|
|
| Sonny Chouinard 2004-03-18, 4:37 pm |
| I have a MSMQ receive function that monitors a queue for messages to be
processed. We use Itemfield for parsing the HL7 data to a XML document. This
document is sent to another MSMQ queue. There is another MSMQ receive
function that monitors messages and then applies it to our database.
The problem is that if a lot of meesages is sent to the queue at one time,
Biztalk cannot garantee that the messages are applied in the database with
the same order as it was received from the Queue. This is a huge problem for
us because we have to process the messages in the correct order.
I'm using MSMQ receive functions with channels for parsing the HL7 message
in XML format and another MSMQ receive function that calls an orchestration
schema to apply the message in the database.
Is there other ways to make sure that Biztalk process messages
synchronously?
| |
| Steve Yetter 2004-03-20, 9:23 pm |
| Well the only way we could get it to work was to have only one CPU in the
server and only one BizTalk server in a group. Then set the number of worker
threads to 1 and the number of receive function threads to 1. As you can
imagine this cuts into the performance of the BizTalk server but is the only
way to get FIFO behavior.
My understanding that there is a better solution with BTS 2004 but I have
not confirmed that!
"Sonny Chouinard" <sonny.chouinard@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:OQwWP#SDEHA.2932@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> I have a MSMQ receive function that monitors a queue for messages to be
> processed. We use Itemfield for parsing the HL7 data to a XML document.
This
> document is sent to another MSMQ queue. There is another MSMQ receive
> function that monitors messages and then applies it to our database.
>
> The problem is that if a lot of meesages is sent to the queue at one time,
> Biztalk cannot garantee that the messages are applied in the database with
> the same order as it was received from the Queue. This is a huge problem
for
> us because we have to process the messages in the correct order.
>
> I'm using MSMQ receive functions with channels for parsing the HL7 message
> in XML format and another MSMQ receive function that calls an
orchestration
> schema to apply the message in the database.
>
> Is there other ways to make sure that Biztalk process messages
> synchronously?
>
>
>
| |
| Sonny Chouinard 2004-03-20, 9:23 pm |
| I forgot to say that I'm using Biztalk 2002 SP1
"Sonny Chouinard" <sonny.chouinard@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:OQwWP%23SDEHA.2932@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> I have a MSMQ receive function that monitors a queue for messages to be
> processed. We use Itemfield for parsing the HL7 data to a XML document.
This
> document is sent to another MSMQ queue. There is another MSMQ receive
> function that monitors messages and then applies it to our database.
>
> The problem is that if a lot of meesages is sent to the queue at one time,
> Biztalk cannot garantee that the messages are applied in the database with
> the same order as it was received from the Queue. This is a huge problem
for
> us because we have to process the messages in the correct order.
>
> I'm using MSMQ receive functions with channels for parsing the HL7 message
> in XML format and another MSMQ receive function that calls an
orchestration
> schema to apply the message in the database.
>
> Is there other ways to make sure that Biztalk process messages
> synchronously?
>
>
>
| |
| Sonny Chouinard 2004-03-22, 5:36 pm |
| Thanks for your response.
Unfortunately, I think I will have to handle this in my application. I
cannot use biztalk to guarantee FIFO. Have you use 1 thread with 1 CPU to
implement FIFO or have done this by code in your application?
Is there any documentation about the improvements of FIFO in Biztalk 2004?
"Steve Yetter" <yetters@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%230S64jTDEHA.1456@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Well the only way we could get it to work was to have only one CPU in the
> server and only one BizTalk server in a group. Then set the number of
worker
> threads to 1 and the number of receive function threads to 1. As you can
> imagine this cuts into the performance of the BizTalk server but is the
only
> way to get FIFO behavior.
>
> My understanding that there is a better solution with BTS 2004 but I have
> not confirmed that!
>
>
> "Sonny Chouinard" <sonny.chouinard@videotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:OQwWP#SDEHA.2932@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> This
time,[color=darkred]
with[color=darkred]
> for
message[color=darkred]
> orchestration
>
>
| |
| Steve Yetter 2004-03-26, 4:48 pm |
| Yes we have used one server with one CPU and one worker thread with one
receive function thread in BizTalk to get as close as reasonably possible to
a FIFO. NO idea were it is documented just read it somewhere on a newsgroup
but I do not remember which one. We will not go to BTS2004 until sometime in
late 2006.
"Sonny Chouinard" <sonny.chouinard@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:eAE2#zFEEHA.1604@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for your response.
>
> Unfortunately, I think I will have to handle this in my application. I
> cannot use biztalk to guarantee FIFO. Have you use 1 thread with 1 CPU to
> implement FIFO or have done this by code in your application?
>
> Is there any documentation about the improvements of FIFO in Biztalk 2004?
>
>
>
> "Steve Yetter" <yetters@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%230S64jTDEHA.1456@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
the[color=darkred]
> worker
> only
have[color=darkred]
be[color=darkred]
document.[color=darkred]
> time,
> with
problem[color=darkred]
> message
>
>
|
|
|
|