Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hi,
I am beginner to biztalk. I have the following questions.
[b:cd8b2b5ba8]1. what’s difference between message routing and content routing
2. I will use promotion properties for making the msg available in send ports. Then where should i use distingushed fields? Can any one give a real time example.
3. What is Convoys in BizTalk ?
4. What is the difference between static and dynamic binding. Can any one give example?[/b:cd8b2b5ba8]
Thanks Stephan,
I did attache the BTS process and getinto the debug window, however the second method that been called can not be hit since I get \”no symbols loaded for this document\”
Have you received that before?
The max size is 2 GB (I think) in theory. But the max size for your system all depends on memory and resources.
Also, if you are using the Xml Receive or mapping on the pipeline. Both will impact performance.
I have ran 250 MB files through a system with 1.5 GB Ram with no problems.
Hope this helps.
This issue was posted on Microsoft internal Biztalk discussion – no one volunteered an answer. Most likely the (fringe) 996 is not even documented in the Base EDI Adapter.
I have resolved this using the Flat File route – treating the EDI message as a flat file message. Using the (dream of a tool) Flat File Schema Wizard in BTS2006, I was easily able to generate the FF schema from an instance – then massaged the schema a bit and did the mapping. All very smooth. Lesson learned – when faced with such situations, instead of trying to mess around with the lightweight Base EDI Adapter, use the Flat File Route.
In R2 of BTS2006 they are releasing 7000 EDI schemas out of the box as an acknowledgement that the Base EDI Adapter is a lightweight joke for serious EDI.
[quote:87120d8d89=\”Anonymous\”]
Nar – it’s defaulting to 4050 because it doesn;t recognize his version; here is from the KB article:
[/quote:87120d8d89]The cues (00200- meaning highest compatibility; and 00302) is plenty enough to figure out a version and parse it. The instance would even validate in a 4050 but it doesnt.
[quote:87120d8d89=\”Anonymous\”]
Another note – the author is referring to the parsing of the flat EDI file as \”translation\”; the correct terminology would be
parsing – conversion from Flat EDI to XML
translation – mapping from one document format to another
serialization – conversion from the XML output of translation back to the flat version of the EDI. [/quote:87120d8d89]I used the term \”translation\” because HAT uses this term for all such messages. Please understand there is NO MAPPING happening at the translation phase – its just trying to determine from the headers and envelope if this is a valid EDI and the version numbers etc. (so yes its better called ‘parsing’)
[quote:87120d8d89=\”Anonymous\”]
His document is failing parsing because the subsystem is not recognizing the version, thus it doesn’t have the cues necessary to be able to parse the file. [/quote:87120d8d89]From the cues (00200- meaning highest compatibility; and 00302) there is no reason not to figure out a version and parse it.
We never found the real reason, it was posted on Microsoft internal Biztalk discussion – no one volunteered an answer. Most likely the (fringe) 996 is not even documented in the Base EDI Adapter.
Something wrong with your delimiters and child order. You mut understand the properties of the Flat File section of your schema. Try to to read up Flat File schemas to understand the concepts first then jump to it.
here are some good tutorials
http://www.winterdom.com/dev/bts/BTSFFSchemaTut1.html
http://geekswithblogs.net/synboogaloo/archive/2005/04/22/37294.aspx
In the past, I have posted some code that we use to add XML \”chunks\” to an existing XML message. This is a C# static function that we call in an expression shape.
In the last few weeks, we have had sporadic cases where the data in this XML message is missing the new elements.
It dawned on me that messages are supposed to be \”immutable\” and we are in effect \”cheating mother nature\”. I think that sporadically, Biztalk dehydrates, then maybe is rehydrating with the old version of this message – before we called the C# helper class.
1) Do you think this is reasonable?
2) Is the solution to simply wrap the C# with an Atomic Scope shape? I.e. will this cause Biztalk to a better \”save point\” for the message?Thanks,
Neal Walters**CONTINUED FROM ABOVE
============================================
[u:2fc38b1367]Output when using PassThru Transmit[/u:2fc38b1367]
<ns0:Root xmlns:ns0=\”http://Schemas.TestSchema\”><firstName>firstName_1</firstName><lastName>lastName_1</lastName><city>City</city></ns0:Root><ns0:Root xmlns:ns0=\”http://Schemas.TestSchema\”><firstName>firstName_2</firstName><lastName>lastName_2</lastName><city>City</city></ns0:Root>
============================================
[u:2fc38b1367]Output when using Custom Send Pipeline[/u:2fc38b1367]
firstName_1|lastName_1|city_1
==============================================
Thanks Again.
I used the wizard on the flat file input. Change the export to unbounded. That now allows for multiple record processing but shows up like this…
ted|tom|mary|smith|rodgers|hays
vs
Ted|Smith
Tom|Rogers
Mary|HaysWhy is it processing all one element first then the next element second?
I used the wizard on the flat file input. Change the export to unbounded. That now allows for multiple record processing but shows up like this…
ted|tom|mary|smith|rodgers|hays
vs
Ted|Smith
Tom|Rogers
Mary|HaysWhy is it processing all one element first then the next element second?
I changed it to unbounded and still only brings in one row. I will try to create a new schema using the wizard and see if that works.
Set your root node (not <Schema> node) Group Max Occurs property to \”unbounded\” (u will find this in the Advanced section).
Why dont you use the FF Schema Wizard?
[url]http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/bts06developing/html/a5e1453f-0380-4505-97a9-9d3526db0923.asp[/url][quote:b7db937423=\”Anonymous\”]it looks to me u r sending 4050 version, schema is 3020 version u r using, check u r GS08=003020
GS*CG*043073964*6082744330*20051220*0604*50006*X*003020
Nar-[/quote:b7db937423]
Nar – it’s defaulting to 4050 because it doesn;t recognize his version; here is from the KB article:
[quote:b7db937423]When an interchange is received that has a higher version of the control segments than the 4050 version (for example, when the version that is indicated in the ISA segment is higher than \”00405\”), the system will try to parse it with the highest version (for example, 4050).[/quote:b7db937423]
Another note – the author is referring to the parsing of the flat EDI file as \”translation\”; the correct terminology would be
parsing – conversion from Flat EDI to XML
translation – mapping from one document format to another
serialization – conversion from the XML output of translation back to the flat version of the EDI.His document is failing parsing because the subsystem is not recognizing the version, thus it doesn’t have the cues necessary to be able to parse the file.
In BT2002, there was a Syntax setup where you would give the thing a number range of where to look for the version in the GS and this type of problem would occur if you didn’t have that number range set correctly. There was also a checkbox for using regular expression parsing to find the version; I don’t know that all this carried forward into 2004. I suspect they may have made the regex method standard and unchangable because it byte location method caused confusion and issues in 2002.
