Hi All,
Ifyou are using virtualization fortesting or deploying your applications, then the above sample chaptersmight be handy!
Do Download them fromhere
or http://vscommunity.com/files/default.aspx
Hi All,
While checking out some stuff on SQL Server, i stumbled on the set of Best Practices available for SQL Server 2005. Check them out here:
XML Best Practices for Microsoft SQL Server 2005
Performance Optimizations for the XML Data Type in SQL Server 2005
SQL Server 2005 Security Best Practices – Operational and Administrative […]
Hi,
The Guidance Automation Toolkit is an extension to Visual Studio 2005 which allows architects to author rich, integrated user experiences for reusable assets including frameworks, components, and patterns.
You can down this toolkit from the following link:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=E3D101DB-6EE1-4EC5-884E-97B27E49EAAE&displaylang=en&hash=TTS0SqiftbK42vy3z9QVjTvJ%2bdAlsB03mFkBTcjrEVkn0iK%2bJypLe8SkOWoxR6hBaMeT05iVQhajb2SuK%2fk5uA%3d%3d
Enjoy!
Hi All,
You can now download the “Patterns & Practices Team Development with TFS Guide (Final Release) “ is available for download at codeplex. You can download this guide from here or from the url below
http://www.codeplex.com/TFSGuide
BizTalk Server 2006 has been out and around for a while, now. Those of you who are familiar with both BizTalk 2004 and 2006 know that some of the biggest improvements have been made in the tools used for deploying and managing applications. One of my favorite improvements is the ability to export an application as an MSI file.
I recently had a question in a class about how someone could create an MSI for a BizTalk application that has different port binding configurations available for different environments. This was a good question, and something I think a lot of developers overlook.
By default, when you export an application to an MSI file, the port configuration settings of the application are saved directly in the MSI. This means that when you import the MSI somewhere else, you end up with ports that match the original environment. This works well, provided all your development, test, and production environments are exactly the same.
To save developers from having to create and re-create the same ports over and over again, BizTalk 2006 has the ability to create binding files. Binding files are XML representation of the port configuration from the BizTalk configuration database. Binding files include the transport settings of the ports, pipeline and maps used by the ports, and the application in which the port is contained, among other things. You can use the Administration Console to export or import binding files to quickly save and recreate physical ports. So what does this have to do with MSI files?
The short version of this is, create your physical send and receive ports, with the appropriate configuration for the end points you are interested in. Once you’ve created all the bindings for one environment export the bindings. Repeat this for the various environments that you need ports for.
Once all your binding files are created, you can add them to the Resources folder of the application (be sure to fill in the Target Environment box). When you export the application as an MSI, the bindings are bundled with it. When you import the MSI, the Target Environment page of the wizard will have a drop down list from which you can choose the bindings to apply.
There are two things you need to remember:
Try using the above recommendations next time you are in need of creating several MSI files with disparate application bindings.
So I started this sample out as an off-the-cuff kind of thing and it seems a
number of people are using it. Lenny Fenster from Microsoft found another bug
– when the child workflow would terminate with an exception – the CallWorkflowService
was sending the exception to the Queue – but the custom Activity listening for the
message wasn’t re-throwing the exception. Its been fixed – so if you are using
this sample – you should download the new code.
Check out my BizTalk
R2 Training.
Some very cool updates in the just-released CTP3 of ESB Guidance. The changes that caught my eye include:
Download the full Help file in CHM format. Check out what’s new in this release, sample projects, and a fair explanation of how to perform basic tasks using the package.
New endpoint “resolver” framework. Dynamically determine endpoint and […]
Recently, when calling web services from the BizTalk environment, we were seeing intermittent instances of the “WebException: The request was aborted: The request was canceled” error message in the application Event Log. This occurred mostly under heavy load situations, but could be duplicated even with fairly small load.
If you search online for this exception, […]
I am a developer on the Biztalk RFID team. I have been on this team since its inception. Phew… it has been a long march!! But, I am excited about all the work we have put in being used in the “real” world. One of the main areas of my work is “Asynchronous…(read more)
I recently attended a meeting of the Dallas
C# SIG, a group which I hadn’t attended in quite some time, because they had Adam
Keyscome in to talk about Ruby. I don’t live under a rock, so I’ve
heard the buzz about Ruby but I hadn’t spent much timelooking into it because
it wasn’t immensely relevant to my day to day. That said,this was a great
chanceto learn soI checked out the meeting and I must admit, I was impressed.
I’m hardly a convert but I can understand Adam’s point that Ruby “feels” moreenjoyable
towrite for him.
While most things Ruby can do I think C# 3.0 has well in hand, therestill some
things C# can’t do yet. The dynamic augmentation of an instance, not a type,
is intriguing to me and certainly powerful. One featurethat I thought
was interesting, and immediately doable in C# 3.0 was the way Ruby can handle loops.
For instance take this Ruby code (syntax errors possible,this is not checked)
:
50.Times do
Puts "We
Built This City ..."
Puts "We
Built This City ..."
Puts "On
Rock And Roll"
end
I like this much better than the standard C# syntax of a For loop because it focuses
on what is important. Its terse yet clear, and I wanted in C# 3.0 right now,
so here it is:
public
static
class LoopingExtensions
{
public
static
void Times(thisint upperBound,
Action<int> action)
{
for (int index
= 0; index < upperBound; index++)
action.Invoke(index);
}
}
This results in a very nice piece of C# code, equivalent to our Ruby example above:
50.Times(i => {
Console.WriteLine("We
Built This City...");
Console.WriteLine("We
Built This City...");
Console.WriteLine("On
Rock And Roll");
}
Simply enough to implement, and a great example of using Lambda expressions and extension
methods to improve the readability of your code.