<?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="4.0.30619.63">Community Server</generator><updated>2007-10-29T16:28:00Z</updated><entry><title>Excellent post of Charles Young about Dublin and BizTalk</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/10/16/excellent-post-of-charles-young-about-dublin-and-biztalk.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/10/16/excellent-post-of-charles-young-about-dublin-and-biztalk.aspx</id><published>2008-10-16T06:55:00Z</published><updated>2008-10-16T06:55:00Z</updated><content type="html">I was reading the post of Charles Young about Dublin and BizTalk Server - What&amp;#39;s the difference? I can only say, it&amp;#39;s really worth a read, and after reading it, you will probably know you will still be doing BizTalk and XLANG for a long time. The goodies mentioned in the article that come with BizTalk will just not be available for WF for a long long time to come. COme on have read of the article here: Dublin and BizTalk Server - What&amp;#39;s the difference?...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/10/16/excellent-post-of-charles-young-about-dublin-and-biztalk.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=475614" 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="OSLO" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/OSLO/default.aspx" /><category term="DUBLIN" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/DUBLIN/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>How to expose an old style WSDL (Flattened) with the schema's included from BizTalk 2006 R2 with a WCF adapter</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/10/06/how-to-expose-an-old-style-wsdl-with-the-schema-s-included-from-biztalk-2006-r2.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/10/06/how-to-expose-an-old-style-wsdl-with-the-schema-s-included-from-biztalk-2006-r2.aspx</id><published>2008-10-06T06:49:00Z</published><updated>2008-10-06T06:49:00Z</updated><content type="html">It is really nice to have WCF around. With WCF you are ready for the future. Unfortunaltely this is only true in a Microsoft landscape. The new style WSDL with the schema&amp;#39;s no longer included is one of those enhancements that should be really nice. Unfortunately there are tons of software out there that cannot handle the default WSDL behaviour of a WCF service. Below is a picture of the default WSDL behaviour. And this is not the behavoiur old clients like. So we have to modify the WSDL that&amp;#39;s...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/10/06/how-to-expose-an-old-style-wsdl-with-the-schema-s-included-from-biztalk-2006-r2.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=475144" 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><entry><title>Interesting stuff coming with the BizTalk Adaper Pack</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/08/15/interesting-stuff-coming-with-the-biztalk-adaper-pack.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/08/15/interesting-stuff-coming-with-the-biztalk-adaper-pack.aspx</id><published>2008-08-15T06:52:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-15T06:52:00Z</updated><content type="html">I really can&amp;#39;t wait for the BizTalk Adapter pack. Finally we get a good SQL adapter capable of almost everything. I had concurrency problems in the past cause the Adapter always has a transaction level Serializable. Now with the new SQL Adapter the transaction level is settable. Have a read of the SQL LOB adapter capabillities &amp;gt;&amp;gt; here &amp;lt;&amp;lt; They also threw in some goodies in the Adapter pack, The various Adapters will now show up as native BizTalk Adapters, have a look &amp;gt;&amp;gt; here...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/08/15/interesting-stuff-coming-with-the-biztalk-adaper-pack.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=471844" 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="SQL Server" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/SQL+Server/default.aspx" /><category term="WCF" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/WCF/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>HowTo define a Custom Soap Header in BizTalk. Expose it, Consume it , even map them..</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/06/13/howto-define-a-custom-soap-header-in-biztalk.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/06/13/howto-define-a-custom-soap-header-in-biztalk.aspx</id><published>2008-06-13T11:37:00Z</published><updated>2008-06-13T11:37:00Z</updated><content type="html">1. Create the schema that defines your custom header. This schema should be a NORMAL schema. (Give it a decent rootnode name) 2. Create a PROPERTY schema with TargetNamespace : http://schemas.microsoft.com/BizTalk/2003/SOAPHeader . 3. Make sure you define a property in the PROPERTYSCHEMA with EXACTLY the same name as the ROOTNODE of the schema in step 1 4. Make sure you set the set the &amp;quot;Property schema base&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;MessageContextPropertyBase&amp;quot; !!!!! 5. Deploy. That&amp;#39;s it.........(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/06/13/howto-define-a-custom-soap-header-in-biztalk.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=460257" 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>New Style SSO Available on Codeplex</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/06/02/new-style-sso-available-on-codeplex.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/06/02/new-style-sso-available-on-codeplex.aspx</id><published>2008-06-02T10:28:00Z</published><updated>2008-06-02T10:28:00Z</updated><content type="html">If you are working with BizTalk you know the dilemma, where do I store my configuration data. Could be on several locations. Have a read of this article to have some in-dept information . I created a base class SSOBaseFunctionality thad deals with storing and loading configuratioin data to and from SSO. So if you want to store a specific class in SSO just make sure it inherits from SSOBaseFunctionality and you are ready to go. The project is on Codeplex . Your class could simply look like this. ...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/06/02/new-style-sso-available-on-codeplex.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=459763" 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="SSO" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/SSO/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Choosing the Right Workflow Tool for Your Project</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/04/28/choosing-the-right-workflow-tool-for-your-project.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/04/28/choosing-the-right-workflow-tool-for-your-project.aspx</id><published>2008-04-28T08:14:00Z</published><updated>2008-04-28T08:14:00Z</updated><content type="html">And another interesting artickle here &amp;gt;&amp;gt; CLICK &amp;lt;&amp;lt; about Choosing the Right Workflow Tool for Your Project...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/04/28/choosing-the-right-workflow-tool-for-your-project.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=458518" 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>Some guidance on BizTalk Testing.</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/04/28/some-guidance-on-biztalk-testing.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/04/28/some-guidance-on-biztalk-testing.aspx</id><published>2008-04-28T06:33:00Z</published><updated>2008-04-28T06:33:00Z</updated><content type="html">Via BlogLines I monotor lot&amp;#39;s of BizTalk feeds. And once in a while there is an article worth reading. The same with this article &amp;gt;&amp;gt; CLICK &amp;lt;&amp;lt; from michael Stepenson. It has some interesting points about BizTalk testing. Worth a read....(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/04/28/some-guidance-on-biztalk-testing.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=458512" 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>Using a Bitwise AND in a BizTalk Send Port as a Filter Expression</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/03/20/using-a-bitwise-and-in-a-biztalk-send-port-as-a-filter-expression.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/03/20/using-a-bitwise-and-in-a-biztalk-send-port-as-a-filter-expression.aspx</id><published>2008-03-20T14:54:00Z</published><updated>2008-03-20T14:54:00Z</updated><content type="html">I knew this was possible but I guess a lot of people are unaware of this functionality. Somebody told me I should blog about it, so here I am adding another entry to my Blog. How to define the BitWise and in a send port. Define a property schema in biztalk and make sure one of the properties is of the type unsigned int. Now deploy that propertyschema. Now add a send port and go to the filter Expression. Select the Unsigned int in the first part of the Exprssion Then open the dropdown and see... there...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/03/20/using-a-bitwise-and-in-a-biztalk-send-port-as-a-filter-expression.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=458058" 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>Microsoft BizTalk Server Operations Guide</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/02/19/microsoft-biztalk-server-operations-guide.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/02/19/microsoft-biztalk-server-operations-guide.aspx</id><published>2008-02-19T09:17:00Z</published><updated>2008-02-19T09:17:00Z</updated><content type="html">This is a post from Microsft Download Center. I found it in my RSS feeds. (Don&amp;#39;t know where). It&amp;#39;s such a usable BizTalk document that I really don&amp;#39;t want to loose the link so it&amp;#39;s a reminder for myself. But a nice read (+700 pages) for anyone who is involved in BizTalk Developement. get the download link &amp;gt;&amp;gt; HERE &amp;lt;&amp;lt; Brief Description Provides detailed information for planning a BizTalk Server environment, as well as recommendations and best practices for configuring, testing...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/02/19/microsoft-biztalk-server-operations-guide.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=457908" 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>Suspended Messages are Included in the Message Count in Database Throttling Threshold</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/02/14/suspended-messages-are-included-in-the-message-count-in-database-throttling-threshold.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/02/14/suspended-messages-are-included-in-the-message-count-in-database-throttling-threshold.aspx</id><published>2008-02-14T08:59:00Z</published><updated>2008-02-14T08:59:00Z</updated><content type="html">I had read this once but I couldn&amp;#39;t remember where. But it can be of importance to BizTalk developers when they have the question : &amp;quot; To Suspend or Not to Suspend &amp;quot;. When you are faced with this question, remember that Suspended Messages are Included in the Message Count in Database Throttling Threshold . see the details &amp;gt;&amp;gt; here &amp;lt;&amp;lt;...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/02/14/suspended-messages-are-included-in-the-message-count-in-database-throttling-threshold.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=457888" 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>Finally Project templates in BizTalk 2006 / BizTalk Template Wizard</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/02/11/finally-templates-and-biztalk-2006.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/02/11/finally-templates-and-biztalk-2006.aspx</id><published>2008-02-11T08:27:00Z</published><updated>2008-02-11T08:27:00Z</updated><content type="html">I have a certain aproach on how to solve common integration scenarios. It involves Process Services, Business Services, Receiving Interation services and Sending Integration Services. It&amp;#39;s a clean way to set up an integration. Although it is a flexible way of setting up a project, it initially requires some extra work. I have looked at this excellent post from Charles Young. It looked so sweet, but I couldn&amp;#39;t get it to work for BizTalk 2006. Then I had a very seriuous look at the BizTalk...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/02/11/finally-templates-and-biztalk-2006.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=457880" 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>The truth about Dynamic SQL and Stored Procedures....</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/01/07/the-truth-about-dynamic-sql-and-stored-procedures.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/01/07/the-truth-about-dynamic-sql-and-stored-procedures.aspx</id><published>2008-01-07T08:34:00Z</published><updated>2008-01-07T08:34:00Z</updated><content type="html">Well I am not going to say what&amp;#39;s better or what I prefer, but I can only give my view of things. What everybody seems to forget is that an external person with very good understanding of SQL ( commonly know as a DBA ) can solve performance problems when stored procedures are used. And I totally agree that Stored Procedures are overkill for most of the the simple CRUD functionality. So I am not going to start a debate about that. But just one question for all those who are against stored procedures...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2008/01/07/the-truth-about-dynamic-sql-and-stored-procedures.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=454363" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>Patrick Wellink</name><uri>http://bloggingabout.net/members/Patrick-Wellink/default.aspx</uri></author><category term="SQL Server" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/SQL+Server/default.aspx" /></entry><entry><title>Some very interesting BixTalk/WCF screencasts</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2007/12/14/some-very-interesting-bixtalk-wcf-screencasts.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2007/12/14/some-very-interesting-bixtalk-wcf-screencasts.aspx</id><published>2007-12-14T07:58:00Z</published><updated>2007-12-14T07:58:00Z</updated><content type="html">I was looking at my list of Blog entries at bloglines and I saw an interesting screen cast from Aaron Skonnard I decided to have a look and was surprised to see how many extra functionality is provided by the WCF adapters. I decided to look at some more web cast about the WCF adapters and learned very interesting new things. Have a look at them and see if you learn something new. Screen cast: BizTalk WCF Adapters -- Send Port Basics Screen cast: BizTalk WCF Adapters -- Send Ports &amp;amp; Custom WCF...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2007/12/14/some-very-interesting-bixtalk-wcf-screencasts.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=445831" 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><entry><title>BizTalk ESB guidance Available on MSDN</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2007/11/09/biztalk-esb-guidance-available-on-msdn.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2007/11/09/biztalk-esb-guidance-available-on-msdn.aspx</id><published>2007-11-09T07:34:00Z</published><updated>2007-11-09T07:34:00Z</updated><content type="html">Yesterday it was my Birthday and how nice of Microsoft to give me what I really wanted .... The BizTalk ESB guidance is available for download NOW Go and get it here : http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=e3957253-24ce-45aa-ac32-60abffe15bac&amp;amp;DisplayLang=en...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2007/11/09/biztalk-esb-guidance-available-on-msdn.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=421852" 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>BizTalk V-Next</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="/blogs/wellink/archive/2007/10/29/biztalk-v-next.aspx" /><id>/blogs/wellink/archive/2007/10/29/biztalk-v-next.aspx</id><published>2007-10-29T15:28:00Z</published><updated>2007-10-29T15:28:00Z</updated><content type="html">At last they have shed some light on what the next version will be : Service Oriented Architecture • Deeper alignment with the .NET Framework – Building deeply on the investments made with Windows Communication Foundation and Windows Workflow Foundation by closer alignment of these technologies and BizTalk Server to enable customers to build richer composite applications and service oriented architectures than they can today. • Hosted Services – BizTalk Services, which represent hosted versions of...(&lt;a href="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/2007/10/29/biztalk-v-next.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://bloggingabout.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=413530" 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" /><category term="WCF" scheme="http://bloggingabout.net/blogs/wellink/archive/tags/WCF/default.aspx" /></entry></feed>