ExceptionHandling.PipelineComponents.ProcessFault.Execute(IPipelineContext pContext, IBaseMessage…
An integration scenario requires a unique incrementing numeric identifier to be sent with each message (or each record in a message). These identifiers cannot be reused (or cannot be reused over certain ranges, or cannot be reused over certain periods of time). A GUID is not suitable because it will not be sequential (not to mention that many legacy systems and data formats may have trouble handling a 128 bit number!).
Integration platforms will have a hard time meeting this on their own – GUIDs work well because they guarantee uniqueness on the fly without needing to worry about history. Messaging platforms typically deal in terms of short executions, and BizTalk is no exception. While persistence of a message might be handled (such as BizTalk does with the MessageBox), persistence of the entire execution process is usually not guaranteed. Deployments,…
Aggregation is a common pattern used in Enterprise Integration. System (or systems) A sends many messages that System B expects in a single message, or in several messages grouped on a particular attribute (or set of attributes).
The most common way to approach this in BizTalk is using a Sequential Convoy orchestration to aggregate the message – Microsoft provides a sample of how to do this in the SDK. This is a powerful pattern, but has a few downsides:
Sequential Convoys can become difficult to manage if they’re expected to run for a long time
Complex subgrouping can multiply the headaches here – for example, if you have to aggregate messages for hundreds of destinations concurrently
The destination message may become very large, to the point where BizTalk cannot optimally process it anymore – particularly if it is a large flat file message.
Modifying the aggregate…