I tried using a solicit response port within an atomic scope - and of course
BizTalk barfed. It does not support that scenario. Are there any techniques
to use that can mimic the same behaiour?

Within my atomic scope I have a loop. Each time through the loop I send a
message. But I don't want to go on to the next iteration of the loop until
the message has been confirmed as processed by the SQL Adapter.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Are you using delivery notifications to determine this?

Check out these posts for more details:
http://blogs.msdn.com/kevinsmi/arch.../03/172574.aspx
http://www.geekswithblogs.net/sthom...08/02/9234.aspx

Hugo

"Xerox" <anon@anon.com> wrote in message
news:%23RgOFLJKFHA.244@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I tried using a solicit response port within an atomic scope - and of
course
> BizTalk barfed. It does not support that scenario. Are there any
techniques
> to use that can mimic the same behaiour?
>
> Within my atomic scope I have a loop. Each time through the loop I send a
> message. But I don't want to go on to the next iteration of the loop until
> the message has been confirmed as processed by the SQL Adapter.
>
>

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Thanks Hugo.

Well, I tried using delivery notification beforehand but the orchestration
just carried on regardless. When I was using a long running transaction or
no transaction at all the orchestration would wait on successful delivery.
When I switched to atomic it carried straight on past.

Thats when I tried a solicit response which the atomic scope refused.

Is delivery notification supported in an atomic scope? If it is I must have
misinterpreted the results of my orchestration.


"Hugo Rodger-Brown" <hugo@coldhams.com> wrote in message
news:%23ag3f5JKFHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Are you using delivery notifications to determine this?
>
> Check out these posts for more details:
> http://blogs.msdn.com/kevinsmi/arch.../03/172574.aspx
> http://www.geekswithblogs.net/sthom...08/02/9234.aspx
>
> Hugo
>
> "Xerox" <anon@anon.com> wrote in message
> news:%23RgOFLJKFHA.244@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... 
> course 
> techniques 
a[vbcol=seagreen] 
until[vbcol=seagreen] 
>
>

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Hello.

I have gotten Delivery Notification to work with Atomic Scopes… I set the
retry count to 1 with a 2 minute interval and the Orchestration waited for
the error response after the retries.

I put the Atomic Scope inside a Long Running Scope so I was able to catch
the Delivery Exception.  The Atomic Scope had Synchronized = true and the
Long Running Scope did not.  Although, I think with Atomic Scopes this
property does not have to be set to true.  I think it works either way.

I have modified my sample that Hugo linked to below.  If you want to see it
just let me know.

Hope this helps.

Stephen W. Thomas
http://www.geekswithblogs.net/sthomas


"Xerox" wrote:

> Thanks Hugo.
>
> Well, I tried using delivery notification beforehand but the orchestration
> just carried on regardless. When I was using a long running transaction or
> no transaction at all the orchestration would wait on successful delivery.
> When I switched to atomic it carried straight on past.
>
> Thats when I tried a solicit response which the atomic scope refused.
>
> Is delivery notification supported in an atomic scope? If it is I must hav
e
> misinterpreted the results of my orchestration.
>
>
> "Hugo Rodger-Brown" <hugo@coldhams.com> wrote in message
> news:%23ag3f5JKFHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... 
> a 
> until 
>
>
>

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Cheers Stephen. Does it still work if you set the retry count to zero?

I'd certainly be interested in seeing it. Can you upload it to your blog?

BTW. I am working on an alternative debatching approach designed to handle
very large messages (any size). Seeing as you wrote that excellent article
on debatching options expect me to be in touch for advice.

"Stephen W. Thomas" <StephenWThomas@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:38072888-0371-42B8-B523-22995CBBDD27@microsoft.com...
> Hello.
>
> I have gotten Delivery Notification to work with Atomic Scopes. I set the
> retry count to 1 with a 2 minute interval and the Orchestration waited for
> the error response after the retries.
>
> I put the Atomic Scope inside a Long Running Scope so I was able to catch
> the Delivery Exception.  The Atomic Scope had Synchronized = true and the
> Long Running Scope did not.  Although, I think with Atomic Scopes this
> property does not have to be set to true.  I think it works either way.
>
> I have modified my sample that Hugo linked to below.  If you want to see
it[vbcol=seagreen]
> just let me know.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Stephen W. Thomas
> http://www.geekswithblogs.net/sthomas
>
>
> "Xerox" wrote:
> 
orchestration[vbcol=seagreen] 
or[vbcol=seagreen] 
delivery.[vbcol=seagreen] 
have[vbcol=seagreen] 
of[vbcol=seagreen] 
send[vbcol=seagreen] 

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Hello.

Here is the updated sample:
http://www.biztalkgurus.com/downloa...NACKUpdated.zip
I am using a dynamic send port so maybe that has something to do with why it
works.  I think I tried it with retry of zero and it worked as well.  If you
continued to have problems let me know.

Are you running SP1?  I think there is a hot fix related to delivery
notification.  Along those lines, I’m not running SP1 but I have the hot f
ix.

New debatching options… great to hear.  Let me know how it goes!

Stephen W. Thomas
http://www.geekswithblogs.net/sthomas


"Xerox" wrote:

> Cheers Stephen. Does it still work if you set the retry count to zero?
>
> I'd certainly be interested in seeing it. Can you upload it to your blog?
>
> BTW. I am working on an alternative debatching approach designed to handle
> very large messages (any size). Seeing as you wrote that excellent article
> on debatching options expect me to be in touch for advice.
>
> "Stephen W. Thomas" <StephenWThomas@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:38072888-0371-42B8-B523-22995CBBDD27@microsoft.com... 
> it 
> orchestration 
> or 
> delivery. 
> have 
> of 
> send 
>
>
>

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Thanks Stephen.

--
McGeeky
http://mcgeeky.blogspot.com


"Stephen W. Thomas" <StephenWThomas@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:448FD354-A3AC-448C-BAD6-2521FBCF8993@microsoft.com...
> Hello.
>
> Here is the updated sample:
> http://www.biztalkgurus.com/downloa...NACKUpdated.zip
> I am using a dynamic send port so maybe that has something to do with why
it
> works.  I think I tried it with retry of zero and it worked as well.  If
you
> continued to have problems let me know.
>
> Are you running SP1?  I think there is a hot fix related to delivery
> notification.  Along those lines, I'm not running SP1 but I have the hot
fix.[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> New debatching options. great to hear.  Let me know how it goes!
>
> Stephen W. Thomas
> http://www.geekswithblogs.net/sthomas
>
>
> "Xerox" wrote:
> 
blog?[vbcol=seagreen] 
handle[vbcol=seagreen] 
article[vbcol=seagreen] 
the[vbcol=seagreen] 
for[vbcol=seagreen] 
catch[vbcol=seagreen] 
the[vbcol=seagreen] 
way.[vbcol=seagreen] 
see[vbcol=seagreen] 
transaction[vbcol=seagreen] 
refused.[vbcol=seagreen] 
must[vbcol=seagreen] 
and[vbcol=seagreen] 
I[vbcol=seagreen] 
loop[vbcol=seagreen] 

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]