Contents tagged with BizTalk
-
Creating BizTalk Message in Custom .NET Component
In my previous blog about consuming WCF service from BizTalk orchestration I wrote about how we’d invoke a service based on a document coming in and mapping it into the service request schema.
-
BizTalk 2010 Server – Developer Edition
Today Developer Edition for BT2010 was announced. Great news for anyone who does BT development/testing.
-
Consuming WCF Service from BizTalk
Sometimes trivial things in .NET are not so trivial in the BizTalk world. Especially for standard .NET developers with the mindset for routine .NET development. Recently, I was asked to give a hand with a simple task that was surprisingly taking too long (and good that was asked for, why to waste time if you can leverage someone to give a hand – always something I resort to). On the web, there are plenty of resources, yet nothing emphasizes the little things that are obvious to somewhat experienced BizTalk-ers and is brand new to mature .NET developers. Lets dive into example.
-
Body Message Part Name in XLANGMessage
I was writing a custom component to copy message parts of an untyped message, invoked from orchestration. This message was created in a custom pipeline, and body part name had to have “Body”. For some bizarre reason, when message body part is handled outside of orchestration and passed into .NET code as XLANGMessage, body part name is “part”. ??? The other parts have the original names. I have no idea why this is happening, but thought it could save someone a question or two, especially when writing tests and expecting that the name of the part is “Body”.
-
Debugging BizTalk Orchestrations
Sometimes you have to get to the lower level of debugging (ie debugging auto-generated code) to understand what happens. This is what you can do to achieve it in BizTalk.
-
Multi-Part Message Parts Order
For the project I work on, processing involves multiple files. Files are packaged in a ZIP archive and it’s BizTalk application that opens the archive and builds a message for processing. In BizTalk terminology, this is a multi-part message.
-
Bizmonade – Testing Orchestration Receiving Any Document Type
I have posted before about Bizmonade testing library for BizTalk orchestrations testing. Unfortunately, there’s something something that looks like a limitation – testing orchestrations that receive any document type (System.Xml.XmlDocument). I posted a question on StackOverflow and curious to see if get anything at all. How do you test your general schema orchestrations?
-
Assembly in GAC and Configuration File
Working with BizTalk pushes the creativity sometimes. This time around, I needed to have an assembly deployed to GAC (so that BizTalk application can easily use it) and at the same time being able to configure this assembly without re-deploying it to GAC again.
-
Bizmonade
Bizmonade is a project allowing to simulate execution of BizTalk orchestrations without deployment to BizTalk server. What is it good for? Testing. Unit testing. The fact that the logic can be tested without deployment hassle is good. There are a few issues that I have encountered so far, and my experience with the particular tool is less than 24 hours (so excuse me in case I am not accurate – corrections are welcomed always):
-
Building AssemblyInfo for BizTalk with NAnt
All assemblies deployed into production are versioned. My personal preference
is to achieve that with build scripts, ensuring that build number, code revision, minor and major versions are all inserted. AssemblyInfo.cs is the file that normally contains that information. I normally generate a dummy AssemblyInfo file in the build project and reference that from the project(s). This way, when building with scripts, we can generate dynamic AssemblyInfo.cs file and overwrite the link. The link is a one way link, nothing is updated in the build project. And since link is just a reference, nothing is modified from the repository point of view. NAnt has <asmInfo> task that does all the job. Except that for BizTalk its not straight forward process (of course, how could it be).
