10-27-04 10:49 PM
Appreciate the feedback, Larry.
Although it sounds like BAM might be the right choice in the long run, I
have a very limited schedule and must put something in place soon. I know C#
well and could design something quite quickly. I don't think I'll have the
time to learn BAM and design something for that. Hopefully Microsoft will
extend BAM so that we can consume data through web services securely.
Cheers,
Andrew
""larry franks"" <larryfr@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4Pgw385uEHA.3028@cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl...
> There's not a pre-built web service interface for BAM. What you would
> probably want to do is directly query the views created against the BAM
> OLAP cubes in analysis server.
> I would suggest reading the sections of documentation on BAM and also
> working through the samples. BAM isn't something you just "enable and
> use". You have to determine for each process what data you are tracking,
> checkpoints in the process that you want to track, etc.
>
> Larry Franks
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties,and confers no rights.
> Subscribe at
> [url]http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=/servicedesks/msdn/nospam.asp[/ur
l]
> &SD=msdn
> --------------------
> | From: "Andrew" <andrew@nospam.com>
> | References: <#y0Jy#3uEHA.2860@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>
> <7406D4F8-DB78-400A-9C25-B7A33D13272C@microsoft.com>
> | Subject: Re: Few general questions...
> | Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:12:35 -0600
> | Lines: 58
> | X-Priority: 3
> | X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> | X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
> | X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
> | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
> | Message-ID: <Osg5fd4uEHA.3504@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>
> | Newsgroups: microsoft.public.biztalk.general
> | NNTP-Posting-Host: ls2c2.cwshs.com 64.86.141.134
> | Path:
> cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP
12
> phx.gbl
> | Xref: cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl microsoft.public.biztalk.general:21035
> | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.biztalk.general
> |
> | Matt,
> |
> | Thank you for your response. As far as answer 4 goes, they want to
> interface
> | with this data within a custom web form as opposed to logging into
> another
> | web site. Can I consume the data through a web service interface that
> | already exists?
> |
> | Thanks.
> |
> | "Matt Meleski" <MattMeleski@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> | news:7406D4F8-DB78-400A-9C25-B7A33D13272C@microsoft.com...
> | > Andrew
> | >
> | > 1) If the messages are to be processed in the same orchestration (or
> | > different ones)
> | > , then you could use a parallel or a sequential convoy.
> | >
> | > 2) On the Soap Adapter , you can specifiy the number of Retry
> Attempts
> | > and the Retry Interval between attempts
> | >
> | > 3) Nothing I know of , maybe somebody else ?
> | >
> | > 4) Things like this are already built into BizTalk.
> | > (BAM) Business Activity Monitoring.
> | >
> | > Matt
> | >
> | > "Andrew" wrote:
> | >
> | >> 1. If I receive message a before message b in BizTalk, can I be sure
> that
> | >> message a will get processed before message b or do I need to design
> for
> | >> that?
> | >>
> | >> 2. If one of the systems I'm trying to communicate with goes down
> (i.e.
> | >> we
> | >> are communicating via web services) can I force BizTalk to keep
> trying
> to
> | >> send that message until the system comes back up? Is there a perhaps
> | >> better
> | >> way to do this (but still keep it simple)? I have pondered MSMQ but
> would
> | >> much rather not have to add that into the fold here...
> | >>
> | >> 3. I'm looking for a utility that will read the contents of a
> delimited
> | >> flat
> | >> file and create a BizTalk schema for me... anything exist?
> | >>
> | >> 4. I want to create a custom logging component so that it is easy for
> a
> | >> web
> | >> site to retrieve specific data within messages that have passed
> through
> | >> an
> | >> orchestration. I'm thinking about writing this in a custom .NET
> assembly.
> | >> Does this sound like the right approach?
> | >>
> | >> Thanks!
> | >>
> | >>
> | >>
> |
> |
> |
>
[ Post a follow-up to this message ]
|