Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Quick note, i tried to launch it in compatibility mode with win2000 that's why the os version is different from this Version: 5.1 Build: 2600 Service Pack: 2.0.
the rest of the log stays the same with no compatibility mode.
Neal – they don't really work well together although you can make it work. You have to reconfigure the SP adapter, and you need ot put into you machine.config a redirect from the old sp dll to the new sp dll.
I've had a number of problems with the integration – mostly due to the fact that columns and workflows don't behave correctly.
Here is the problem – you made your project name SHMC.BTS.RASBInterfaceTest – this turns into your .NET namespace. Since BizTalk takes the odx and turns it into C# – you have a C# namespace with BTS in it. This is cause the compiler to look into your namesapce for MessageType – and its not there. The only fix is to go into the project properties and remove BTS. from your namespace
Jon Flanders
Hi,
Thanks for u r post!!!
But what should i do to achive this
Each debatched message will have the BTS.InterchangeSequenceNumber. In the last message this will be equal to the record count.
Many thanks
Nishil,
Went back and looked everything over, the answer was right there and it was so simple! The field name's case in the inbound schema didn't match the XML, so the comparison failed. I corrected the typo and it works great.
Sorry for the delay in responding and thanks for your help!Henry
Hi,
THis may be obvious but the schema name ofr a message type is 2 parts namespace#rootnode.
Slan
Gar
Here is the schema created:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-16" ?>
– <xs:schema xmlns:b="http://schemas.microsoft.com/BizTalk/2003"
xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:schemaInfo count_positions_by_byte="false" parser_optimization="speed"
lookahead_depth="3" suppress_empty_nodes="false" generate_empty_nodes="true"
allow_early_termination="false" standard="Flat File" root_reference="Root" />
<schemaEditorExtension:schemaInfo namespaceAlias="b"
extensionClass="Microsoft.BizTalk.FlatFileExtension.FlatFileExtension"
standardName="Flat File"
xmlns:schemaEditorExtension="http://schemas.microsoft.com/BizTalk/2003/SchemaEditorExtensions" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
– <xs:element name="Root">
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:recordInfo structure="delimited"
preserve_delimiter_for_empty_data="true" suppress_trailing_delimiters="true"
sequence_number="1" child_order="default" child_delimiter_type="hex"
child_delimiter="0x0D 0x0A" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
– <xs:complexType>
– <xs:sequence>
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:groupInfo sequence_number="0" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
– <xs:element minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1" name="HDR">
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:recordInfo sequence_number="1" structure="delimited"
preserve_delimiter_for_empty_data="true" suppress_trailing_delimiters="false"
child_delimiter_type="hex" child_delimiter="0x7C" tag_name="HDR"
child_order="default" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
– <xs:complexType>
– <xs:sequence>
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:groupInfo sequence_number="0" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
– <xs:element name="Field1" type="xs:string">
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:fieldInfo sequence_number="1" justification="left" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
</xs:element>
– <xs:element name="Field2" type="xs:string">
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:fieldInfo sequence_number="2" justification="left" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
</xs:element>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
</xs:element>
– <xs:element minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded" name="BDY">
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:recordInfo sequence_number="2" structure="delimited"
preserve_delimiter_for_empty_data="true" suppress_trailing_delimiters="false"
child_delimiter_type="hex" child_order="default" child_delimiter="0x7C"
tag_name="BDY" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
– <xs:complexType>
– <xs:sequence>
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:groupInfo sequence_number="0" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
– <xs:element name="Field1" type="xs:string">
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:fieldInfo sequence_number="1" justification="left" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
</xs:element>
– <xs:element name="Field2" type="xs:string">
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:fieldInfo sequence_number="2" justification="left" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
</xs:element>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
</xs:element>
– <xs:element minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1" name="MSG">
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:recordInfo sequence_number="3" structure="delimited"
preserve_delimiter_for_empty_data="true" suppress_trailing_delimiters="false"
tag_name="MSG" child_order="default" child_delimiter_type="hex"
child_delimiter="0x7C" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
– <xs:complexType>
– <xs:sequence>
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:groupInfo sequence_number="0" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
– <xs:element name="Field1" type="xs:string">
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:fieldInfo sequence_number="1" justification="left" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
</xs:element>
– <xs:element name="Field2" type="xs:string">
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:fieldInfo sequence_number="2" justification="left" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
</xs:element>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
</xs:element>
– <xs:element minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1" name="DOC">
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:recordInfo sequence_number="4" structure="delimited"
preserve_delimiter_for_empty_data="true" suppress_trailing_delimiters="false"
child_order="default" child_delimiter_type="hex" child_delimiter="0x7C"
tag_name="DOC" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
– <xs:complexType>
– <xs:sequence>
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:groupInfo sequence_number="0" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
– <xs:element name="Field1" type="xs:string">
– <xs:annotation>
– <xs:appinfo>
<b:fieldInfo sequence_number="1" justification="left" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
</xs:element>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
</xs:element>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
</xs:element>
</xs:schema>And the test file:
HDR|File|A Header test
BDY|Name|A Body test
BDY|Name|A Body test2
MSG|To file|A Message
DOC|HDR|File|A Header test
BDY|Name|A Body test
BDY|Name|A Body test2
MSG|To file|A MessageNote: The DOC record contains all records from HDR to MSG.
Thanks for your helping.
Boy, I hate to sound dumb here but this is what I have done… I setup separate servers for SQL 2005 and Biztalk. I was told that it was not a good idea to install both on the same server. (Since then, I have seen where this would not be a problem) Anyway, All I have on my Biztalk server that is SQL related is the configuration manager. I also just installed the distributable client found in the setup disks just to make sure I had that covered.
You should also know that I have been interfacing with the SQL database because I have working projects so all that should be straight… its just for some reason, I am getting this one error during the lookup… I guess what I need to know is how do I check if this native client is active? I have the udl file setup to use this… as for the functoid configuration, I believe I have it setup correctly. obviously, I am not so saavy on SQL, I just installed it on a development server just to fill the biztalk installation requirement. nothing fancy
This is exactly what I have in my DB lookup functoid
01 (hardcoded key value just to get the test working)
c:\DBConnection.udl (literal location of file)
dbo.TESTDBF (database table name)
ShipToNumber (table key column for lookup)
The extractor functoid has the lookup input and just the output column
This is the exact contents of my .uld file…
[oledb]
; Everything after this line is an OLE DB initstring
Provider=SQLNCLI.1;Integrated Security=SSPI;Persist Security Info=False;User ID=kb17324dx;Initial Catalog=TESTDB;Data Source=HPSQL05TDoes this give you any better idea what I have and what I dont have?
I'm going to recommend the "pointer" method since we had that scenario presented to us in a Deep Dive / Ranger training last year. It makes sense since otherwise it is a complete waste of bandwidth and resources to push those files into and out of SQL Server, not to mention moving that data over the wire twice more than would be required otherwise. Even if SQL is on the same Dedicated BizTalk Server, now its a resource and performance issue you shouldn't need.
That would be a great project to work on and then test performance against the original app and current BizTalk application.
I have to assume that the SQL Client was installed on the BizTalk server since it requires access to SQL Server. Are you using SQL Native client?
My Database Lookup functoid looks like this:
- xpath statement created when I dragged a line from the input field.
- String Left Trim (or String Concatenate) that holds the "File Name=C:\…\…uld" statement
- USER_TYPE (Table name)
- USER_TYPE_ID (Column name)
The Value Extractor then looks like this:
- Database Lookup
- USER_TYPE_ID
Of course this just confirms that the ID value I have is in the table, a very simple example. One thing I wanted to be clear on is the fact that all these funcoid links are in the correct order. If you verify this, then it might me a good idea to grab any standard SQL patches from Microsoft Update. I'd make sure any SQL and SQLXML updates are present.
Again, thx for everybodies replay.
The current app we have is a windows service that does just that. Waits for the file to come in, decypts/untars/calls a sproc and moves the file. As I mentioned above, we implemented Biztalk about a month ago and picked 3 "different styles" of projects that we currently had running in production to rewrite in Biztalk just so we could get our hands around the new product. Our other projects we completed (more data integration between systems) are working great. This one has just felt like we've been forcing Biztalk the entire way.
This process does have a bit of business logic in it, in the sense that it performs certain actions in our DB based on the file name of the .tifs. Other than that, it's a file mover.
We considered using a "pointer" system as describied in the Apress Pro Biztalk 2006 book, where the actual files are not moved through the message box, but rather the file locations and biztalk is used for process flow logic only.
What we ended up doing is pulling all files recieved in our port and forcing them in a single file line before entering our orchestration through our custom pipeline components. In other words, the 1st file must be completely through the rcvd pipeline/orchestration before the 2nd one is allowed to enter. This seems to work fine and we've successfully pushed 4+gig of .pgp files through our process succesfully. However, it's a bit of a "quirky" way to do it.
Again, thx to your responses. I would still appreciate any more feedback, if someone feels like giving their 2 cents.
Yes, makes perfect sense, especially now that I have a much better idea about the udl files than what I have read.
Unfortunately though, no, still not working.
I did figure out how to hook up an error return functoid and now can see the error, however slightly ambiguous to me…
Format of the initialization string does not conform to specification starting at index 0
after doing some googling on this, it looks like it relates to the connection string. it also looked like it could be a Microsoft bug based on some of the forums I read but not convinced.
In any case, I created the .udl file like you said. and upon testing connection it succeeded. I am slightly lost when you said to use the SQL native client if I had it installed… This is something automatically installed on the SQL 2005 server, so is this also something that maybe needs to be installed onto the same server as Biztalk because currently these are both residing on seperate servers.
does any of this sound familiar or do you have any tips on how I can continue to narrow this issue down?
Thanks again…
