<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://bloggingabout.net/utility/FeedStylesheets/atom.xsl" media="screen"?><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en"><title type="html">Patrick Wellink</title><subtitle type="html">BizTalk Server 2004 / 2006, Using C#, Disposing VB and anything else I want to share with the community</subtitle><id>http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/atom.aspx</id><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/default.aspx" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/atom.aspx" /><generator uri="http://communityserver.org" version="4.1.40407.4157">Community Server</generator><updated>2009-01-23T08:18:00Z</updated><entry><title>BizTalk 2006 R2 SP1 alters the disassembling behaviour of a Receive pipeline !</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2010/03/19/biztalk-2006-r2-sp1-alters-the-disassembling-behaviour-of-a-receive-pipeline.aspx" /><link rel="enclosure" type="application/x-zip-compressed" length="70270" href="http://bloggingabout.net/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.PostAttachments/00.00.48.30.11/Service-Pack-Test.zip" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2010/03/19/biztalk-2006-r2-sp1-alters-the-disassembling-behaviour-of-a-receive-pipeline.aspx</id><published>2010-03-19T21:44:00Z</published><updated>2010-03-19T21:44:00Z</updated><content type="html">In my previous post I mentioned i noticed a change in the disassembling behaviour of BizTalk Server 2006 R2 after installing SP 1. After I got home after work I sat down and looked somewhere on my harddisk for an old version of a BizTalk 2006 Virtual PC. After a while I found one that was approximately one and a half year untouched. So I sat down and Fired it up... First get all the updates that have been since then, geeeeeez there have been many, I had about 80 of them and i completely forgot that...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2010/03/19/biztalk-2006-r2-sp1-alters-the-disassembling-behaviour-of-a-receive-pipeline.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=483011" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="BizTalk 2006 R2 SP 1" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BizTalk+2006+R2+SP+1/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>BizTalk 2006 R2 SP1 -&gt; Something changed in disassembling pipelines !</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2010/03/19/biztalk-2006-r2-sp1-gt-something-changed-in-disassembling-pipelines.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2010/03/19/biztalk-2006-r2-sp1-gt-something-changed-in-disassembling-pipelines.aspx</id><published>2010-03-19T15:11:00Z</published><updated>2010-03-19T15:11:00Z</updated><content type="html">Although I am still investigating this item i thought it would be nice to share it as soon as i find out something went wrong. I have a very simple schema that returns data from the SQL adapter. I deployed an envelope schema and a schema that resembles the payload. Everything was working fine until I deployed SP1 to my developement server. Now all of a sudden I see stuff like this in the eventlog : Event Type: Error Event Source: BizTalk Server 2006 Event Category: BizTalk Server 2006 Event ID: 5753...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2010/03/19/biztalk-2006-r2-sp1-gt-something-changed-in-disassembling-pipelines.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=483009" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="BIzTalk 2006 R2 SP1" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BIzTalk+2006+R2+SP1/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>No longer Copy Local That Biztalk Reference !!!!!!!</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2010/01/25/no-longer-copy-local-that-biztalk-reference.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2010/01/25/no-longer-copy-local-that-biztalk-reference.aspx</id><published>2010-01-25T11:04:00Z</published><updated>2010-01-25T11:04:00Z</updated><content type="html">On monday 19 january I gave a presentation to the dutch BizTalk User Group (BTUG) about he BizTalk Best Practices. The Best Practices are a set of components, a loosly coupled architecture and a software factory that supports the components and the architecture. The presentation went very well and for sure I had to demo something. And while i was demoing i had a lot of trouble with the references. Normally i don&amp;#39;t have these problems during a demo cause then i build the complete solution in about...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2010/01/25/no-longer-copy-local-that-biztalk-reference.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=482744" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="BizTalk 2009" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BizTalk+2009/default.aspx" /><category term="Visual Studio" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/Visual+Studio/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>BizTalk Server future sneak peak </title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/11/11/biztalk-server-future-sneak-peak.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/11/11/biztalk-server-future-sneak-peak.aspx</id><published>2009-11-11T14:21:00Z</published><updated>2009-11-11T14:21:00Z</updated><content type="html">Well some people are still not convinced BizTalk is here to stay, today some very nice information popped up in bloglines (my favorite RSS reader) about the futur of BizTalk. Almost every new technology MS has released are mentioned, to name a few: WCF WF Future plans Pub/Sub pattern StreamInsight Have a read of this post &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Click &amp;lt;&amp;lt;...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/11/11/biztalk-server-future-sneak-peak.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=482450" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="BizTalk" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BizTalk/default.aspx" /><category term="StreamInsight" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/StreamInsight/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Ugly..... Xsd Import causes DummyVar warnings during compile time in BizTalk *UGLY*</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/09/08/ugly-xsd-import-causes-dummyvar-warnings-during-compile-time-in-biztalk-ugly.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/09/08/ugly-xsd-import-causes-dummyvar-warnings-during-compile-time-in-biztalk-ugly.aspx</id><published>2009-09-08T09:02:00Z</published><updated>2009-09-08T09:02:00Z</updated><content type="html">I am busy creating a BizTalk Software factory for BizTalk 2009. So instead of going through all kinds of repeatable steps, enter data, do some more stuff, add pesky references do more stuff, add a map, add another map, add an orchestration, Start from step 2 again I have those steps nicely put into a wizard. You enter data once and a complete orchestration with maps is generated. Very nice indeed. Everything works fine but you have to look very carefully into all kind of compile errors. So during...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/09/08/ugly-xsd-import-causes-dummyvar-warnings-during-compile-time-in-biztalk-ugly.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=482168" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="BizTalk 2009" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BizTalk+2009/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Gjeeeeez, Guidance automation and VS 2008 SP1, Thank Google for that !</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/09/07/gjeeeeez-guidance-automation-and-vs-2008-sp1-thank-google-for-that.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/09/07/gjeeeeez-guidance-automation-and-vs-2008-sp1-thank-google-for-that.aspx</id><published>2009-09-07T10:36:00Z</published><updated>2009-09-07T10:36:00Z</updated><content type="html">When you are working with the Guidance Automation toolkit, you are creating all kind of wizards yoursef. Currently I am in the middle of doing so and after adding a specific recipe to create a Biztalk Project I got the following error :&amp;quot; project creation failed &amp;quot; So I tried to create a BizTalk project without my custom wizard and I got the same error. I googled around a bit on : project creation failed And i found the following post that everybody is referring to : http://petesbloggerama...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/09/07/gjeeeeez-guidance-automation-and-vs-2008-sp1-thank-google-for-that.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=482163" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="BizTalk" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BizTalk/default.aspx" /><category term="Visual Studio" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/Visual+Studio/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Custom BAM and making it really work</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/07/20/custom-bam-and-making-it-really-work.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/07/20/custom-bam-and-making-it-really-work.aspx</id><published>2009-07-20T06:28:00Z</published><updated>2009-07-20T06:28:00Z</updated><content type="html">I have a solution where I use BAM to build a complete audit trail of a message flow. Custom components write a message to a predefined BAM view whenever you want it to. Normal points where you would use this functionality is in receive &amp;amp; send pipelines. And if an important business decision was made you could write that to the audit trail as well. Below is an example of how to do this in an expression shape inside an orchestration. AuditData(XlangMessage,&amp;quot;The order was rejected because of...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/07/20/custom-bam-and-making-it-really-work.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=481946" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="BizTalk" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BizTalk/default.aspx" /><category term="BAM" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BAM/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>About EDI / Property Schemas and Validate instance</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/05/11/about-edi-property-schemas-and-validate-instance.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/05/11/about-edi-property-schemas-and-validate-instance.aspx</id><published>2009-05-11T12:06:00Z</published><updated>2009-05-11T12:06:00Z</updated><content type="html">In the future we need to process EDI documents so I am currently looking at some EDI Samples. I did some tutorials (from Pro EDI in BizTalk Server 2006 Apress) and I created my own EDI schema based on X12_00401_810 (Exercise 1.0 to 1.4) Then I had to create my own PropertySchemas to promote some nodes (Exercise 1.5) Then I had to validate an instance of the schema i had just created....(Exercise 1.6 to 1.7) But no matter what I did, I kept getting the same error over and over again. The errors were...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/05/11/about-edi-property-schemas-and-validate-instance.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=481626" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="EDI" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/EDI/default.aspx" /><category term="BizTalk 2006 R2" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BizTalk+2006+R2/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Building your own Adapter. Serious Pitfals / Adapter WOES !!</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/03/31/building-your-own-adapter-serious-pitfals.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/03/31/building-your-own-adapter-serious-pitfals.aspx</id><published>2009-03-31T10:25:00Z</published><updated>2009-03-31T10:25:00Z</updated><content type="html">This blog post is about several experiences I had when building my own Sybase adapter. Normally i would suggest to the customer that they should buy an adapter, but in this case that was not possible since the only good working Adapter for Sybase was produced by TopXML and they vanished from this globe.... So I had to start building my own. If you do a couple of searches on google you will probably find the BizTalk Adapter Wizard on codeplex. This is a good start cause it helps you a great deal in...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/03/31/building-your-own-adapter-serious-pitfals.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=481444" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="BizTalk" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BizTalk/default.aspx" /><category term="ESB" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/ESB/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>The transport proxy method DeleteMessage() failed for adapter XYZ (Bug in Codeplex Adapter Wizard)</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/02/25/the-transport-proxy-method-deletemessage-failed-for-adapter-xyz-bug-in-codeplex-adapter-wizard.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/02/25/the-transport-proxy-method-deletemessage-failed-for-adapter-xyz-bug-in-codeplex-adapter-wizard.aspx</id><published>2009-02-25T13:55:00Z</published><updated>2009-02-25T13:55:00Z</updated><content type="html">Ok, I have seen this error a couple of times on the internet. They all have to do with the same issue. And in my current project i stumbled upon this problem. I found a solution and thought it would be nice to share this with the community You have created an adapter with the AdapterWizard on codeplex. You stress test the newly developed adapter and you get some pretty strange eventLog messages. Some sample Eventlog messages you could encounter: Event Type: Error Event Source: BizTalk Server 2006...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/02/25/the-transport-proxy-method-deletemessage-failed-for-adapter-xyz-bug-in-codeplex-adapter-wizard.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=481227" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="BizTalk" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BizTalk/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Cannot add (custom) pipeline component to the toolbox (You have selected an invalid pipeline component assembly. Please check security settings for the assembly if you are loading it from an UNC path)</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/02/17/cannot-add-custom-pipeline-component-to-the-toolbox-you-have-selected-an-invalid-pipeline-component-assembly-please-check-security-settings-for-the-assembly-if-you-are-loading-it-from-an-unc-path.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/02/17/cannot-add-custom-pipeline-component-to-the-toolbox-you-have-selected-an-invalid-pipeline-component-assembly-please-check-security-settings-for-the-assembly-if-you-are-loading-it-from-an-unc-path.aspx</id><published>2009-02-17T08:13:00Z</published><updated>2009-02-17T08:13:00Z</updated><content type="html">If you created a pipeline component with the Pipeline componet wizard it will probably run just fine. But then comes that moment in time that yoy want to create a new pipeline component that looks just like an already created pipeline, so you decide to copy the code and change some things. Then you compile the component and you try to add it to the Vizual studio toolbox. And then you get the following message : You have selected an invalid pipeline component assembly. Please check security settings...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/02/17/cannot-add-custom-pipeline-component-to-the-toolbox-you-have-selected-an-invalid-pipeline-component-assembly-please-check-security-settings-for-the-assembly-if-you-are-loading-it-from-an-unc-path.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=481176" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="BizTalk" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BizTalk/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>BizTalk HotRod number 5 is now online !</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/02/12/biztalk-hotrod-number-5-is-now-online.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/02/12/biztalk-hotrod-number-5-is-now-online.aspx</id><published>2009-02-12T07:41:00Z</published><updated>2009-02-12T07:41:00Z</updated><content type="html">Topics covered : Application Servers: BizTalk vs. Dublin Unit Testing in BizTalk Server 2009 Monitoring a WCF Service Using BAM: A Walkthrough Operations Management for BizTalk Governing the SOA Runtime with AmberPoint BizTalk monitoring and exception handling from any desktop Add Governance to BizTalk with SOA Software So lots of interesting stuff again !. Go to the site of BizTalk HotRod and download your copy &amp;gt;&amp;gt; here &amp;lt;&amp;lt;...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/02/12/biztalk-hotrod-number-5-is-now-online.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=481153" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="BizTalk" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BizTalk/default.aspx" /><category term="WCF" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/WCF/default.aspx" /><category term="DUBLIN" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/DUBLIN/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Now that BizTalk Utillities is out of business It's time ..................</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/02/10/now-that-biztalk-utillities-is-out-of-business-it-s-time.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/02/10/now-that-biztalk-utillities-is-out-of-business-it-s-time.aspx</id><published>2009-02-10T14:41:00Z</published><updated>2009-02-10T14:41:00Z</updated><content type="html">BizTalk Utillities used to have a very nice suite of solid adapters. For some reason, Pieter van de Merwe has stopped his business. We tried for months to get into contact with him to no avail. We called all the possible phone numbers we could find and finally we got somebody on the line. It was not Pieter himself but someone else working there in the same office. This person mentioned that he believed that BizTalk Utillites were no longer available as a product. This answer in combination with our...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/02/10/now-that-biztalk-utillities-is-out-of-business-it-s-time.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=481148" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Excellent post about Synchronous To Asynchronous Flows Without An Orchestration</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/01/23/excellent-post-about-synchronous-to-asynchronous-flows-without-an-orchestration.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/01/23/excellent-post-about-synchronous-to-asynchronous-flows-without-an-orchestration.aspx</id><published>2009-01-23T07:28:00Z</published><updated>2009-01-23T07:28:00Z</updated><content type="html">While writing my previous blog posting, I remembered that Paolo Salvatori had posted about another very usefull &amp;quot; Synchronous To Asynchronous Flows Without An Orchestration &amp;quot;scenario. So again I can recommend the article found &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Here &amp;lt;&amp;lt;...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/01/23/excellent-post-about-synchronous-to-asynchronous-flows-without-an-orchestration.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=481060" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="BizTalk" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BizTalk/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Excellent post about BizTalk Protocol Transition</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/01/23/excellent-post-about-biztalk-protocol-transition.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/01/23/excellent-post-about-biztalk-protocol-transition.aspx</id><published>2009-01-23T07:18:00Z</published><updated>2009-01-23T07:18:00Z</updated><content type="html">Today I found an excellent post about BizTalk Protocol transition by Paolo Salvatori . It&amp;#39;s absolutely worth reading if you have to work with Webservices / Single Sign On. He covers 3 scenarios: Scenario 1 &amp;ndash; Messaging Only Scenario with a SOAP Receive Location Scenario 2 &amp;ndash; Messaging Only Scenario with a WCF-Custom Receive Location Scenario 3 &amp;ndash; Orchestration with an Inline Send Port Have a read of the post &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Here &amp;lt;&amp;lt;...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2009/01/23/excellent-post-about-biztalk-protocol-transition.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=481059" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="BizTalk" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/BizTalk/default.aspx" /><category term="WCF" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/WCF/default.aspx" /></entry></feed>