|
Home > Archive > BizTalk Server > February 2005 > my schema is not in the list when configuring the XmlDisassembler
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
my schema is not in the list when configuring the XmlDisassembler
|
|
| Yossi Dahan 2005-02-22, 7:47 am |
| We have two schemas that are exactly the same, but have different property
promotion settings.
We have two different pipelines, each one should use a different schema for
the promotion, in those we wish to use the standard XmlDisassembler to
perform the promotion, because both schemas have the same root node and
namespace we know we have to specify explicitly which schema should be used
in which pipeline, so we created two pipelines, dropped the XmlDisassembler
component in the disassemble stage of both, and tried to select the schema
from the list, however, our schemas were not on the list.
The documentation on this is vague and (as confirmed by MS) incorrect when
initially it says that the list shows only schemas with unique target
namespace but later suggests that if there are two schemas with the same
target namespace the correct one should be manually selected.
Did someone manage to have two identical schemas deployed and used with the
XmlDisassembler?
What is the correct way to do so?
Thank you
Yossi Dahan
| |
| Joerg Fischer 2005-02-22, 5:50 pm |
| Hi,
Personally, I would strongly descourage the intented solution since I have
seen problems occuring when deploying two schemas with the same RootElement
/ Namespace pair (I have expirienced problems when undeploying this kind of
schema yielding my MgmtDb incorrectly set up)
Why not defining one schema having all necessary promotions? Is this a
performance issue or the like?
Sincerely
Joerg Fischer
"Yossi Dahan" <yossidahan@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:##jb$8LGFHA.2608@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> We have two schemas that are exactly the same, but have different property
> promotion settings.
>
> We have two different pipelines, each one should use a different schema
for
> the promotion, in those we wish to use the standard XmlDisassembler to
> perform the promotion, because both schemas have the same root node and
> namespace we know we have to specify explicitly which schema should be
used
> in which pipeline, so we created two pipelines, dropped the
XmlDisassembler
> component in the disassemble stage of both, and tried to select the schema
> from the list, however, our schemas were not on the list.
>
> The documentation on this is vague and (as confirmed by MS) incorrect when
> initially it says that the list shows only schemas with unique target
> namespace but later suggests that if there are two schemas with the same
> target namespace the correct one should be manually selected.
>
> Did someone manage to have two identical schemas deployed and used with
the
> XmlDisassembler?
> What is the correct way to do so?
>
> Thank you
>
> Yossi Dahan
>
>
| |
| Yossi Dahan 2005-02-22, 5:50 pm |
| Thank you for the tip,
There are two reasons we've designed it like this is:
One is because we have solution A which is then extended by solution B
Schema A has promoted properties from property schema A.
Schema B is identical to schema A but have additional promoted properties
from property schema B.
we do not want to have solution A dependant on B but only the other way
around.
The second reason is performance, since promoting properties does take
processing.
Yossi
"Joerg Fischer >" <<NOT SPECIFIED> wrote in message
news:eDPtKtPGFHA.2568@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
>
> Personally, I would strongly descourage the intented solution since I have
> seen problems occuring when deploying two schemas with the same
> RootElement
> / Namespace pair (I have expirienced problems when undeploying this kind
> of
> schema yielding my MgmtDb incorrectly set up)
>
> Why not defining one schema having all necessary promotions? Is this a
> performance issue or the like?
>
> Sincerely
>
> Joerg Fischer
>
> "Yossi Dahan" <yossidahan@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:##jb$8LGFHA.2608@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> for
> used
> XmlDisassembler
> the
>
>
| |
| Joerg Fischer 2005-02-23, 7:46 am |
| Hi,
Why not separating the schema into a separate assembly which is shared by
both solutions?
If you do not want to merge the promoted properties for performance reasons,
what about using a custom pipeline component which does the promotion of the
fields (see ArbitaryXPathPromoter sample in the SDK)?
Sincerely
Joerg Fischer
"Yossi Dahan" <yossidahan@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:emPv#3PGFHA.3840@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Thank you for the tip,
> There are two reasons we've designed it like this is:
> One is because we have solution A which is then extended by solution B
> Schema A has promoted properties from property schema A.
> Schema B is identical to schema A but have additional promoted properties
> from property schema B.
> we do not want to have solution A dependant on B but only the other way
> around.
>
> The second reason is performance, since promoting properties does take
> processing.
>
> Yossi
>
> "Joerg Fischer >" <<NOT SPECIFIED> wrote in message
> news:eDPtKtPGFHA.2568@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
have[vbcol=seagreen]
same[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>
|
|
|
|
|